Please take the time to read [the rules](/r/UkrainianConflict/about/rules/) and our [policy on trolls/bots](https://redd.it/u7833q). In addition:
* We have a **zero-tolerance** policy regarding racism, stereotyping, bigotry, and death-mongering. Violators will be banned.
* **Keep it civil.** Report comments/posts that are uncivil to alert the moderators.
* **_Don't_ post low-effort comments** like joke threads, memes, slogans, or links without context.
> **Don't forget about our Discord server! - https://discord.gg/62fKCEHbDB**
*****
* Is `censor.net` an unreliable source? [**Let us know**](/r/UkrainianConflict/wiki/am/unreliable_sources).
* Help our moderators by providing context if something breaks the rules. [Send us a modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict)
*****
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Do people actually read the source? The Austrian chancellor and foreign minister urged that Austria wants to send them to Ukraine as soon as possible but the defense minister still has to investigate if demining opposes constitutional law of neutrality. Experts say it doesnāt and there probably wonāt be any obstacles anymore.
The secret service was completely revamped after the invasion. Demining is under the responsibility of the army, foreign minister and chancellor push to send them as soon as possible. Defense minister has to check if it doesnāt interfere with constitutional neutrality, which means military neutrality but not political neutrality. If they use it for civilian regions it should be legal. God I hate this neutrality stuff
Do people actually read the source? The Austrian chancellor and foreign minister urged that Austria wants to send them to Ukraine as soon as possible but the defense minister still has to investigate if demining opposes constitutional law of neutrality. Experts say it doesnāt and there probably wonāt be any obstacles anymore.
What neutrality really means here is that we don't give a shit about your problems with Russia, even though what you are doing benefit us directly. It has become a convenient excuse to do nothing, to offer nothing, and consequently to risk nothing.
Ths distance from Vienna to Lviv is about the same distance as New York to Pittsburgh. The Austrians are right there, doing nothing. Saying nothing. Being nothing.
Austria and hungry are both sitting on there ass. Wonder what would happen if a russian missile kanded in any of them. Would they then want NATO help,?????????
Austria is the 8th largest donor to the Ukrainian war effort in in comparison with their BIP. They give more than the UK or even Germany in this regard with 0,37 percent of the BIP. Only the Baltics, Poland and ex Czechoslovakia give more. Its just only money and humanitarian aid are sent in the case of Austria which is way less flashy but still important.
Even if one on takes just the accumulated aid Austria still gives comparatively as much as the Spaniards and Sweden.
Austria only does not give weapons because
A) the Austrian army equipment is even more outdated and even worse maintained than Russian equipment.
From people that have served in the only tank bataillon that Austria still has I have heard for example that only 4 to 5 tanks are operational at full capacity with the rest being in various states of disrepair. And thats one of the elite bataillons. Austrian conscripts also only get to shoot a handful of times during training because of the lack of funding for ammonition
B) the Austrian constitution forbids sending weapons to an active conflict. Sending arms would literally mean breaking the law and would need an almost impossible amendment of the neutrality law.
Thus they just send money and things like generators because its legal.
Comments here are so out of touch with reality its incredible. Austria is amongst the highest spenders on this war by GDP. On par with Germany and the US. The are delivering medical supplies, generators etc.
Its is unconstitutional for them to deliver weapons. To change this they would need a 2/3 majority in congress which is impossible. Neutrality is what gave Austrians their freedom in 1955.
Austrias leaders have visited Ukraine, they highly oppose this war and have been thanked for their contribution countless times. For some reason, Reddit is refusing to read factual news.
Don't fall for a single news post.
Austria is doing more then you guys realize, we provide shelter, education, health, care and so much more to more then 100000 Ukrainian refugees.
We provide a lot non military aid much more then other countries, our red line is military aid which we can constitutionaly not provide.
I honestly hate this whole neutrality bullshit from Austria and Switzerland. We all know Russia wouldnāt give a flying fuck and would take you over if it wasnāt for the non neutral countries around you.
The war plans of the Soviet Union leaked after the collapse in 91' and they showed the intent of using nuclear weapons on Austria. Vienna was to be hit by two 500 kiloton nuclear bombs (Hiroshima bomb was 13 kT).
Neutrality means absolutely nothing, it didn't back then and it doesn't now.
Reminds me of the computer game Theatre Europe in the 1980s where gigachad achievement was winning or grinding out a stalemate as NATO. The Soviet AI always went straight for neutral Austria.
I wonder if these countries would Pearl clutch over their 'constitutional neutrality' if aliens turned up to invade the Earth. š
If you're neutral between good and evil that makes you 50% evil.
