The talk show host’s ‘Cops’-style ride-along with Trump ‘border tsar’ Tom Homan is the latest step in the TV psychologist’s political rebranding

  • NimdaQA@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    Your Words?= Also don’t forget that Stalin wouldn’t sign the agreements for reciprocal good treatment of prisoners (which even the Nazis did

    Reality =

    To quote TopWar,

    “In 1929, a new Geneva Convention relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War was concluded, which provided prisoners with an even greater degree of protection than previous agreements. Germany, like most European countries, signed this document. Moscow did not sign the convention, but ratified the convention on the treatment of the wounded and sick in war that was concluded at the same time. The USSR demonstrated that it intended to act within the framework of international law. Thus, this meant that the USSR and Germany were bound by common international legal norms of warfare, which were binding on all states, regardless of whether they had joined the relevant agreements or not. Even without any conventions, it was unacceptable to exterminate prisoners of war, as the Nazis did. The USSR’s agreement and refusal to ratify the Geneva Convention did not change the situation.”

    “It should also be noted that the rights of Soviet soldiers were guaranteed not only by general international legal norms, but also fell under the Hague Convention, which Russia signed. The provisions of this convention remained in force after the signing of the Geneva Convention, which all parties, including German lawyers, were aware of. The German collection of international legal acts of 1940 indicated that the Hague Agreement on the Laws and Rules of War was valid even without the Geneva Convention. In addition, it should be noted that the states that signed the Geneva Convention assumed the obligation to treat prisoners normally, regardless of whether their countries signed the convention or not. In the case of a German-Soviet war, the situation of German prisoners of war should have been a concern - the USSR did not sign the Geneva Convention.”

    “Moscow also tried to provide its prisoners with maximum legal protection. Already 27 June 1941 of the USSR expressed readiness to cooperate with the International Committee of the Red Cross. On July 1, the “Regulation on Prisoners of War” was approved, which strictly complied with the provisions of the Hague and Geneva Conventions. German prisoners of war were guaranteed decent treatment, personal safety and medical assistance. This “Regulations” acted throughout the war, its violators were prosecuted in disciplinary and criminal proceedings. Moscow, recognizing the Geneva Convention, apparently hoped for an adequate response from Berlin. However, the military and political leadership of the Third Reich had already crossed the line between good and evil and was not going to apply to the Soviet “subhumans” neither the Hague nor the Geneva Convention, nor the generally accepted norms and customs of war.”

    The USSR claimed that they did not sign it because the conventions at the time demanded them to separate prisoners by race which went against the USSR’s anti-racist beliefs.

    Your Words?= I mean, they probably would since they may not even be issued a gun - going into war expected to pick up their dead friend’s gun and take their turn, then the next.

    Reality= Enemy at the Gates is not a documentary.

    To quote, Alexei Isaev

    "The first myth that is repeated by the film industry in particular is that the Red Army went into battle with one rifle for every 3, 5, even 10 men, fill in the blank yourself. This myth maintains that in the USSR, near Moscow, militiamen with one rifle per 10 had to stop German tanks, even though that is madness, that is not possible. The Red Army never had big problems, specifically big problems, with small arms. This was because there were large stockpiles from the Tsarist army and then the trophies from the Polish campaign. You’ll laugh, but the source of this myth is the German Volkssturm. They really had one rifle with one clip of ammunition per 3 or 5 men. In the Red Army, in the worst case scenario, had its auxiliary troops go unarmed: drivers or artillerymen that fire guns from the rear at map squares. They don’t really need a rifle. When there was not enough guns, such as in the summer of 1941, the guns were taken from these rear line units, from the horse handlers and such. On the front line the troops were armed well. The claim that soldiers would go into battle and would have to find a weapon there is nonsense. This is a very resilient myth. There are scarier things in war than having to go into battle to get a rifle, but this myth persists. "

    It is based on a small grain of truth

    • NotLemming@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 day ago

      For anyone reading this, I wont say anything which could be construed as insulting to this person, as they then report my comments and they’re removed.

      I encourage you to simply search for the truth yourselves, there’s a lot of unbiased sources out there, even just wikipedia (obviously don’t trust any source this person provides).

      If you want to know what Russia is really like now, here you can hear it from Russians. The video begins in a convenient place but the whole thing is interesting.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3CopUYaRzZo&t=679

      • NimdaQA@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 day ago

        I don’t report any comments.

        Rather unfortunate that censorship is disrupting our conversation.

        • NotLemming@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 day ago

          Well Putin loves censorship, as all dictators do. That’s how he’s kept Russia from overthrowing him. Did you watch the video?

          Is that why you won’t condemn Russian invasion of Ukraine, because your government would punish you?

          Hey guess what, Kier Starmer is a massive steaming sack of shit who should never have gotten near power. So is Putin. Ah, we should look on the bright side of life, shouldn’t we. Things could always be worse.

          Oh, sorry, not to brag. I’m sure you’re just fine with being censored just like you’re fine with the rest LOL.

          • NimdaQA@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            1 day ago

            Well Putin loves censorship, as all dictators do. That’s how he’s kept Russia from overthrowing him. Did you watch the video?

