I should stay out of this topic.

What difference does it make. Warcrimes would be called for, has been called for in any event regardless of this happening.

Has that act sparked an outcry, no more than anywhere else.

What effect did it make by the proceeding causality. None. Any affect of more armament and accusing warcrimes and false flags would continue to happen in any event.

Perhaps it has caused more calls for peacekeeping, but propaganda has been inciting it anyway, from day one, and supposed warcrimes from day two or three.

I have a hard time believing this topic's version there. Not impossible, nothing is. But unlikely by the percentages. It hasn't caused anything more or less than any other occurrences.

Meanwhile how go you actually solve a Warcrime? Veto. No, how? In a 100 years from now? Immediate war? What.

The probability didn't make any actual difference to occurrence. Meanwhile with Russian losses. And Ukrainian tactics of its human shields. It seems far more probable it was fired on. Not false flagged. A false flag draws more support, often others into too it. It simply doesn't suicide, achieving nothing but another spectacle where such events continue. Although nothing is impossible in warfare.

Okay you're suggesting they rigged bombs painted symbols and blew it up. Where is the evidence? That detonation would have basic identification not rumor. Any expert on the ground, fire or otherwise would immediately identify that blast damage. If it was shelled by their own positions where is the footage from Russian optics, trajectory?

I should stay out of this topic.

What difference does it make. Warcrimes would be called for, has been called for in any event regardless of this happening.

Has that act sparked an outcry, no more than anywhere else.

What effect did it make by the proceeding causality. None. Any affect of more armament and accusing warcrimes and false flags would continue to happen in any event.

Perhaps it has caused more calls for peacekeeping, but propaganda has been inciting it anyway, from day one, and supposed warcrimes from day two or three.

I have a hard time believing this topic's version there. Not impossible, nothing is. But unlikely by the percentages. It hasn't caused anything more or less than any other occurrences.

Meanwhile how go you actually solve a Warcrime? Veto. No, how? In a 100 years from now? Immediate war? What.

The probability didn't make any actual difference to occurrence. Meanwhile with Russian losses. And Ukrainian tactics of its human shields. It seems far more probable it was fired on. Not false flagged. A false flag draws more support, often others into too it. It simply doesn't suicide, achieving nothing but another spectacle where such events continue. Although nothing is impossible in warfare.

Okay you're suggesting they rigged bombs inside painted symbols and blew it up. Where is the evidence? That detonation would have basic identification not rumor. Any expert on the ground, fire or otherwise would immediately identify that blast damage.

I should stay out of this topic.

What difference does it make. Warcrimes would be called for, has been called for in any event regardless of this happening.

Has that act sparked an outcry, no more than anywhere else.

What effect did it make by the proceeding causality. None. Any affect of more armament and accusing warcrimes and false flags would continue to happen in any event.

Perhaps it has caused more calls for peacekeeping, but propaganda has been inciting it anyway, from day one, and supposed warcrimes from day two or three.

I have a hard time believing this topic's version there. Not impossible, nothing is. But unlikely by the percentages. It hasn't caused anything more or less than any other occurrences.

Meanwhile how go you actually solve a Warcrime? Veto. No, how? In a 100 years from now? Immediate war? What.