Russia, US, Ukraine, and the Future

[Kyriakos]

Breaking news. Russia supporters and apologists having insurmountable trouble seeing the moral difference in between a school shooter hitting a bystander that does not attend the school and someone trying to take down the school shooter hitting a bystander.

But since the war is between Russia and Ukraine, the bystander wasn't attacked by Russia and would be alive if it wasn't for the counter-shooter. If you are attacked in your house, and firing your gun you fail to hit your attacker and instead kill someone on the street, it is tragic. If this happens a second time, you think the court should treat it the same way as the first?

[Alastor]

Breaking news. Russia supporters and apologists having insurmountable trouble seeing the moral difference in between a school shooter hitting a bystander that does not attend the school and someone trying to take down the school shooter hitting a bystander.

Ah yes, the classic NRA argument. If you want to eliminate school shootings just make sure all the teachers are armed. Their guns don't kill.

It's so funny how people keep talking about Ukraine's agency, but apparently their agency does not include making mistakes, or rather it doesn't include being responsible for them. Because someone else made a mistake first, so whatever you do to stop that someone else is justified. Guess what nuking the school to stop the school shooter isn't exactly ideal, there are limits to every response. Unless you are Ukraine I suppose.

[conon394]

Lviv is 60km away from the border, this missile landed if I recall 70km northwestwards from Lviv. While attempting to intercept a missile that would be unlikely to be coming from the northwest (unless fired from Belarus, though I'm not certain if Russia is firing missiles from there). You guys speak with a lot of certainty, but as far as I understand at least, missile defense doesn't mean start firing missiles on all directions in the hopes of hitting sth. This isn't some rando on the ground firing MANPADS in a panic we're talking about. This was, from what I gathered, an S-300 missile, hence the range. There are procedures in place, they have targeting systems, they don't just fly blind. Or at least, I sure hope they don't. So for this to happen, someone along the way screwed up.

I'll say again, how quick we are to exonerate Ukraine and just blame Russia and Russia alone for this incident, despite the reckless or even duplicitous attitude of the Ukrainian authorities that followed, showcases how extreme our bias is.

They are firing from Belarus
https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...e-from-belarus

Also I would point the whole point of cruise missals is that it can maneuver and do things like follow terrain/way points etc. (*)

You not firing will nilly but you got limited time and limited time to decide if you need to shoot or not. Also I really have no ideal if the S-300 has a self destruct option automatic or on command - for its missiles. Its the kind thing that the west takes a little more seriously than Soviet based systems. A good comparison is the deep dive minute by minute detail of USS Vincennes shoot down of Iranian flight 655. So bleeding edge combat system and radar etc. on the Ticonderoga class ship that fired the shot that blew away a civil jet airliner. On the Vincennes a ship engaged in close surface action and maneuvering at speed and turning often the crew came to the wrong conclusion and thought they were looking at a f-14 attack run. On the not engaged USS Sides the crew of have a feed of the Vincennes' data correctly identified the plane and as civilian aircraft in a civilian air corridor doing exactly what it should be doing (notably climbing). Don't be so confident that all the procedure in the world and best gear can top stress and perhaps tiredness and other factors.

* I got no ideal on the various Russian Missiles but say you can't just track a US Tomahawk for a few minutes and ascertain some strait line path for it it could have a whole load of waypoints programed into it.

[Alastor]

Don't be so confident that all the procedure in the world and best gear can top stress and perhaps tiredness and other factors.

As per your example, that would mean, as I said, that someone screwed things up. It may have been a simple mistake indeed, it may have been lack of proper procedure too. How do we know? Is anyone scrutinising? No, the argument I see is "Ukraine is defending itself so if they bomb their neighbours by accident it's ok, they are trying to save their playgrounds, their neighbours don't have playground". That's just grating.

This should be investigated and if the Ukrainians did mess up, as I suspect, they should be held accountable and there should be at the very least a demand that they do better. It is only reasonable to expect some accountability when another country bombs you, however accidentally. Yet we don't see any of that. We just see people saying "Russia did it". Now if we add the, as I mentioned, either reckless or worse duplicitous response of the Ukrainian authorities that tried to capitalise on this event, even more so.

[Septentrionalis]

But since the war is between Russia and Ukraine, the bystander wasn't attacked by Russia and would be alive if it wasn't for the counter-shooter. If you are attacked in your house, and firing your gun you fail to hit your attacker and instead kill someone on the street, it is tragic. If this happens a second time, you think the court should treat it the same way as the first?

Amazing. What is obvious to everyone else just doesn't sink in.