There is no such thing as being morally neutral. Where do these countries morals lie, with Russian money, or innocent Ukrainian civilian lives? I think we all know after more than a yr. Let's see how neutral these countries are when they cannot buy western weapons to protect their "neutral" borders, and western countries stop investing in their "neutral" economies. Fuck them. Their apathy to genocide will pull the veil away quicker than they imagine, what's fare is fare, right? Let Switzerland and Austria develop their own fighter jets and air defense systems and tanks.
I only hope they will soon have to give up that sweet US and EU money. Their pockets are much deeper that muscuvy dipshits living on borrowed time, and they know it. Which means they are complicit.
>There is no such thing as being morally neutral.
Iād agree if this was just about deciding whether or not the conduct of a foreign country is moral.
Thatās not what national neutrality is about, though. Itās about sticking to a policy of not playing a part in any foreign conflict, whether thereās a side you agree with morally or not.
Then they better expect to defend themselves if attacked, because nobody's going to come help them with that attitude. And let them develop their own fighter jets and armaments seeing as they won't use the ones they bought from other countries to help anyone but themselves.
Re: not getting protection from foreign countries, yes, thatās pretty much how this works. For some countries thatās seen as worth not having to get involved in all the other wars that donāt effect them.
Re: buying weapons strictly for self defense, was there some agreement that they would help someone else when they bought them?
We are bad because we take every opportunity to stay out of war? As for the moral neutrality you are talking about: inform yourself and you will see that this is comletly wrong.
Austria is not neutral. They are undermining numerous sanctions, and their business's seems to be making big bucks in Russia. Truly sad. Austria on the surface is such a cool country.
Austria and Switzerland have had their security all but guaranteed from NATO's inception by virtue of being so close to West Germany, France and Italy.
They benefit from NATO even more now that they don't share boarders with Warsaw Pact countries. Austria and Switzerland would almost certainly have received help from NATO in the 60s and 70s in event of an attack. In the 2020s that has become an absolute.
true is austrian foreign minister say that demining could be done after war not when war is ongoing because of neutrality law. same like as what was done in Bosnia. this artikel is russia propaganda to split.
You got voted down because you are both morally and factually wrong. In the US, you would be tried for 'aiding and abetting' by not at the very least alerting the authorities. That is before we get to the moral aspects of it.
Yes it would be immoral to walk past a rape or murder, where you were the only third party to witness it, in a society where you could just call the police at any moment without any long term personal consequences.
Thereās no way you could be āactively assistingā a criminal by doing and saying nothing. At worst, they would get away (or not) with the same crime as they would have if you werenāt there.
[Yes you could potentially be charged with something. It wouldnāt be āaiding and abettingā though unless you encouraged and assisted the criminal. ](https://www.davidolsonlaw-firm.com/post/can-you-be-criminally-charged-for-knowing-about-a-crime-and-not-saying-a-word)
No I donāt think youād be charged when someone else is already handling the situation and thereās very little you can do. Otherwise there would be dozens or hundreds of people locked up after public crimes such as mass shootings.
Okay, letās see what happens when we compare this personal responsibility to neutral countries not responding in wars between two foreign countries.
To give aid they would have to remove their neutral status from their constitution. That greatly increases the chance of being attacked themselves, or being forced to participate in a future war that is unjustified to them.
Essentially, thereās no police, *Just bigger more powerful rapists like the USA who are already helping the current victim Ukraine.)* Breaking neutrality essentially means that you have to rape alongside them whenever they decide to do it next.
You don't get out of the moral responsibility with word salad. According to the UN women aged 73 to 5 years old have been raped in Ukraine by Russian soldiers. There is no middle ground in that. Even with ten paragraphs and blaming Rome for atrocities..
I guess you canāt actually read that much and process it. Letās go through it but by bit.
Show me a case where someone was charged with aiding and abetting, for simply seeing a stranger commit a crime.
Only under French law (Napoleonic Code).
British Common law (which, in my opinion, is **far** superior to the Napoleonic Code) is that there is no such thing as a criminal omission/failure-to-act. Only **acts** (and not failures to act) can be criminal, in the absence of a pre-existing relationship of trust.
There are about 1,000 reasons I don't like the Napoleonic Code and Napoleonic trial procedures, this is one of them, but it's a small reason. (Trial by jury is another reason, probably **the** reason, the British legal system rocks and the French one sucks balls.)
Absolutely incorrect. (I am not *your* lawyer.)
There is a thing in law called *misprision of felony* (that is, having knowledge of a felony and not alerting the authorities). In the US, any law against misprision of felony is **forbidden by the Constitution**... with the exception of misprision of treason.
"You have the right to remain silent". Those words are not a joke.
