Please enlighten us what exactly is ‘civilian infrastructure’?
Is it the same ‘civilian infrastructure’ that is utilized by the military? Hello?!
No one had any issues when the US destroyed ‘civilian infrastructure’ in the opening of the Iraq War, Kosovo War or any other war/conflict but all of a sudden it is decried and bemoaned in this war/conflict?
Can idiots be anymore hypocritical when even remotely bringing or asserting ‘civilian infrastructure’ in this Ukrainian-Russia war/conflict? In the end, if that ‘civilian infrastructure’ is being utilized by the military, it ceases to be off limits. Period.
As usual, comments by cranked are no more than vomit on a keyboard that some how gets mistaken as words.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graphite_bomb
Graphite bomb BLU-114/B.
A graphite bomb is intended to be a non-lethal weapon used to disable an electrical grid. The bomb works by spreading a dense cloud of extremely fine, chemically treated carbon filaments over air-insulated high voltage installations like transformers and power lines, causing short-circuits and subsequent disruption of the electricity supply in an area, a region or even an entire small country. The weapon is sometimes referred to as blackout bomb or as soft bomb because its direct effects are largely confined to the targeted electrical power facility, with minimal risk of immediate collateral damage.
Civilian infrastructure is infrastructure explicitly created primarily for civilians.
As you don’t seem to understand the difference between the Brooklyn bridge and military pontoon bridges, it is no wonder that your countrymen under Putin don’t understand it either
Late to the party but anyway...
“No one had any issues when the US destroyed ‘civilian infrastructure’ in the opening of the Iraq War, Kosovo War or any other war/conflict but all of a sudden it is decried and bemoaned in this war/conflict?”
The USA didn’t have a Budapest Memorandum level nonaggression treaty with Iraq or Serbia.
Iraq post 9/11 was a Bush vanity project,and unfinished business from the UN Charter triggered response to the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait.
Kosovo’s another disaster but again was enabled in the first place by reports of genocide against the Kosovo Albanians being taken to the UN.
You seem to have a complete inability to understand something that the average high school kid can.
The UN is a forum with rules against unprovoked invasions of sovereign nation states, and against ethnic cleansing being carried out by sovereign nation states.
It also acts as a custodian and independent register of treaties between sovereign nation states.
If a sovereign nation states breaks these rules the UN can pass a resolution which can in turn trigger remedial action by UN peacekeepers, moniotis, humanitarian NGOs, and sometimes military intervention.
Rusdia NEVER took any of its claims to the UN. It acted unilaterally.
Ukraine went to the UN with its charges, and bugger me if there wasn’t a whole litany of legal documents created by Russia, obliging Russia to NEVER take hostile military action inside Ukraine without talking to the UN or beimg asked formally by Kyiv and other Budapest signatories to do it.
The international precedent for how Russia should be treated is Iraq in the 1990s. No matter how justified Saddam Hussein thought he was, he had absolutely no international legal justification for the invasion of Kuwait.
Kuwait went to the UN, pointed at a boatload of security guarantees beimg violated by Hussein’s action, and the UN authorised action to force Iraqi withdrawal from Kuwait.
Swap Kuwait for Ukraine and Hussein for Putin in tjose two paragraphs,and that’s sll you need to know.
Just as the USA went off mission in Gulf War 2 as a consequence of a sore President with a score to settle, Putin went off mission in Special Military Operation because he still can’t get over the collapse of the USSR and is determined to make Ukraine pay for its insolence.
3. Does this include schools and hospitals full of civilians?.
You are nuts!