[Kyriakos]

Amazing. What is obvious to everyone else just doesn't sink in.

But if you think something is both too simple and not picked up, chances are that you misunderstood the other person's position...
To make it a bit more clear: The first time someone unwittingly kills a bystander, while they were trying to deflect a blow by an enemy in their house, the court can just acquit since it's a tragic accident.
If it happens a second time, the person who unwittingly now killed people in two separate cases, will be asked to either take lessons in using his gun, or to refrain from using it.

In a fantasy scenario, it can happen tens of times, and no one would care. Now that would have been "amazing"

[Septentrionalis]

The only reason anyone is shooting or dying in the shooting is Russia firing at Ukrainian cities.

In the Nordics, we have experimented with this radical new idea of no one shooting at ones neighbors and no one dying in the shootings, offensively or defensively. It has actually worked really well. I can recommend it from the bottom of my heart to all those who haven't thought of it yet.

[Coughdrop addict]

I find it telling that some here are outraged that a Ukrainian missile seems to have accidentally killed people, while ignoring or excusing Russia deliberately targeting Ukrainian civilians. It's pretty clear that had it actually been a Russian missile their response would have been to blame Poland for getting in the way of Putin's vengeance.

[Ludicus]

ukraine should apologize for rushing into blaming russia for attacking poland... but what happened is completely understandable.

Indeed,as it is easy to understand. But Zelensky insists on lying and says that the S-300 missile of the Ukrainian anti-aircraft defense that crashed in Poland is not Ukrainian. Zelensky denies Ukrainian missile hit eastern Poland during

He vowed to continue to try to bring NATO forces into direct conflict with Russia,and that is what we should all be afraid of.
If Ukraine keeps refusing to negotiate peace, sooner or later the gradual destruction of Ukraine's energy networks will cause unbearable suffering to the Ukrainian population. Thinking about that, it is worth remembering that this was one of the arguments the US used to drop two atomic bombs on Japan, by stating that it was a solution that would spare a lot of pain.Let’s keep in mind that the use of the atomic bombs produced little public remorse. Contemporary opinion studies demonstrate that American overwhelmingly approved the use of the bomb. Even today (2017) a new Stanford study suggests that “American public opinion on nuclear weapons usage has not fundamentally changed since 1945” … Americans weigh in on nuclear war | Stanford News

The results showed little support for the so-called “nuclear taboo” thesis. When considering the use of nuclear weapons, the majority of Americans prioritize protecting U.S. troops and achieving American war aims, even when doing so would result in the deliberate killing of millions of foreign noncombatants.

It seems that Russia would rather destroy the Ukrainian power grid than use the nuclear argument. To date, there has been only one country that has used the bomb for the purpose of hastening the surrender of a country that was already on its knees.

[Cyclops]

If it's done in a such way that your missile lands in someone else's playground, apartment building, power plant etc, yes it is irresponsible. Better than intentional. But still bad.

I'm with you on this, Zelenskyy must bear the blame for some accidental deaths defending his people from the brigand dog Putin's terror attacks.

So, lets punish the **** out of Putin so we can get around to punishing Zelenskyy, because, as I am sure you will agree, it would be morally wrong to punish the lesser offender while a terrorist scum is still launching missile strikes on civilian infrastructure on purpose.

Poland understands Ukraine's missile not hitting what it was attempting to hit, but doesn't understand Russia's missile not hitting what it was attempting to hit => terrible if Russia by mistake hit stuff in Poland, fine if Ukraine by mistake hit stuff in Poland.

Thats wretched and silly strawman you've got there. I haven't seen anyone actually argue anything remotely like that. Not sure its worth responding, probably the last time I will to you.

If a terrorist intent on murder murders the wrong person, it's still deeply wrong, and if a defender accidentally kills someone else in self defense its still wrong, but less reprehensible than the terrorist dog Putin's actions.

[Alastor]

I'm with you on this, Zelenskyy must bear the blame for some accidental deaths defending his people from the brigand dog Putin's terror attacks.

So, lets punish the **** out of Putin so we can get around to punishing Zelenskyy, because, as I am sure you will agree, it would be morally wrong to punish the lesser offender while a terrorist scum is still launching missile strikes on civilian infrastructure on purpose.

I don't believe Zelensky is necessarily at fault for the incident, since I don't believe the incident was intentional. Zelensky is at fault for how he tried, and continues trying, to capitalise on this incident under false pretenses. But as far as the incident itself goes it was most likely caused due to faulty military procedure in the Ukrainian armed forces. Zelensky is not directly responsible for that, though the political initiative to install better processes does rest with his government.

