This is the best summary I could come up with:
Hours after a battle in eastern Ukraine in August, a wounded and unarmed Russian soldier crawled through a nearly destroyed trench, seeking help from his captors, a unit of international volunteers led by an American.
The shooting of the unarmed, wounded Russian soldier is one of several killings that have unsettled the Chosen Company, one of the best-known units of international troops fighting on behalf of Ukraine.
In a second episode, a Chosen member lobbed a grenade at and killed a surrendering Russian soldier who had his hands raised, video footage reviewed by The Times shows.
In a third episode, Chosen members boasted in a group chat about killing Russian prisoners of war during a mission in October, text messages show.
A Greek soldier known as Zeus was at the center of all three episodes — tossing the grenade and, Mr. Grosse says, firing at the wounded Russian in the trench and bragging about another kill.
But in the United States military, a video showing the killing of a surrendering soldier, regardless of the circumstances, would prompt an immediate investigation, said Rachel E. VanLandingham, a professor at Southwestern Law School and a former U.S. Air Force lawyer.
The original article contains 2,902 words, the summary contains 197 words. Saved 93%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
Bah, I expect this will be dealth with. Especially now that there is a story about it in the news. War can turn men into monsters.
Ukraine is in a war for survival. They just let prisoners out to fight. I doubt they’re going to go after a foreign volunteer battalion lead by fighters from one of their major suppliers of arms.
No they did not, they allowed convicts to join the military under very strict rules. And why not? As far as I can gather from the article the issue is certain members of the unit. And even if the American is found to be an issue, they can discuss with the US what they want. Convict or expell
Letting convicts join under very strict rules is literally letting prisoners out to fight.
And sure, they could negotiate with America on penalties. Or they could turn a blind eye because they’re in a war for survival and these are volunteer units of foreigners. It would be nice if war crimes enforcement was a top priority in every war, but the United States doesn’t do it when we have the universal upper hand and can easily loose a few fighters without it having any impact on our success or sovereignty.
Killing surrendering soldiers is a war crime. Besides that fact, it’s fucking horrifying that these people will come back from Ukraine and walk around freely, knowing that they executed tied up prisoners for shits and giggles.
This is mostly why we’re better than they are: these things sometimes get reported, and our media criticizes these actions. There’s a non-zero chance of punishing these people.
On the other side, these people are universally treated as heroes and if they’re given something, it’s medals or promotions.
But of course, we will need to actively work to maintain this superiority. It can vanish in an instant.
Lets see what happens… Look at assange, these fuckers who killed civilist, are as unconvicted as ever …
We might compare Assange’s treatment to how Navalny was treated. Assange is not dead and I believe he’s about to be freed. And he did actual crimes whereas Navalny’s crime was being a political opponent to Putin.
I don’t know who or what civilist was.
The “superiority” was never there. Ukraine is commiting war crimes and so is Russia. Russia is commiting a lot of them and the spotlight is on them so they are easier to see. For Ukraine there are obvious ones you can see outright (i.e. televising POWs) and less obvious ones you hear about from people who were in Ukraine.