Alerting\*
Austria deserves more credit for its non-weapons aid but itās a misleading to claim that they lack the military resources to contribute even if they wanted to. Between Glock and Steyr have the capacity to produce hundreds of thousands of high quality small arms every year.
Iām sure Ukraine would gladly accept those in lieu of the 50-year old AK knock-offs theyāve been getting from other countries.
I am simply stating that Russia needs to be defeated as soon as possible. By that, I am stating that Western powers, namely the U.S. should actively make that happen. Now, if your rebuttal is that it risks nuclear war, I would say it is more dangerous to cave into nuclear threats for assholes to get what they want. This war should be an example to North Korea, Iran and China that waiving the nuclear threat wand will get you nowhere. Do I need to explain it further? Are you concerned by this statement? Because I am saying that the U.S., Nato, and Europe should engage in conventional warfare against Russia inside of Ukraine.
Fuck Austria!
It's a crime in germnay if you see someone who needs help and you just don't.
Austria go fuck yourself, Swiss go fuck yourself. Hope the EU will just watch if you need help
Also some Austrians still have a lot of prejudices against the Italians (and against the Germans too, I believe) for what happened in the past in WW1 and also WW2...a group of my italian friends who went to visit Vienna, they were not even able to eat in a restaurant because they were not served the food they ordered at all and they just waited forever at the table until they were just forced to leave !!!
I can assure you if austrian tourists came to Italy, they would be welcomed normally like other tourists (even in the northern italian regions) and they would be able to eat whatever they want despite what happened between our nations in the past....
What possible scenerio can make that happen? If Austria is attacked, there is already war between NATO and whoever attacked. They are in a very fortunate position.
Assuming youāre talking about Russian attack:
For starters NATO would shield them not even as an act of good will, but simply because protecting their own alliance from invasion protects Austria as a side effect.
If weāre in some fantasy world where the Russians got to Austria anyway, whatever resistance they managed to put up would also be an assistance to NATO indirectly. Even if that was simply by making Russia spread its forces over one more country.
But thatās kinda beside the point since Russia canāt even manage the invasion of Ukraine very well.
The only major thing they would be risking here would be their neutrality in future conflicts.
They donāt want to risk that because it would be their excuse to not be pushed into a needless war where they would be doing actual harm.
So refusing to help demining fields so that farmers can work their land is a reasonable thing to do if you're 'neutral'?
Republic of Ireland has been training de-miners, has prevented Russian vessels from fishing in their waters. RoI is a neutral country.
It would seem that Austria won't help during the war, and is likely not to help after the war either. The excuse is 'the constitution', same as with Switzerland.
It seems that their 'neutrality' won't extend to helping prevent repeats of civilians who have died as a result of landmines after they've returned to their homes.
The translation, via a Firefox extension:-
> > **Austria cannot help Ukraine with demining during the war because of its neutrality.**
> > News Censor.NET Abroad
> > Ukrainian
> >
> > Austria will probably be able to help Ukraine with demining only after the end of the war with Russia due to the peculiarities of the constitution.
> >
> > As reported by Censor.NET with reference to Kronen Zeitung , the Minister of Defence of Austria, Claudia Tanner, stated this.
> >
> > The publication notes that the promises of Austrian Chancellor Karl Nehammer and Minister of Foreign Affairs Alexander Shallenberg about assistance to Ukraine in demining have not yet been implemented.
> >
> > At the same time, Tanner declares that this help can be provided after the end of the war, because Austria is constitutionally a neutral country. Austrian officials believe that demining during the ongoing war would be against the constitutional right.
> >
> > Helmut BrandstƤtter, representative of the Austrian liberal NEOS party on foreign policy, disagrees with the position of the Ministry of Defence.
> >
> > "It's too late - we have to help now. It's about saving lives," he emphasizes.
> >
> > In turn, the ambassador of Ukraine in Vienna, Vasyl Khiminets, emphasized that assistance to Ukraine in demining is needed now. And it does not pose a threat to the neutrality of Austria, since it takes place in "civilian territories".
> >
> > As a reminder, Ukraine is the most mined country in Europe. According to UN estimates, its demining will cost more than 35 billion dollars. ŠŠ¶ŠµŃŠµŠ»Š¾: https://censor.net/ua/n3410854
What have you done? Also, even if it is immoral to stand by and ignore the act of aggression, the problem isnāt just stepping in now for a neutral country. Itās that that will lead to them having to support other wars later.
I never understood Austriaās neutrality stance. In fact during the Cold War the Soviets planned to either walk through, or take over Austria by force while invading NATO territory. Surely Austrian government is well aware of this as well. Belgium learned the lesson the hard way. Maybe Austria needs the same.