You will also notice I did not speak specifically of punishment. If this was some freak accident there isn't much to punish. I spoke of scrutiny, accountability, responsibility and doing better in the future. None of which is gonna happen if such incidents are shoved under the rug as "Putin's fault".

Finally, considering we are effectively waging an economic war against Putin and materially supporting Ukraine against him militarily, it is rather funny to then claim "we are not punishing Putin" for his misdeeds. So since that's already happening, why does the "lesser offender" get away with his misdeeds again?

[Ludicus]

I support Poland and NATO's entry.

I hope not, that would be the last thing that nobody wants, not even the US, because Russia will resort to nuclear weapons to defend itself.

[Sir Adrian]

Russia will never resort to nuclear weapons because if Russia resorts to nuclear weapons the US and China and North Korea and France and India resort to nuclear weapons and there will be no Russia left to defend.

The moment Putin pushes that button the russian people are gone, quickly followed by everyone else in the northern hemisphere.

[Kyriakos]

Russia will never resort to nuclear weapons because if Russia resorts to nuclear weapons the US and China and North Korea and France and India resort to nuclear weapons and there will be no Russia left to defend.

The moment Putin pushes that button the russian people are gone, quickly followed by everyone else in the northern hemisphere.

Not "everyone else". Why nuke a non-nuclear side, just because a nuclear side nuked you? Besides, US+Russia combined have a bit under half the population of India, or a bit over 1/3 of China; to themselves they are very important, but life would go on.
It's why I am sure the US (being non crazy) will do anything it can to avoid getting into a nuclear exchange; neither US nor Russia feel like becoming radioactive wastelands and allowing others to be the main powers.

[Cyclops]

Finally, considering we are effectively waging an economic war against Putin and materially supporting Ukraine against him militarily, it is rather funny to then claim "we are not punishing Putin" for his misdeeds. So since that's already happening, why does the "lesser offender" get away with his misdeeds again?

I am not saying Zelenskyy gets away with I literally said the opposite. I'm not claiming we're not punishing Putin, but seeing as his terror attacks continue I think it is self-evident we are not punishing him hard enough. MORE PUNISHMENT.

I am well aware of the Ukranian capacity to offend in this conflict (its not a war remember, Russia has mode no legal declaration it is literally just them throwing bombs at civilians without a valid pretext). Seeing how the Balkan wars went in the 1990s there's a strong chance of ethnic cleansing whoever wins and we want to be sitting on Zelenskyy hard to prevent that.

It's likely Putin has organised some cleansing already, if it is true then add it to the pile crimes already committed.

A Ukranian bomb off line is less of a crime than a flood of Russian missiles on target hitting civilians and civilian infrastructure. The moral calculus is simple here.

[Sir Adrian]

Not "everyone else". Why nuke a non-nuclear side, just because a nuclear side nuked you?

Nuclear winter and emp pulses have this very rude habit of not respecting international borders.

There was a study what would happen in case of a limited nuclear war between India and Pakistan (100 Hiroshima sized warheads launched in total). The blasts alone would kill over several hundred million people, it would reduce global temperatures by 2C, reduce global rainfall by 8% and put 1.5 billion people at risk of starvation after the first year (when the world's food reserves are completely depleted) and it would damage ozone layer by 30-80 percent at the mid latitutes, which means cancer, zero crops and permanently damaged ecosystem in the Amazon and areas critical for farming which means nuclear starvation for less developed countries after year 4.

If the scale increases to 1000+, that's when the real fun begins. I'm going to just quote a summary of a 2019 study on the topic because I'm lazy

The devastation causes so much smoke that only 30-40 percent of sunlight reaches the Earth’s surface for the subsequent six months. A massive drop in temperature follows, with the weather staying below freezing throughout the subsequent Northern Hemisphere summer. In Iowa, for example, the model shows temperatures staying below 0°C for 730 days straight. There is no growing season. This is a true nuclear winter.

Temperatures still drop below freezing in summer for several years thereafter, and global precipitation falls by half by years three and four. It takes over a decade for anything like climatic normality to return to the planet.

By this time, most of Earth’s human population will be long dead. The world’s food production would crash by more than 90 percent, causing global famine that would kill billions by starvation. In most countries less than a quarter of the population survives by the end of year two in this scenario. Global fish stocks are decimated and the ozone layer collapses.

In the 4,400 warhead/150 Tg soot nuclear war scenario, averaged over the subsequent five years, China sees a reduction in food calories of 97.2 percent, France by 97.5 percent, Russia by 99.7 percent, the UK by 99.5 percent and the US by 98.9 percent. In all these countries, virtually everyone who survived the initial blasts would subsequently starve.

