This.
There are some people who don’t “deserve” due process (e.g. child killers), but I wouldn’t dream of depriving them of it. I guess it’s about being a civilised society and putting people on trial instead of taking vengeance in other ways. Similar to how the Jews put Eichmann on trial instead of just torturing him for days etc.
As for the soldiers, well, that’s just about common decency. If you don’t understand that stealing, raping, torturing and executing people is wrong, you’re fucking accountable. You don’t need a degree in fucking humanitarian studies to know that shit. Put it this way, if I were a soldier, and I caught my best friend in the world raping someone, I’d probably put a gun to his head and tell him to stop, and I might be tempted to pull the trigger too. You’re accountable for the actions of your peers if you know what they are doing and say nothing.
The reason I personally have chosen this war is probably that it coincides with my now being old enough to take much larger interest in what’s going on in the world than I did in the past, and this particular war involving my “motherland” as the “James-bond villain-ish” bad guys. I can’t speak for others.
3 Likes
those soldiers were no angels viktor
for someone who has repeatedly advocated for violent revolution you sure got your knickers in a bunch over people getting mad at invaders of their homeland.
Imagine not having victor on ignore in 2022.
2 Likes
I generally support the efforts to equip the Ukrainians so that they can defend themselves against Russia, but I’ve gotta say all the giddy reporting about all the latest and greatest slaughter toys that the military industrial complex is pumping out is rather sickening.
6 Likes
There’s a difference between talking about aid being given and pumping out tweet after tweet detailing all the “awesome” capabilities of the latest military tech.
5 Likes
Oh fuck off.
EDIT: Aren’t you the guy who went on a COVID-spreading bender across south Florida? Not sure you’re well positioned to call other people sickening.
1 Like
No u.
Yawn
I second the idea that it’s insanely crass to tout the awesome military capabilities of a country that has lied its way into war after war after war. Say a prayer for the people affected and save the fetishism.
Surf: (Assuming it’s not used against civilians obviously)
My adult life has been partially defined by the leaders of my country using these sick weapons on civilians. Whenever a weapon like this is created, it is a mortal lock that the United States will use it on innocents. We need more people opposing the fetishism of death-dealing devices
5 Likes
I dunno guys, seems unlikely that Ukrainians are going to be bombing Ukrainian civilians with their new precision drone. Probably going to attack Russian trucks.
It also seems unlikely that this weapon is ever used by the U.S. If you read the tweets, you’ll see that it was a rush job built to Ukrainian specs, so the MIC will probably want to make sure that the US military adopts something much more expensive and less effective.
Also @moderators, it’s going to be so much easier for you to just excise this to the LC thread now rather than wait until there’s 100 posts of it to move.
2 Likes
The locals don’t obey the stop signs. But they can at least get the Brits, Aussies, Americans…. To actually stop
It’s not great, but technology is ever improving and if it’s not the USA, someone else will find ways to use the increased in technology for death/destruction. It’s a foregone conclusion.
I think y’all are being myopic here. This isn’t an argument for or against the Ukrainian defense efforts. We can support the Ukrainians (including providing military aid) without getting giddy about the latest and greatest killing technology that the MIC is spitting out. It seems impossible to think about these weapons without thinking about how, regardless of how righteous every use of them by the Ukrainians is in this context, these weapons will invariably not get put on the shelf after this and collect dust waiting for the next righteous use case. They will incentivize more aggressive behavior by power-hungry monsters and they will be used for terrible ends. The ability of the MIC to rapidly develop and deploy ever more impressive killing hardware is terrifying. It’s just one more horrific wrinkle in this unfolding tragedy. So while I think it’s awesome that the Ukrainians have banded together and appear to be holding their own/defeating Russia’s tyrannical actions with our support, I don’t think any person who considers themselves progressive/liberal/whatever should giddily retweet information glamorizing the latest iDrone 12.4 (now with the ability teabag the charred remains of your enemies!).
4 Likes
If only it were a foregone conclusion that the announcements of these weapons were met by smart people raising their voices to warn the world of what their effects would be. As it stands we’re in a country of salivating death fetishists that allow war to be glorified left and right. We owe a giant penance to the world and the bare ass minimum is to put some respect and humility on our public postings
1 Like
This is where some of the arguments Whatevs/Vict0ar make have some relevance. Without getting into the tedious/stupid argument over who is worse Russia or the US, anyone with a passing understanding of modern U.S. history should be deeply unsettled by this viewpoint. I mean, I tend to agree with it, but it terrifies me and makes me incredibly sad (I don’t agree that we should just accept it, however). As the kids say these days, we are no angels. While that doesn’t justify or excuse the evil actions of others, it should give decent people pause to think about what we might do with these weapons in the future.