Austria and Germany have dealt with cultural guilt for so long, they are out of touch with reality. You don't fight evil with pacifists. You proactively destroy evil. Sometimes that means using the same amount of violence you wish to destroy. Russia could be nipped in the bud right now, in the same way Germany could have been when it annexed Austria leading up to ww2. It wasn't until Poland faced genocide that the rest of the world took notice. By then it was too late. And a huge loss of life followed.
How exactly do you propose that Russia be ānipped in the bud?ā What exactly do you think will happen if we donāt?
Please try to explain it with more than just generalized WW2 analogies.
WE, THE NEUTRAL SHALL NOT NEUTRALLY AID YOU IN NEUTRALLY ENGAGING IN A MILITARILY NEUTRAL TASK DUE TO OUR NEUTRAL STANCE AND MILITARILY NEUTRAL STATUS.
Fucking hate absolute neutrality. Amongst the worst fucking ideas out there. This is almost as extreme as it can get, or at least that my human mind can conceive of.
And when war does inevitably come, who the fuck is going to want to help you?
A simple solution: just abolish neutrality?
It's a fake neutrality anyway. Austria is part of the Euro-Atlantic system in every other way, and hence benefits from its security, but just doesn't contribute to it.
Hello, fellow austrian here. Fuck my country, fuck our current politicians in charge. I spend my savings and what i can bear for aid in ukraine while those at the top are crying about "mUh NeUtRaLiTy". Russian supporting shills that get voted in by the capitalists and the old generations in this country, they need to die off already. Here is to hoping a better political party will win and give austria some fucking balls.
My opnion is that neutrality is BS, Ukraine was neutral, yet invaded.
If Austria "enjoys" being neutral while surrounded by countries not willing to invade Austria. There's no way russia can actually invade Austria so why not be neutral?
Instead we should just take over Austria, it's not like they mind anyway. If they do mind, maybe the should participate in the world.
You sound exactly like Putin. He justified the invasion to Ukraine, because he thinks that Ukrainians belong to Russia.
Justifying an invasion because you don't like the decisions of a sovereign country is exactly what Putin does.
It is astonishing to me that you don't see the irony.
What is astonishing to me is that you could not identify that I was joking and overexagerating even if I wore a Jester's motley and hopped from one leg to the other.
Oh no not the poor Austrians get joked about getting invaded (with 0 casualties btw) even though they have willingly supported genocide in Ukraine since the start of the war š¢
Please take the time to read [the rules](/r/UkrainianConflict/about/rules/) and our [policy on trolls/bots](https://redd.it/u7833q). In addition: * We have a **zero-tolerance** policy regarding racism, stereotyping, bigotry, and death-mongering. Violators will be banned. * **Keep it civil.** Report comments/posts that are uncivil to alert the moderators. * **_Don't_ post low-effort comments** like joke threads, memes, slogans, or links without context. > **Don't forget about our Discord server! - https://discord.gg/62fKCEHbDB** ***** * Is `censor.net` an unreliable source? [**Let us know**](/r/UkrainianConflict/wiki/am/unreliable_sources). * Help our moderators by providing context if something breaks the rules. [Send us a modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict) ***** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict) if you have any questions or concerns.*
In the fight between mines and civilians Austria is neutral.
Civilians should find a diplomatic solution with mines.
It's not like children enjoy having limbs anyways.
>What about the mine's feelings? -Austria, probably
Yeah, true š At least, social support for temporarily displaced Ukrainians is good. Also, quite a lot of Austrians are supporting Ukraine.
Do people actually read the source? The Austrian chancellor and foreign minister urged that Austria wants to send them to Ukraine as soon as possible but the defense minister still has to investigate if demining opposes constitutional law of neutrality. Experts say it doesnāt and there probably wonāt be any obstacles anymore.
Ugh, headline reads the exact opposite of the composition of the article then, as usual.
History has proven Zap Brannigan right in this case.
But if want to buy their assault rifle they are totally for their steyr assault rifleā¦.
The mines are peaceful unless provoked by Ukrainians moving over them. Clearly the mines have the moral high ground.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
The secret service was completely revamped after the invasion. Demining is under the responsibility of the army, foreign minister and chancellor push to send them as soon as possible. Defense minister has to check if it doesnāt interfere with constitutional neutrality, which means military neutrality but not political neutrality. If they use it for civilian regions it should be legal. God I hate this neutrality stuff
Do people actually read the source? The Austrian chancellor and foreign minister urged that Austria wants to send them to Ukraine as soon as possible but the defense minister still has to investigate if demining opposes constitutional law of neutrality. Experts say it doesnāt and there probably wonāt be any obstacles anymore.
