Post #3232852
2026-06-08 19:43 UTC
As I said that with that much firepower only one house as collateral damage is pretty impressive,
I didn’t say it was a single house. Most of the mentioned attack affected Kiev, there were a ton of casualties. One of the houses even got a strike for the second time while it was on fire. I can’t attach a video here, but pretty sure you can google this one.
They regularly have military there in civilian infrastructure which makes it a legitimate target.
I didn’t say this specific one was on purpose. I just showed an example of how often these things could happen. Both sides always say there was a military target, it’s just not practical media-wise to admit things like that.
So your anecdotal collateral damage versus the systematic and deliberate attacks on civilians aren’t comparable in the least.
I previously randomly picked recent attacks with a comparable number of targets.
I’m also pretty sure Ukrainian citizen suffered much more just because of the pure fire potential and the fact that the conflict is happens mostly on Ukrainian territory. Last winter was especially horrible. Russia bombed electricity infrastructure and some people simply froze because of the lack of heating.
Replies (1)
-
@Bloomcole@lemmy.world 2026-06-08 20:09
We can argue about it all day long. To me it’s very clear there is a difference. And the ukrainian civilians indeed suffered the most. But it’s also clear it’s mostly the ethnic Russians in the east and south. The Banderites made as much casualties there since the coup in 2014 as there are now from the whole conflict after 2022. Which is not surprising when their aim was to ethnically cleanse the population. As an objective witness looking at the facts all of this is obvious. War sucks and I feel sorry for civilian casualties from whatever side but I have been following this since long before 2014 so I am confident in my conclusions.