• sudo
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Coincidentally, lemmygrad and hexbear users can indeed imagine being that stupid.

          • Excrubulent@slrpnk.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            I’m sure there are plenty of hapless souls on those instances that didn’t understand what .ml meant but they’ve gotta be slowly leaving at this point. There’s only so much unhinged bullshit you can withstand before you start asking questions.

  • ares35@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    38
    ·
    1 year ago

    russia finds a new way to save on military payroll and other compensation. shoot their own guys.

  • AutoTL;DR@lemmings.worldB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    1 year ago

    This is the best summary I could come up with:


    A Russian corporal wounded in Ukraine has been denied standard compensation for his war injuries because they were inflicted by his own comrades instead of Ukrainian forces, court documents show.

    Kurazov, a contract soldier, was wounded in Ukraine by a mine accidentally detonated by fellow Russian personnel, according to the September 8 decision.

    His injuries were certified by a Russian military hospital on March 14, and the cause of his wounds was listed as improper handling of ammunition by someone in his unit, the ruling said.

    It ruled that there were no grounds for the corporal to receive the lump-sum payment, and Kurazov’s commander ordered a refusal of the claim, the judicial decision said.

    Kurazov argued that the one-time payment to injured troops should be given to any Russian soldier wounded in Ukraine, including the Donetsk and Luhansk regions, the filing said.

    But a panel of three military court judges — Viktor Alekseevich Kostin, Dmitry Viktorovich Merkulov, and Magomedbasir Gapurovich Shuaipov — ruled on September 8 that the original decision should be upheld.


    The original article contains 415 words, the summary contains 173 words. Saved 58%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!