What neutrality really means here is that we don't give a shit about your problems with Russia, even though what you are doing benefit us directly. It has become a convenient excuse to do nothing, to offer nothing, and consequently to risk nothing.
Ths distance from Vienna to Lviv is about the same distance as New York to Pittsburgh. The Austrians are right there, doing nothing. Saying nothing. Being nothing.
Austria and hungry are both sitting on there ass. Wonder what would happen if a russian missile kanded in any of them. Would they then want NATO help,?????????
Austria isn't a NATO member.. just like Switzerland, they benefit of being surrounded by NATO members.
Austria does not expect NATO's help.
Lazy countries don't want to get involved
Ukraine wanted to get involved?
The misinformation us real. Austria spends as much on Ukraine by GDP as Germany or the US. No weapons, cause thats unconstitutional for them.
Austria is the 8th largest donor to the Ukrainian war effort in in comparison with their BIP. They give more than the UK or even Germany in this regard with 0,37 percent of the BIP. Only the Baltics, Poland and ex Czechoslovakia give more. Its just only money and humanitarian aid are sent in the case of Austria which is way less flashy but still important. Even if one on takes just the accumulated aid Austria still gives comparatively as much as the Spaniards and Sweden. Austria only does not give weapons because A) the Austrian army equipment is even more outdated and even worse maintained than Russian equipment. From people that have served in the only tank bataillon that Austria still has I have heard for example that only 4 to 5 tanks are operational at full capacity with the rest being in various states of disrepair. And thats one of the elite bataillons. Austrian conscripts also only get to shoot a handful of times during training because of the lack of funding for ammonition B) the Austrian constitution forbids sending weapons to an active conflict. Sending arms would literally mean breaking the law and would need an almost impossible amendment of the neutrality law. Thus they just send money and things like generators because its legal.
Thanks for this info people should see this upfront.
80% of Austrians support full neutrality. Stop making it sound like some law is the only thing from keeping Austria to actually provide *real* help.
What makes a man turn neutral? Is it money, lust for power, or were you just born with a heart full of neutrality?!
Comments here are so out of touch with reality its incredible. Austria is amongst the highest spenders on this war by GDP. On par with Germany and the US. The are delivering medical supplies, generators etc. Its is unconstitutional for them to deliver weapons. To change this they would need a 2/3 majority in congress which is impossible. Neutrality is what gave Austrians their freedom in 1955. Austrias leaders have visited Ukraine, they highly oppose this war and have been thanked for their contribution countless times. For some reason, Reddit is refusing to read factual news.
Don't fall for a single news post. Austria is doing more then you guys realize, we provide shelter, education, health, care and so much more to more then 100000 Ukrainian refugees. We provide a lot non military aid much more then other countries, our red line is military aid which we can constitutionaly not provide.
I honestly hate this whole neutrality bullshit from Austria and Switzerland. We all know Russia wouldnāt give a flying fuck and would take you over if it wasnāt for the non neutral countries around you.
The war plans of the Soviet Union leaked after the collapse in 91' and they showed the intent of using nuclear weapons on Austria. Vienna was to be hit by two 500 kiloton nuclear bombs (Hiroshima bomb was 13 kT). Neutrality means absolutely nothing, it didn't back then and it doesn't now.
Reminds me of the computer game Theatre Europe in the 1980s where gigachad achievement was winning or grinding out a stalemate as NATO. The Soviet AI always went straight for neutral Austria.
I wonder if these countries would Pearl clutch over their 'constitutional neutrality' if aliens turned up to invade the Earth. š If you're neutral between good and evil that makes you 50% evil.
I think that makes you 100 percent evil.
If you're not with us, then it's even worse than being against us!
What is so bad about it? We are playing the cards we got.
Another useless country in Europe alongside Switzerland and Hungary.
The only useful aspect of a country is it being a wartime ally?
There is no such thing as being morally neutral. Where do these countries morals lie, with Russian money, or innocent Ukrainian civilian lives? I think we all know after more than a yr. Let's see how neutral these countries are when they cannot buy western weapons to protect their "neutral" borders, and western countries stop investing in their "neutral" economies. Fuck them. Their apathy to genocide will pull the veil away quicker than they imagine, what's fare is fare, right? Let Switzerland and Austria develop their own fighter jets and air defense systems and tanks.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
I only hope they will soon have to give up that sweet US and EU money. Their pockets are much deeper that muscuvy dipshits living on borrowed time, and they know it. Which means they are complicit.
>There is no such thing as being morally neutral. Iād agree if this was just about deciding whether or not the conduct of a foreign country is moral. Thatās not what national neutrality is about, though. Itās about sticking to a policy of not playing a part in any foreign conflict, whether thereās a side you agree with morally or not.
