Emergency in Cheveksim

[Czarnazemlyu]

People,
I, as ruler of Czarnazemlyu, beg you to condemn the nation of Suurta-Osavaltio. The Osavaltian nation is an ally of my country, and we went to war alongside them. We are currently still fighting that war. The Suurta-Osavaltian special forces have gone way too far. They have broken a key rule of war. A Staasik (S.Osavaltian special forces) regiment of thirty men, led by BkKom Lyudvadov, entered the small Chevek town of Qvrzady on tuesday. They went door to door and slaughtered the innocent civilians without any reason to. This brutal slaughter claimed the lives of two thousand non-combatants, and left many more injured. I am calling for a WA resolution to condemn Suurta-Osavaltio for their actions, and to force an end to this bloody war. Please listen to my request.

-Prime Minister Katherine Aarmstaad

[The Emmerian Unions]

You want the Security council. It's down the hall.

[Czarnazemlyu]

I posted a request there as well.

[Holy Roman Confederate]

Sounds to me that you need better taste in allies. Now, have you stopped to consider that if they are willing to commit wholesale slaughter of innocents just what they might do to you for turning on them? Just a thought.

[Czarnazemlyu]

I cannot disagree with you, but there is no way to ignore this slaughteer. I don't care what the consequences are.

[Gharin]

Dont worry. Im on it.

[Czarnazemlyu]

Spas'ba, for listening to us.

[Suurta-Osavaltio]

The people in the Chevek controlled town of Qvrzady were enemy combatants. They were a threat to Osavaltian troops in Cheveksim, so they were eliminated.

-BkKom Anton Lyudvadov, Staasik regiment 17

[Holy Roman Confederate]

Even though this isnt the SC thread on this topic, I'll answer here anyway. Seeing the accused's reply to the charges leveled now you understand why proof is required.

[Czarnazemlyu]

Enemy combatants, my officers reported seeing elderly men and women and even children among the dead. All were killed by Staasik men.

[Holy Roman Confederate]

Produce video, unbiased witness accounts from an independent third party, something along those lines. Without that the argument can be made that your troops who by your own admission witnessed the event were the true "bad guys" in this situation, and you are simply trying to frame another nation. Now, I'm not saying thats the case here, but stranger things have happened.

[Suurta-Osavaltio]

The town of Qvrzady was controlled by the ChPA, a known Chevek terrorist organisation. Yes, there were women and children killed by my men. By living in a ChPA occupied town, they made themselves a target for the Osavaltian military command. There is no argument here other than that what my troops did was eliminate highly dangerous terrorist forces.

[Banjamos]

The town of Qvrzady was controlled by the ChPA, a known Chevek terrorist organisation. Yes, there were women and children killed by my men. By living in a ChPA occupied town, they made themselves a target for the Osavaltian military command. There is no argument here other than that what my troops did was eliminate highly dangerous terrorist forces.

Sometimes, people can't move, even if there are some very bad people living down the block from them. They may live in their ancestral home, or they may not have enough money to move. Perhaps they have a stable job in this town, or they're afraid of moving, due. Whatever the case, living in the same town does not condone killing/treating them as enemy combatants. Unless there is unbiased proof they are engaging your men as enemy combatants, your men cannot fire upon civilians and write it off as Enemy Combatants.




OOC: In an easier explanation: Take a person, for example, living in the same town as the Taliban's headquarters back before the US invaded Afghanistan. Does living near the Taliban condone killing of innocent civilians?

[Suurta-Osavaltio]

The town of Qvrzady was controlled by the ChPA, a known Chevek terrorist organisation. Yes, there were women and children killed by my men. By living in a ChPA occupied town, they made themselves a target for the Osavaltian military command. There is no argument here other than that what my troops did was eliminate highly dangerous terrorist forces.

Sometimes, people can't move, even if there are some very bad people living down the block from them. They may live in their ancestral home, or they may not have enough money to move. Perhaps they have a stable job in this town, or they're afraid of moving. Whatever the case, living in the same town does not condone killing/treating them as enemy combatants.


In an easier explanation: Take a person, for example, living in the same town as the Taliban's headquarters back before the US invaded Afghanistan. Does living near the enemy condone killing of innocent civilians?

These people were a threat to our nation, and now they are not. There can be no more argument.

[Banjamos]

The town of Qvrzady was controlled by the ChPA, a known Chevek terrorist organisation. Yes, there were women and children killed by my men. By living in a ChPA occupied town, they made themselves a target for the Osavaltian military command. There is no argument here other than that what my troops did was eliminate highly dangerous terrorist forces.

Sometimes, people can't move, even if there are some very bad people living down the block from them. They may live in their ancestral home, or they may not have enough money to move. Perhaps they have a stable job in this town, or they're afraid of moving. Whatever the case, living in the same town does not condone killing/treating them as enemy combatants.