Yeah, humanity will survive to repopulate but those that do will eke out a miserable existence on a barren devastated planet.


And this is why Putin will NEVER launch any nukes.

[mishkin]

Indeed,as it is easy to understand. But Zelensky insists on lying and says that the S-300 missile of the Ukrainian anti-aircraft defense that crashed in Poland is not Ukrainian. Zelensky denies Ukrainian missile hit eastern Poland during

Zelensky is not a saint and he is the leader of a devastated/war country.

He vowed to continue to try to bring NATO forces into direct conflict with Russia,and that is what we should all be afraid of.

Ukraine wants to repel the aggression and expel russia from ukrainian territory, looking for allies in this fight is so logical that i don't know why it has to be mentioned.

You are afraid that NATO will enter the conflict because in the medium term it can have severe repercussions in your life. Ukraine and Russia's neighboring countries fear attacks in the short term if Russia is not stopped in Ukraine. It seems unbelievable that we are in this site, where everyone knows the minimum necessary history to know that the aggressor nations must be stopped immediately or they will become emboldened. (btw Russia should have been stopped earlier, for example in Georgia).

[Alastor]

I am not saying Zelenskyy gets away with I literally said the opposite. I'm not claiming we're not punishing Putin, but seeing as his terror attacks continue I think it is self-evident we are not punishing him hard enough. MORE PUNISHMENT.

More punishment? The amount of punishment we are already delivering is hurting us considerably. Inflation rates hereabouts is over 14%. That's completely unsustainable. Stock markets are reeling, the housing market is under pressure. Already people I know are being made redundant and many are fearing for their jobs. All that for a war on the other side of the continent. More punishment that we can't afford is ill-advised. I think Europe has done more than enough for Ukraine.

I am well aware of the Ukranian capacity to offend in this conflict (its not a war remember, Russia has mode no legal declaration it is literally just them throwing bombs at civilians without a valid pretext). Seeing how the Balkan wars went in the 1990s there's a strong chance of ethnic cleansing whoever wins and we want to be sitting on Zelenskyy hard to prevent that.

As far as I can recall, the Balkan wars were also undeclared. So I'm not sure your point about this not being a war but a conflict is that meaningful. But yes indeed, the threat of ethnic cleansing is there and I would argue it has been there for well over a decade, but we ignored it. Well, we ignored it when it wasn't coming from Russia. Yet another example of double standards and our extreme bias.

It's likely Putin has organised some cleansing already, if it is true then add it to the pile crimes already committed.

Honestly, I don't see why he would care to do that. Putin wants Ukrainians to admit they are secretly Russians gone astray, not kill them off. As far as I have seen at least. Simply put, Putin isn't hardcore enough for that.

A Ukranian bomb off line is less of a crime than a flood of Russian missiles on target hitting civilians and civilian infrastructure. The moral calculus is simple here.

That would have been the case if that Ukrainian bomb hit Russian civilians in Russia. Here it hit the civilians of a 3rd country in said 3rd country. So the moral calculus is a bit more complicated than that. As far as I'm aware at least, Russia hasn't bombed a NATO country so far. Not even by accident.

[Cyclops]

German embassy?

Putins actions toward Ukranian citizens of any ethnicity show no underlying racism: i think him capable of atrocirty to serve his own goals. Likewise his use of Nazis (like Ukraines) is opportunistic: hes not Hitler, but he is a terrorist.

Poland is watching Russia here not Ukraine. It knows the enemy.
The price of Peace is worth every penny, the price of appeasement is sadly subject to inflation.

[Ludicus]

Zelensky is not a saint

He doesn't need to be a liar, by trying to drag NATO into a conflict with Russia, which may end in nuclear conflict. Contradicting allies, Zelensky says missile that that caused explosion in Poland was "Russian”.

CNN reporter asked Biden: What’s your reaction to President Biden that the missiles that landed in Poland were not Ukrainian?”
Biden: “That’s not the evidence”

-----

You are afraid that NATO will enter the conflict because in the medium term it can have severe repercussions in your life

"Medium term"..! what are you talking about! If you are not afraid of a nuclear conflict, you should be.
--

Nuclear winter and emp pulses have this very rude habit of not respecting international borders.

And this is why Putin will NEVER launch any nukes.

Y'm afraid you are wrong, my friend. Tactical nuclear bombs can be used for limited targets. In doubt, ask the US. ( Hiroshima and Nagasaki). If the US attacks Russia, the response will immediately be tactical nuclear: what will follow is anybody's guess. Every single nuclear country has its own nuclear deterrence police.