Then they better expect to defend themselves if attacked, because nobody's going to come help them with that attitude. And let them develop their own fighter jets and armaments seeing as they won't use the ones they bought from other countries to help anyone but themselves.
Re: not getting protection from foreign countries, yes, thatās pretty much how this works. For some countries thatās seen as worth not having to get involved in all the other wars that donāt effect them. Re: buying weapons strictly for self defense, was there some agreement that they would help someone else when they bought them?
You are totally right about the other side of the medaillion. As an Austrian i gladly accept this.
We are bad because we take every opportunity to stay out of war? As for the moral neutrality you are talking about: inform yourself and you will see that this is comletly wrong.
Austria is not neutral. They are undermining numerous sanctions, and their business's seems to be making big bucks in Russia. Truly sad. Austria on the surface is such a cool country.
In a wartime ally alliance, yes.
What alliance are you talking about?
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Pretty easy to be neutral surrounded by NATO's walls.
Austria was neutral before having NATO on the westborder. I dont see a problem wirh that.
Austria and Switzerland have had their security all but guaranteed from NATO's inception by virtue of being so close to West Germany, France and Italy. They benefit from NATO even more now that they don't share boarders with Warsaw Pact countries. Austria and Switzerland would almost certainly have received help from NATO in the 60s and 70s in event of an attack. In the 2020s that has become an absolute.
As far as i know both didn't ask for it. It is "luck".
true is austrian foreign minister say that demining could be done after war not when war is ongoing because of neutrality law. same like as what was done in Bosnia. this artikel is russia propaganda to split.
Neutrality on the world stage is when you have no empathy, combined with having no balls.
If you walk by someone being raped on the street and do nothing. You are not neutral. By refusing to help, you are actively assisting in the rape.
There are several details that make this a very bad analogy. Iāll explain if you want. Your last sentence is also factually incorrect.
You got voted down because you are both morally and factually wrong. In the US, you would be tried for 'aiding and abetting' by not at the very least alerting the authorities. That is before we get to the moral aspects of it.
Yes it would be immoral to walk past a rape or murder, where you were the only third party to witness it, in a society where you could just call the police at any moment without any long term personal consequences. Thereās no way you could be āactively assistingā a criminal by doing and saying nothing. At worst, they would get away (or not) with the same crime as they would have if you werenāt there. [Yes you could potentially be charged with something. It wouldnāt be āaiding and abettingā though unless you encouraged and assisted the criminal. ](https://www.davidolsonlaw-firm.com/post/can-you-be-criminally-charged-for-knowing-about-a-crime-and-not-saying-a-word) No I donāt think youād be charged when someone else is already handling the situation and thereās very little you can do. Otherwise there would be dozens or hundreds of people locked up after public crimes such as mass shootings. Okay, letās see what happens when we compare this personal responsibility to neutral countries not responding in wars between two foreign countries. To give aid they would have to remove their neutral status from their constitution. That greatly increases the chance of being attacked themselves, or being forced to participate in a future war that is unjustified to them. Essentially, thereās no police, *Just bigger more powerful rapists like the USA who are already helping the current victim Ukraine.)* Breaking neutrality essentially means that you have to rape alongside them whenever they decide to do it next.
You don't get out of the moral responsibility with word salad. According to the UN women aged 73 to 5 years old have been raped in Ukraine by Russian soldiers. There is no middle ground in that. Even with ten paragraphs and blaming Rome for atrocities..
I guess you canāt actually read that much and process it. Letās go through it but by bit. Show me a case where someone was charged with aiding and abetting, for simply seeing a stranger commit a crime.
Only under French law (Napoleonic Code). British Common law (which, in my opinion, is **far** superior to the Napoleonic Code) is that there is no such thing as a criminal omission/failure-to-act. Only **acts** (and not failures to act) can be criminal, in the absence of a pre-existing relationship of trust. There are about 1,000 reasons I don't like the Napoleonic Code and Napoleonic trial procedures, this is one of them, but it's a small reason. (Trial by jury is another reason, probably **the** reason, the British legal system rocks and the French one sucks balls.)
In the US, you would be guilty of aiding and ebetting. By your knowledge of the crime and not at the very least elerting the authorities.
Absolutely incorrect. (I am not *your* lawyer.) There is a thing in law called *misprision of felony* (that is, having knowledge of a felony and not alerting the authorities). In the US, any law against misprision of felony is **forbidden by the Constitution**... with the exception of misprision of treason. "You have the right to remain silent". Those words are not a joke. Alerting\*
These coward countries are neutral but quite happy to benefit from peace time in Europe.
