Comments by "naas699" (@naas699) on "" video.

what is it about Vegans who feel the need to tell the world that they are vegans? so he is against killing animals - but has no problem killing humans?
38
mercenraies are not protected by the Geneva Convention and the treatment of POW's - the Aust Govt should know that. According to this rule, States are free to grant prisoner-of-war status to a mercenary or withhold it, but the mercenary has no right to claim such status as a defence against prosecution. As the UN Secretary-General reported in 1988
21
really? maybe you can list all of RU's wars since the end of the USSR in 1991 (thats the former Communist Soviet Union seeing as you clearly have no clue of which present day RU bears no resemblance), now compare that to the list of the USA's forever wars. You know - the country that has NOT been at war for 16 years since 1776 making it "the most warlike nation in the history of the world" - former US President Jimmy Carter. "Do you know why the biggest propagators of disinformation in the history of the world are? the United States Government" - US Senator Rand Paul, and lets not forget "the death of 500,000 Iraqi children was worth it" - US Secretary of State Madeline Albright. Maybe you should read about what Assange made the world know about Americas forever wars and their reasons for them
4
@Straya92 Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, Article 47 - Mercenaries 1. A mercenary shall not have the right to be a combatant or a prisoner of war. #1 on the list smart guy.
3
you mean those children that were abandoned & were alone in a war zone?
2
Practice relating to Rule 108 Mercenaries. A “mercenary” is a person who takes a direct part in hostilities motivated essentially by the desire for private gain. A captured mercenary is not a prisoner of war. Article 47 of the 1977 Additional Protocol I spells out six cumulative conditions for a person to be a mercenary. The person must: 1/ be specially recruited locally or abroad in order to fight in an armed conflict 2/ take a direct part in the hostilities; 3/ be motivated to take part in the hostilities essentially by the desire for private gain and to be promised, by or on behalf of a Party to the conflict, material compensation substantially in excess of that promised or paid to combatants of similar ranks and functions in the armed forces of that Party; 4/ not be a national of a Party to the conflict or a resident of territory controlled by a Party to the conflict; 5/ not be a member of the armed forces of a Party to the conflict; and 6/ not have been sent by a State which is not a Party to the conflict on official duty as a member of its armed forces. The 1989 International Convention against the Recruitment, Use, Financing and Training of Mercenaries extends this definition to persons recruited for the purpose of participating in a concerted act of violence aimed at overthrowing a government or otherwise undermining the constitutional order of a State, or at undermining the territorial integrity of a State.
2
@JannaAnderson-ol4gs Blinken said that once UA is in NATO the US will put nuclear missiles in UA, only the qty will be discussed with RU. Why don't you then take a history lesson to see what the US did during the Cuban Missile Crisis & the US Monroe Doctrine where they see any influence by an outside Govt on nations bordering the US or nearby as political interference & wiull go to war over it. Cuban Missile Crisis - USA illegally blockaded shipping in international waters & depth charged Soviet submarines to drive them to the surface.
1
@JannaAnderson-ol4gs try reading the USA's Rand Corporation "Extending Russia" - their oped on how to provoke & go to war with RU. commissioned by the US military who acknowledged that RU were trying to avoid conflict
1
@JannaAnderson-ol4gs NATO - an organisation openly hostile to RU had no reason to exist after the collapse of the USSR so they came up with a new plan - expand up to RU's border to provoke war to justify their existence. NATO - we will not expand ONE INCH EAST if the USSR allows Germany to unify as 1 country and the US can keep their military there (more US lies). NATO - force all countries to buy US military equipment
1
@JannaAnderson-ol4gs 1992 US withdrew from the ABM (anti ballistic missile) treaty and put missiles in Poland & Romania capable of nuclear warheads - aimed at Moscow. 2019 US withdrew from the INF (intermediate range nuclear forces) treaty, 2020 US withdrew from Open Skies policy. All former treaties signed by Reagan & Gorbachev to minimise nuclear missiles now worthless courtesy of the US. (who have said they will put nukes in Germany). US happy to provoke nuclear war with RU believing it will be contained in EU & the US will be protected by their 2 greatest allies - the Atlantic & Pacific Oceans
1
@JannaAnderson-ol4gs in its 75 year existence NATO, the supposed guarantors of peace and stability are responsible for instigating over 100 military actions or wars around the globe - so much for a defensive alliance. Point out Yugoslavia on a map for me will you as I can't find it. Oh yeah - you can thank NATO for that. Libya had one of the best lifestyles in Africa - destroyed thanks to NATO.