1 Like
It sucks, but so did trench warfare and how the Civil War was fought and every battle before that around the globe.
They’re obviously not wrong, but one of the really bad Superman movies was the only reality where evil weapons just disappeared.
You can have whatever vibes you like in posting about the news. Personally, I think it’s great that Ukraine is going to have access to a new and effective weapon system that seems likely to significantly increase their chances of winning in the war. That brings me satisfaction.
The role of drones and loitering munitions in warfare is certainly an interesting question (and it’s not really obvious that it’s worse from a humanitarian perspective), but this particular weapon being developed will have ~0 impact on how that story plays out. This is not the Manhattan Project, it’s something that was rushed from concept to production in what can’t have been more than a couple months. It probably just amounts to a streamlined version of the Switchblade drones specialized for this particular war.
Conclusions
The initial euphoria at Ukraine’s withstanding the onslaught of the Russian Army has in some parts of Europe brought about a belief that Ukraine’s victory is now assured, or that an exhausted Russia may soon come to the negotiating table. Ukrainian victory is possible, but will demand hard fighting for some time to come. Having first done little to set a narrative about the war, the Russian government had an opportunity to lay the groundwork for de-escalation in mid-March. It made a deliberate decision to escalate its rhetoric and ideologically mobilise its society. By banning dissent, and by holding local officials accountable for the organisation of patriotic mobilisation, the Russian government is in the process of radicalising its public. Even as the cost of living in Russia rises, therefore, the intent in Moscow is to prolong the fighting. In the short term, this means a major offensive in Donbas. In the medium term, there is an intention to bring about a summer offensive to finish Ukraine off. Given that the Russian government has not yet curtailed its wider ambitions – as demonstrated by its designs on Moldova – it is critical that NATO remains firmly determined to not just support Ukraine to hold Donbas but to prepare for a renewed offensive after.
At the same time, a protracted conflict poses dangers for the West. As Europe enters summer, high energy costs will harm businesses, but there will be a delay between this and job losses. By autumn, there is a risk that recession will coincide with cooling temperatures while citizens will struggle to heat their homes. In this context, support for Ukraine may wither, engagement with Russian disinformation may rise, and Russia’s diplomatic efforts to evade sanctions may gain traction through Western disunity. Limiting Russia’s ability to protract fighting beyond the summer could be effectively enabled by reducing its access to modern armaments. To achieve this, Western countries must conduct a thorough assessment of where their companies are knowingly or inadvertently supplying Russia and cut off these channels. The severing of these channels will not alter the volume of munitions physically stockpiled by Russia for operations in the summer. But the expectations of future manufacture will both shape how much of the stockpile can be expended in Ukraine and the Kremlin’s confidence in the long-term security implications of continuing the war. Reducing dependence on Russian gas must also be a medium-term objective of European policy, even if it will not have an immediate effect. At the same time, NATO must be more engaged in the information struggle beyond its borders; Western efforts to manage their own energy crisis risk being perceived as imposing costs on the very states whose cooperation will be critical in bringing about Russia’s military and political isolation
Although Russia has clearly been weakened by its battlefield setbacks in Ukraine, the combinationof its imperial ambitions and significant coercive power risks destabilization further afield.Moldova is the most prominent example, but as the conflict protracts, Russian operations could pose threats in Serbia and beyond. Coordinated efforts to curtail Russian malign influence in these states – and further afield – will be critical if the crisis in Ukraine is to be contained. Further crises, risking further economic disruption, will prove politically difficult to bear.
Finally, the Russian decision to double down is a high-stakes gamble. If Russia mobilises and eventually overcomes Ukrainian resistance then NATO will face an aggressive, isolated and militarised state. If Russia loses then President Putin has now begun radicalising the population in the pursuit of policies that he will struggle to deliver. Failure to defeat the Ukrainian state after relentlessly comparing it to the Nazi regime may have serious consequences for Putin and those around him. To frame a conflict as existential and to lose must necessarily call the suitability of a leader into question among Russia’s political elites. NATO states therefore need to consider how to manage escalation pathways that follow if Russia is not only defeated in Donbas but finds its newly mobilised and poorly trained troops, with few remaining stocks of precision munitions, unable to deliver a victory in the summer. The death of Putin’s political project is plausible, but it has already inflicted immense damage internationally and risks doing considerably more.
Ugh copying out of a PDF never works.
3 Likes