>There was also a report that Russia had summoned foreign ambassadors in Moscow to complain about foreign volunteers traveling to Ukraine to fight against Russia.
I am absolutely dying laughing at the absurdity of such a complaint (if true), lol.
I am absolutely dying laughing at the absurdity of such a complaint (if true), lol.
As a glaring example of how gullible are Russians to their propaganda - this official Russian TV story shows planes with unguided dumb bombs (FAB-250, 500lbs) with which Russia bombs Ukrainian cities, and they call it "high-precision missiles" and "point-precision weapons" with which Russia supposedly strikes only military targets (while any Russian can find, yet wouldn't, on YouTube the videos of Ukraine cities destruction by those bombs) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LrekdY2FgD0 , yet if you talk to a Russian in Russia they will be screaming that they only "precision-strike only military targets".
That is the same unit - the same planes and pilots - who did similar bombing of civilians in Syria cities back then. On February 5 Ukraine shot down one of those planes when it was bombing the city of Chernigov. The pilot was captured - happened to be the guy infamous for his Syrian cities bombings and who was celebrated by Putin for that. https://www.unian.net/war/bombil-mirnyy-gorod-letchika-so-sb...
A lot harder to uphold once a tactical nuke is used... My worry after the world is so blatently defying Putler with MiGs & other armarments...
Plus the experience of the Chechen volunteers -- who generally got hit hard from the looks of it -- is something the Kazakhs can look at and say "nah".
I suppose it is the difference between officially being at war and not. If some country sends fighters to support your enemy, you may start asking if you are at war with that other country, after all?
So would you say it would be funny if Canada was officially at war with Russia now?
Unless Russia gives up, WWIII seems to already have started, as most countries have joined in one way or another. I guess the only hope is that Russia will decide that the cost is too high.
Canada itself is not sending them, that is the distinction here. The humor is in a country exercising hostility by invading another country then asking people to stop coming to that country's defense, simple as that.
Obviously the real world has more complexity than that. "Complain about it" could mean "We know about your tax incentives driving your citizens to fight us and we want you to end that program" but is more likely to mean "We want you to police your internal borders and prevent your citizens from traveling to Europe"
and a legal quagmire. I wonder if a canadian citizen who murders someone overseas can be tried for such in canada (when they return). Because if they can be, then going overseas to participate in a war can be legally problematic, esp. unauthorized by the canadian gov't.
But if this is seen as legal today, then it sets a bad precedence for private citizens going overseas to commit murder!
Is there a good reason why any country willing to claim you as a citizen should have a right to police you wherever you are in the world? In context, if Russia decided that all current Ukrainians were Russian citizens should they be allowed to continue the invasion (which at that point would just be ordinary police work quelling an internal rebellion)?
Russia cannot just declare that every person is a Russian citizen and therefor subject to Russian laws. (I mean... they can but it would obviously be in bad faith)
But it does make sense that people who themselves claim and hold Russian citizenship be subject to Russian laws and that if they do not wish to be so, they renounce their citizenship.
I don't understand what you are trying to say here. Do you mean that subjecting people to the laws of the jurisdiction in which they claim residence regardless of where their actions take place would be "bad precedence"?
In the case where an individual who claims residence in Jurisdiction A (where murder is illegal) travels to and commits murder in Jurisdiction B (where murder is illegal).
Clearly some form of "double jeopardy" would be bad and odd cases with conflicting laws can get complex.
But, overall, the notation that you abide by all laws of the land in which you claim citizenship as well as the land in which you currently physically occupy seems to be a "good precedence".
As for the "country" sending fighters, in this instance, it's miss-representative. These are legit volunteers acting on there own initiatives outside of any government's call to arm, a bit like the International Brigades of the Spanish Civil war.
Lastly, Putin is a gambler, but not an idiot nor a lunatic wanting to end the world nor a leader in a desperate situation. He made a gamble in Ukraine because he knew he could somewhat get away with it (even if things are not exactly going according to plan).
He will not start a global/nuclear conflict over a silly matter like few hundreds foreign combatants acting on their own initiative, which doesn't mean he will not posture against it.