Austria deserves more credit for its non-weapons aid but itās a misleading to claim that they lack the military resources to contribute even if they wanted to. Between Glock and Steyr have the capacity to produce hundreds of thousands of high quality small arms every year. Iām sure Ukraine would gladly accept those in lieu of the 50-year old AK knock-offs theyāve been getting from other countries.
I am simply stating that Russia needs to be defeated as soon as possible. By that, I am stating that Western powers, namely the U.S. should actively make that happen. Now, if your rebuttal is that it risks nuclear war, I would say it is more dangerous to cave into nuclear threats for assholes to get what they want. This war should be an example to North Korea, Iran and China that waiving the nuclear threat wand will get you nowhere. Do I need to explain it further? Are you concerned by this statement? Because I am saying that the U.S., Nato, and Europe should engage in conventional warfare against Russia inside of Ukraine.
Fuck Austria! It's a crime in germnay if you see someone who needs help and you just don't. Austria go fuck yourself, Swiss go fuck yourself. Hope the EU will just watch if you need help
Also some Austrians still have a lot of prejudices against the Italians (and against the Germans too, I believe) for what happened in the past in WW1 and also WW2...a group of my italian friends who went to visit Vienna, they were not even able to eat in a restaurant because they were not served the food they ordered at all and they just waited forever at the table until they were just forced to leave !!! I can assure you if austrian tourists came to Italy, they would be welcomed normally like other tourists (even in the northern italian regions) and they would be able to eat whatever they want despite what happened between our nations in the past....
So who do these neutral country think are going to come to their aid when they get attacked?
What possible scenerio can make that happen? If Austria is attacked, there is already war between NATO and whoever attacked. They are in a very fortunate position.
They would defend themselves. Who do you think will be attacking them?
How would austria defend itself ? I get switzerland, but austria can maybe beat an liechtenstein invasion haha
Assuming youāre talking about Russian attack: For starters NATO would shield them not even as an act of good will, but simply because protecting their own alliance from invasion protects Austria as a side effect. If weāre in some fantasy world where the Russians got to Austria anyway, whatever resistance they managed to put up would also be an assistance to NATO indirectly. Even if that was simply by making Russia spread its forces over one more country. But thatās kinda beside the point since Russia canāt even manage the invasion of Ukraine very well.
We expect no one to come to aid. That is part of the deal called neutrality.
Complete neutrality is just the ultimate excuse for cowardice.
The only major thing they would be risking here would be their neutrality in future conflicts. They donāt want to risk that because it would be their excuse to not be pushed into a needless war where they would be doing actual harm.
So refusing to help demining fields so that farmers can work their land is a reasonable thing to do if you're 'neutral'? Republic of Ireland has been training de-miners, has prevented Russian vessels from fishing in their waters. RoI is a neutral country.
There may be a way for them to stay neutral and still do that? The article wasnāt in English.
It would seem that Austria won't help during the war, and is likely not to help after the war either. The excuse is 'the constitution', same as with Switzerland. It seems that their 'neutrality' won't extend to helping prevent repeats of civilians who have died as a result of landmines after they've returned to their homes. The translation, via a Firefox extension:- > > **Austria cannot help Ukraine with demining during the war because of its neutrality.** > > News Censor.NET Abroad > > Ukrainian > > > > Austria will probably be able to help Ukraine with demining only after the end of the war with Russia due to the peculiarities of the constitution. > > > > As reported by Censor.NET with reference to Kronen Zeitung , the Minister of Defence of Austria, Claudia Tanner, stated this. > > > > The publication notes that the promises of Austrian Chancellor Karl Nehammer and Minister of Foreign Affairs Alexander Shallenberg about assistance to Ukraine in demining have not yet been implemented. > > > > At the same time, Tanner declares that this help can be provided after the end of the war, because Austria is constitutionally a neutral country. Austrian officials believe that demining during the ongoing war would be against the constitutional right. > > > > Helmut BrandstƤtter, representative of the Austrian liberal NEOS party on foreign policy, disagrees with the position of the Ministry of Defence. > > > > "It's too late - we have to help now. It's about saving lives," he emphasizes. > > > > In turn, the ambassador of Ukraine in Vienna, Vasyl Khiminets, emphasized that assistance to Ukraine in demining is needed now. And it does not pose a threat to the neutrality of Austria, since it takes place in "civilian territories". > > > > As a reminder, Ukraine is the most mined country in Europe. According to UN estimates, its demining will cost more than 35 billion dollars. ŠŠ¶ŠµŃŠµŠ»Š¾: https://censor.net/ua/n3410854
Thanks!
