Will you likewise applaud when some American generals are killed?

Or only the ones, if any, not decrying the glorification of naziism? "USA yet again votes at the UN to allow for glorification of Naziism."

@FrayedBear American generals aren't dying. Russian generals are. [bbc.com]

@barjoe exactly Joe. The Russians haven't dropped any hypersonic bombs on the Pentagon yet. We all saw what one supposed hijacked aeroplane did to the investigators & evidence in the Pentagon back on 9\11 when investigating American fraud . . . What do you think the equivalent of a mortar dropped from the outer edges of space is going to do if it is also nuclear? And do you think that they'll stop without cleaning out your White House & every nuclear power station in the USA?

As Long as America send in AI weaponary things will progress as future history will tell. If America sends in troops, the Russians have won.
It is a historically proven fact that America is good at mopping up after a war has been won, but cannot fight their way out of a wet paper bag in truth .Europe,(Brits had won it) Japan ( crippled militarily from lack of fuel) Vietnam and Korea are good recent examples

@Garban US Generals would be hard put to be found anywhere near the action wouldn't they. Wasn't it an US squaddie who deserted & ran so far from the action that he tripped over a general's shiny boot to give inspiration for the joke that has travelled the world. A joke attesting to US general's bravery & participation alongside the troops?

@Kurtn America isn't going to send in troops. Russia sent in the troops. There's plenty of Ukraine troops. They're doing a pretty good job without American GIs.

@Kurtn You don't know much. We are very good at winning battles, not so good at occupation.

@Kurtn, @FrayedBear General officers are not supposed to be in front lines. Among other things that is far too large a security risk. The Field grade officers do fine.

@Alienbeing What is interesting is that the numbers of military killed in war has seriously diminished since WWII whilst the numbers of civilians murdered has increased. Apart from deaths of Russian generals other country's generals continue not to be killed unless USA decides to break all the rules and drop a cruise missile on you!

@Garban I understand that it was because USA satellites were able to locate their mobile phone locations & thus guide cruise missiles to their locations. I think that in anyone but an American or Ukrainian mind that is assassination & murder of a known human being. There I thought war was about killing the enemies unknown soldiers. The #stupidity of running assassinations is that the good generals will have trained subordinates to take over who will be better than the trainer & assassinated generals.

@Garban do you have proof that the Russians are targeting schools & hospitals or have you got bad markmanship & Ukrainian weaponry deflecting missiles from their intended targets?

@Garban & how much is it Ukrainian propaganda?

@Garban it's my suspicion that the Russian generals were superfluous to Russia's government aspirations.

@FrayedBear You once again prove you have NO knowledge of topics you select. Civilian casualties have NOT, in any way increased since WW2.

German, Japanese and Russin civilian deaths during WW2 wer SIGNIFICANTLY higher than in any conflict prior to WW2 and SINCE WW2!.

Next what "rules" are you referrng to as respects the demise of any General officer?

Last, the U.S. is not firing any munitions of any kind, so what are you referring to when you say "Apart from deaths of Russian generals other country's generals continue not to be killed unless USA decides to break all the rules and drop a cruise missile on you!" You make no sense AND prove you don't know what you are talking about.

@FrayedBear You suspect the killed Russian Generals were superfluous to Russian "aspirations". What knowledge could you possibly have to make that statement?

The answer is NONE!

@FrayedBear The missiles Russia fires are accurate enough to state that if the missile hit a hospital it was aimed at the hospital.

@Alienbeing the same knowledge that will state that the murder & assassination of Qasem Soleimani
On 3 January 2020 was yet another US government & citizen's crime.

@Alienbeing no missile contains infallible AI that ensures that it hits\destroys its intended target.
There is absolute truth in the statement "no one has ever been born who has not made a mistake in their life time".

How many motor vehicles have you unintentionally caused to be damaged?

@Alienbeing Interestingly I see that only last Saturday your NYT reported on another plot to kill a Russian general. RT reported it today US sought to stop Ukraine from killing Russia’s top general – NYT [rt.com]

As for the USA dropping munitions to assassinate other country's generals how quickly you wish to forget the murder of Iran's General Qasem Soleimani on 3 January 2020.