1
@JannaAnderson-ol4gs what did the USA do to the last 2 world leaders who tried to sell their countries oil in a currewncy other than the US$? Muammar Gaddafi & Saddam Hussein. RU (Putin) the big player in BRICS causing massive dedollarisatioin. So UA is a US proxy war where the US thought in 3 months Putin would be overthrown
1
@JannaAnderson-ol4gs by your peabrane logic RU will then take over all of the Baltics and more of EU because they were all part of the USSR and prior to that the Russian Empire - or something like that
1
@JannaAnderson-ol4gs Oleksii Arestovych - former military officer & aid to UA president is on video stating the price for UA to join NATO is to PROVOKE war with RU that leads to RU's defeat (US want to overthrow Putin so they can go back to raping RU of its oil, gas and minerals as they had been doing from 1993-2002). Arestovych is also on video saying RU was extremely generous with concessions all in UA's favour for neutrality - then Boris Johnson flew to Kiev & told Zelensky not to sign peace. Victoria Nuland is on video admitting the US spent $6 billion on their coup, and that peace was signed but it was unacceptable to the US & UK
1
@JannaAnderson-ol4gs Zelensky was voted in on a platform of peace saying he would end the shelling of the Donbas but once in power - instead of ending the shelling, he increased it as noted by OSCE. Minsk 2 ceasefire sham admitted by Germany's Merkal (Germany & France Minsk 2 guarantors to ensure they were enforced) that it was used by the west time to weaponise, build up,fund & train UA military where it was the 2nd largest out of NATO countries & the largest in EU, aimed to go to war against RU. Donbas declared themselves independant as is their right under international law for self determination, so RU entered to end the killing of RU speakers by Zelensky. RU used the UN Responsibility to Protect (R2P) Doctrine. if it was any other country they would be lauded for ending the killing, but that doesn't fit the western BS narrative
1
@JannaAnderson-ol4gs why did the US haphazardly withdraw from Afghanistan? they had to prepare for the war against RU. US says they will go to war with China in 2025. now 2027. All so the US weapons manufacturers get the mega $ trillion contracts and they donate $ millions to US congress. Lockheed MArtin CFO we received an order for $10 billion and another order for $10 billion to replace what has already been sent. Liz Cheneys net worth 2017 $7 million 2021 $44 million - who says Americas forever wars don't pay? Blinken, Lloyd Austin, Lindsey Graham 0- the war is good for the US economy creating jobs
1
@JannaAnderson-ol4gs US following George Soros' New World Order policy from the 1990'sw - to go to war with RU you need to use former Soviet countries soildiers with modern NATO weapons, as NATO would not tolerate bodybags returning to their soil. US have found a new way to continue their forever wars - use proxies to do their fighting for them as bodybags made the US end thair failed wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, Vietnam (I could go on as the US lose every war they are involved in)
1
@JannaAnderson-ol4gs this is a continuation of Americas forever wars - money laundering for the US weapons manufacturers & US Congress. you have no effn idea do you
1
it is, he has no right to claim POW status and to be treated as one under the Geneva Convention, but the Aust Govt will demand RU treats him as a POW
1
if he was captured by the USA he'd be shipped off to Gitmo without trial & held for 20 years
1
@JannaAnderson-ol4gs RU sent in 2021 a draft for secutity to the US & NATO to prevent war - ignored by the US & NATO. Stoltenberg is on video saying they received it. USA violent and illegal coup to overthrow the democratically elected President Yanukovych, followed by Poroshenko & Zelensky shelling the civilians in the Donbas from 2014-2022
1
@JannaAnderson-ol4gs my god if you believe that then you have brought ign0rance & styup!dity to a whole new level
1
@Straya92 Rule 108. Mercenaries, as defined in Additional Protocol I, do not have the right to combatant or prisoner-of-war status. Volume II, Chapter 33, Section C. International armed conflicts - The rule that mercenaries do not have the right to combatant or prisoner-of-war status is set forth in Additional Protocol I. It is also contained in a few other treaties. Numerous military manuals specify that mercenaries are not entitled to combatant or prisoner-of-war status you need to do more than cut & paste POW from wikipedia. you sound like you're as smart asd Oscar
1
@Straya92 Oscars linkedin website shows a map of UA with "righteous Soldier" posted on it. Proof he went to UA to fight - the LEGAL DEFINITION OF A MERCENARY
1
@Straya92 and mercenaries are not covered under the Geneva Convention for POW rights
1
@Straya92 i have posted this before, & clearly have to again. Rule 108. Mercenaries, as defined in Additional Protocol I, do not have the right to combatant or prisoner-of-war status. as per The ICRC’s International Humanitarian Law Database
1