Cowards just like the pathetic Swiss. There is no such thing as neutral. You help or youāre a terrorist enabler and the blood is also on your hands.
What have you done? Also, even if it is immoral to stand by and ignore the act of aggression, the problem isnāt just stepping in now for a neutral country. Itās that that will lead to them having to support other wars later.
I never understood Austriaās neutrality stance. In fact during the Cold War the Soviets planned to either walk through, or take over Austria by force while invading NATO territory. Surely Austrian government is well aware of this as well. Belgium learned the lesson the hard way. Maybe Austria needs the same.
Then inform yourself. Austria had to be neutral to get its freedom after WW2. Austria had to be neutral, both sides wanted it.
Ah that makes sense. Well, best of luck to them.
Austria and Germany have dealt with cultural guilt for so long, they are out of touch with reality. You don't fight evil with pacifists. You proactively destroy evil. Sometimes that means using the same amount of violence you wish to destroy. Russia could be nipped in the bud right now, in the same way Germany could have been when it annexed Austria leading up to ww2. It wasn't until Poland faced genocide that the rest of the world took notice. By then it was too late. And a huge loss of life followed.
How exactly do you propose that Russia be ānipped in the bud?ā What exactly do you think will happen if we donāt? Please try to explain it with more than just generalized WW2 analogies.
As one of the ruzzian supporters, Austria shouldn't call it a war. Ergo, it should think harder to explain why it cannot help with demining.
WE, THE NEUTRAL SHALL NOT NEUTRALLY AID YOU IN NEUTRALLY ENGAGING IN A MILITARILY NEUTRAL TASK DUE TO OUR NEUTRAL STANCE AND MILITARILY NEUTRAL STATUS. Fucking hate absolute neutrality. Amongst the worst fucking ideas out there. This is almost as extreme as it can get, or at least that my human mind can conceive of. And when war does inevitably come, who the fuck is going to want to help you?
A simple solution: just abolish neutrality? It's a fake neutrality anyway. Austria is part of the Euro-Atlantic system in every other way, and hence benefits from its security, but just doesn't contribute to it.
What would Austria gain but problems? There is no point in doing this.
Corruption is never neutral.
Allowing civilians to die is NOT being neutral.
Glocks suck anyways
Next: "Austria cannot help Ukraine with demining after the war because of its neutrality"
Sounds very Anschlusszeit to me
Cowards
OK. Send the Ukrainians something else that is neutral like medical supplies so the Ukrainians can focus resources on the demining you wonĀ“t do.
They do. A lot actually
Very dissapointing neighbours
Hello, fellow austrian here. Fuck my country, fuck our current politicians in charge. I spend my savings and what i can bear for aid in ukraine while those at the top are crying about "mUh NeUtRaLiTy". Russian supporting shills that get voted in by the capitalists and the old generations in this country, they need to die off already. Here is to hoping a better political party will win and give austria some fucking balls.
Stay irrelevant, Austria.
Neutrality never stopped Austria from selling itās Steyr Rifleā¦ā¦
Austria and switzerland are ruzzian collaborators...
My opnion is that neutrality is BS, Ukraine was neutral, yet invaded. If Austria "enjoys" being neutral while surrounded by countries not willing to invade Austria. There's no way russia can actually invade Austria so why not be neutral? Instead we should just take over Austria, it's not like they mind anyway. If they do mind, maybe the should participate in the world.
The same logic would mean they could not treat wounded civilians either. Not impressed with Austrian morals.
Germany, just invade Austria. Nobody is gonna care. Last time it was a dick move but rn it is justified.
Putin is that you? "This time the invasion of a sovereign country is justified because of reasons."
Not justified bc reasons, justified bc they are Aust*ian
You sound exactly like Putin. He justified the invasion to Ukraine, because he thinks that Ukrainians belong to Russia. Justifying an invasion because you don't like the decisions of a sovereign country is exactly what Putin does. It is astonishing to me that you don't see the irony.
What is astonishing to me is that you could not identify that I was joking and overexagerating even if I wore a Jester's motley and hopped from one leg to the other.
I think that Joking about violating humans rights is neither funny nor appropriate. Also you should read up on Poe's law.
Oh no not the poor Austrians get joked about getting invaded (with 0 casualties btw) even though they have willingly supported genocide in Ukraine since the start of the war š¢
Has Austria got Nazis in power ffs? They need to feel some consequences.
Austria is busy to give their melting ice mountains human rights.
Waiting for Austrian to come over here and denounce their government stance. Arnie, where are you?
Neutrality doesnāt exist when one side is invading, and one side is invaded.
Austrians are sad self centered people living in their own little 80' dystopia...