@FrayedBear In other words (and more correct words) you have no knowledge of the issue.

@FrayedBear Once again you mouth off without any knowledge of the subject you approach.

The guidence system in missiles is not what you attempt to describe, not even close, and I do have knowledge of that.

Do yourself a favor and hang it up.

@FrayedBear No clue what you think your point is.

OF COURSE Ukrainians will attempt to kill all Russian military, including Generals..... they are at war you know.

Last, I never took issue with anyone using missiles, conventional bombs, artillery, or any other munition to kill the other side's military. It is the obvious use of munitions to kill civilians I (and the world) has issue with.

@Alienbeing when did the USA declare war on the murdered general's country?

@FrayedBear Ukraine is doing the fighting. No American GIs are involved. USA is giving military and financial support. If Trump was still president Zalenskyy would've been deposed and probably killed and Ukraine would be annexed by Russian Federation. NATO would be on it's way to being dissolved if Trump had his way. Whatever you think of Joe Biden, he saved NATO and stopped Russian aggression. He deserves a lot of credit for this.

@FrayedBear Killing Soleimani was one of Trump's finest hours. He didn't have many.

@FrayedBear Are you really that out of it? Did you miss the TONS of articles where the U.S. declared Soleimani a terrorist? He was killed because he was a terriorist, not because he lived in Iran.

@Alienbeing He was a serving officer of a country that USA has not declared war on. You labelling him terrorist simply means that yet again without government declaration nor open court trial enabling justice the USA has peremptorily given itself the right to murder anyone anywhere in the world because it suits your perverted beliefs.

@FrayedBear As I posted elsewhere, your agreement is not a factor. The fact that you cannot clearly see he was a terrorist provides positive proof you are very ignorant.

@Alienbeing And how many terrorists do we know serving & being the US government?

Let's start with Kissinger, Regan, Nixon, Clinton then there are those leaving land mines & Agent Orange in SE Asia, depleted uranium in the Middle East, the downfall of the democracies of Chile, Australia, Libya, et al. To say nothing of the hardships created in many countries through sanctions, trade barriers, with holding medical supplies & knowledge, the probable planning & production of numerous diseases, catastrophes like 9\11, Ukraine & current EU energy crisis, the great African refugee invasion of recent years . . . All created by US terrorists.

@FrayedBear We know of none, and it is obvious you don't know what a terriorist is.

@Alienbeing I'll give you these definitions from American dictionaries.
Do you agree or disagree with the definitions?

terrorist
Definitions
from The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, 5th Edition.
noun A person who engages in terrorism.
adjective Of or relating to terrorism.
from The Century Dictionary.
noun One who favors or uses terrorizing methods for the accomplishment of some object, as for coercing a government or a community into the adoption of or submission to a certain course; one who practises terrorism.
noun In Russia, a member of a political party whose purpose is to demoralize the government by terror. See nihilism, 4 .
from the GNU version of the Collaborative International Dictionary of English.
noun One who governs by terrorism or intimidation; specifically, an agent or partisan of the revolutionary tribunal during the Reign of Terror in France.
noun One who commits terrorism{2}.
from Wiktionary, Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License.
noun A person, group, or organization that uses violent action, or the threat of violent action, to further political goals; frequently in an attempt to coerce either a more powerful opponent, (such as a citizen or group targeting a government), or conversely, a weaker opponent, (such as a government, or even an internal citizen or group, being targeted by a larger government).
noun An agent or partisan of the revolutionary tribunal during the Reign of Terror in France.
adjective Of or relating to terrorism.
from WordNet 3.0 Copyright 2006 by Princeton University. All rights reserved.
noun a radical who employs terror as a political weapon; usually organizes with other terrorists in small cells; often uses religion as a cover for terrorist activities

@FrayedBear Your ability to copy and paste in no way proves or even indicates you know what a terrorist is. Your inability to identify terrorism is but one of your problems.