            I am not unaware of Putin’s crimes.

            Is that why you won’t condemn Russian invasion of Ukraine, because your government would punish you?

            My opinions regarding the Russian invasion of Ukraine come from the 2014-2022 era.

            • NotLemming@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 day ago

              Did you not watch it because watching it would be a crime for you, as you’re trapped in russia? How did you not get conscripted?

              In the video Russians on the street say they aren’t allowed to talk about the war, they say they’re afraid, and they say that the situation would be much different if Russia had fair elections.

              • NimdaQA@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                1 day ago

                How did you not get conscripted?

                People conscripted into the Russian Armed Forces aren’t sent into the Special Military Operation Zone.

                This has been the case in previous conflicts involving Russia including when Russian troops were sent into Ukraine in 2014 and 2015 during Donbas War with only contractors being sent in.

                Heck, Most of Russian Armed Forces aren’t even in Ukraine, majority of forces in Ukraine are from irregular volunteer formations recruited from regions across Russia.

                Hence why casualties amongst Russian regulars are low:

                Motorized Rifles: 6,457

                VDV: 3,257

                Naval Infantry: 1,305

                Tank Crew: 1,806

                Artillery: 851

                Special Forces: 736

                Engineering: 291

                Navy: 291

                VVS: 265

                Other: 957

                Total: 16,216

                Source: MediaZona

                For comparison:

                US losses from 2003-2005 mainly against insurgents: 5175

                Source: Defense Casualty Analysis System

                In the video Russians on the street say they aren’t allowed to talk about the war, they say they’re afraid, and they say that the situation would be much different if Russia had fair elections.

                Neither can Ukrainians really without receiving a visit from the SBU.

                You aren’t even allowed to flip off TCC enlistment officers in Ukraine.

                • NotLemming@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  1 day ago

                  https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Russo-Ukrainian_War

                  The real info for anyone interested. The Russians don’t even report their dead properly. If they don’t cremate them, they’re left to rot and be eaten by wild animals or feral packs of dogs. They don’t inform the families of the deaths and don’t report true figures on the amount of dead. I think Ukraine refuses to give figures, which is at least more honest.

                  That’s why it made me laugh when trump said ‘Ukraine men are refusing to fight and deserting’ because Russian men did that all along. I remember the news of the rush for the border and the plane tickets being sold out etc. Not that I blame them. This poor guy didn’t answer about conscription but I’m guessing he was too young to run. RIP.

                  • NimdaQA@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    1 day ago

                    You only get substantially higher numbers if you include PMCs, irregular volunteer formations, etc.

                    Even your own wikipedia source uses Mediazona and shows this LOL:

                    According to BBC News Russian and the Mediazona news website, out of 97,994 Russian soldiers and contractors whose deaths they had documented by 13 March 2025, 4.9 percent (4,794) were officers, while 6.8 percent (6,636) were Motorized Rifle Troops and 3.3 percent (3,275) were members of the Russian Airborne Forces (VDV). In addition, 11.5 percent (11,265) of Russian soldiers whose deaths had been confirmed were people who were mobilized, while 16.4 percent (16,075) were convicts.

                    I don’t include ‘mobilized’ (which means BARS not conscripts btw) nor do I include convicts. My death totals only include the professionals.

                    My numbers is a little older than March 15:

                    hence: Motorized Rifles: 6,457 VDV: 3,257

                    Yeah, the death toll is likely higher, but the professional death rate likely not so much higher as they are better documented than those from irregulars.

                    I mean Mediazona also admits that irregular volunteer formations and convicts make up larger portions of losses than professionals:

                    "From early summer and into the mid-fall season of 2022, volunteers bore the brunt of the losses, which is strikingly different from the situation in the initial stage of the war: in winter and early spring, the Airborne Forces suffered the greatest damage, followed by the Motorised Rifle troops.

                    By the end of 2022 and the beginning of the next year, losses among prisoners recruited into the Wagner PMC increased markedly. They were formed into “assault groups” to overwhelm Ukrainian positions near Bakhmut.

                    By March 2023, prisoners became the largest category of war losses. After the capture of Bakhmut, there have been no cases of mass use of prisoners so far.

                    By September 2024, volunteers once again emerged as the largest category among the KIA. This shift reflects a cumulative effect: prison recruitment had significantly waned, no new mobilisation had been announced, yet the stream of volunteers continued unabated.

                    By March 14, the death of over 4,800 officers of the Russian army and other security agencies had been confirmed.

                    The proportion of officer deaths among overall casualties has steadily declined since the conflict began. In the early stages, when professional contract soldiers formed the main invasion force, officers accounted for up to 10% of fatalities. By November 2024, this figure had dropped to between 2–3%—a shift that reflects both evolving combat tactics and the intensive recruitment of volunteer infantry, who suffer casualty rates many times higher than their commanding officers."

                    The only time when professionals bore the brunt of the losses amongst Russian forces was in winter and early spring of 2022, they were quickly beaten by the blood that was shed from irregular volunteer formations in mid-fall, the death toll amongst irregular volunteer formations were eventually surpassed by prisoners in 2023 before irregular volunteer formations again emerged as highest category among the KIA.