In an easier explanation: Take a person, for example, living in the same town as the Taliban's headquarters back before the US invaded Afghanistan. Does living near the enemy condone killing of innocent civilians?

These people were a threat to our nation, and now they are not. There can be no more argument.

Be careful, Representative of Suurta-Osavaltio, you are walking a fine line. You are of the belief that since women and children live in the same town as an "Enemy," they are "fair game." Would it be the same if an enemy force swept through your country, killing any and all, simply because they are a threat to said enemy force?

[Suurta-Osavaltio]

The town of Qvrzady was controlled by the ChPA, a known Chevek terrorist organisation. Yes, there were women and children killed by my men. By living in a ChPA occupied town, they made themselves a target for the Osavaltian military command. There is no argument here other than that what my troops did was eliminate highly dangerous terrorist forces.

Sometimes, people can't move, even if there are some very bad people living down the block from them. They may live in their ancestral home, or they may not have enough money to move. Perhaps they have a stable job in this town, or they're afraid of moving. Whatever the case, living in the same town does not condone killing/treating them as enemy combatants.


In an easier explanation: Take a person, for example, living in the same town as the Taliban's headquarters back before the US invaded Afghanistan. Does living near the enemy condone killing of innocent civilians?

These people were a threat to our nation, and now they are not. There can be no more argument.

Be careful, Representative of Suurta-Osavaltio, you are walking a fine line. You are of the belief that since women and children live in the same town as an "Enemy," they are "fair game." Would it be the same if an enemy force swept through your country, killing any and all, simply because they are a threat to said enemy force?

Nation of Banjamos, we would not allow the murder of innocent civilians unless we have reason.

[Holy Roman Confederate]

Rules of engagement are tightly defined, but in warfare those hard and fast rules sometimes fall by the wayside.

[Banjamos]

The town of Qvrzady was controlled by the ChPA, a known Chevek terrorist organisation. Yes, there were women and children killed by my men. By living in a ChPA occupied town, they made themselves a target for the Osavaltian military command. There is no argument here other than that what my troops did was eliminate highly dangerous terrorist forces.

Sometimes, people can't move, even if there are some very bad people living down the block from them. They may live in their ancestral home, or they may not have enough money to move. Perhaps they have a stable job in this town, or they're afraid of moving. Whatever the case, living in the same town does not condone killing/treating them as enemy combatants.


In an easier explanation: Take a person, for example, living in the same town as the Taliban's headquarters back before the US invaded Afghanistan. Does living near the enemy condone killing of innocent civilians?

These people were a threat to our nation, and now they are not. There can be no more argument.

Be careful, Representative of Suurta-Osavaltio, you are walking a fine line. You are of the belief that since women and children live in the same town as an "Enemy," they are "fair game." Would it be the same if an enemy force swept through your country, killing any and all, simply because they are a threat to said enemy force?

Nation of Banjamos, we would not allow the murder of innocent civilians unless we have reason.

Is living in the same town as an enemy "reason" enough to kill hundreds, or even thousands of innocents, simply because they can become enemy combatants? Even if civilians are housing and feeding your "enemy" combatants, it still does not condone the wholesale slaughter of civilians. This was not simply a violation of common Rules of Engagement, it was a massacre. Massacres are "the indiscriminate and brutal slaughter of people," which has allegedly happened here.

[Holy Roman Confederate]

And that would represent a violation of common rules of engagement, would it not? It seems to me as if you are not coming at this in an unbiased matter. Before you cast judgement perhaps it should be investigated. The burden of proof rests on the government leveling these charges, and it rests there alone. Let the evidence speak.

[Lord Zannah]

A WA sanctioned inspection team should go into the region to verify the claims on both nations, if there is such a thing.

[Suurta-Osavaltio]

We have sent a message to the ChPA by destroying this town. This town is only the first. More terrorists will be killed until the ChPA is no longer a threat.

[Holy Roman Confederate]

This would fall into the realm of the ICC, as this would constitute a war crime if found to be true. Perhaps then the repeal of the ICC should be rethought.

[Banjamos]

And that would represent a violation of common rules of engagement, would it not? It seems to me as if you are not coming at this in an unbiased matter. Before you cast judgement perhaps it should be investigated. The burden of proof rests on the government leveling these charges, and it rests there alone. Let the evidence speak.

I am sorry, as I have let the heat of the matter get to myself. I will attempt to look upon this as unbiased as I can possibly be from now on.

The threats Suurta-Osavaltio makes against innocent civilians coincidentally living in the same towns as these "terrorists" are quite inflammatory.

[Holy Roman Confederate]

Inflammatory or not one cannot let emotion bias an investigation into this matter, or justice cannot be done in any regard.

[Cheveksim]

We will never bow to the filthy king of suurta-osavaltio. We deserve to be a nation again! The Osavaltians came into our country without warning. They took our land and our people. We are determined to get it back. This massacre will not stop us, nothing will stop us. We are unstoppable.

-Aigor Qoxok, head of the ChPA