News War with Russia

[Scouse]

I'd also suggest that there's one group of people who can stop this, and that's the Russians, and if it means a bit of 9mm regime change, I won't shed one fucking tear for Vladimir Putin.

I agree. But there are better ways for humans to settle differences. If we cannot ever get to that way of thinking then sooner or later someone's going to push the button that none of us are going to walk away from.


Anyway - I'll take this opportunity to point out that it's essentially a nothing conflict. It's big only in the media (and in the people's lives that are being trashed (which I think is the important bit, but that doesn't matter, clearly)). If it was a serious conflict we'd have stopped buying gas off Russia.

But we haven't. The west is still taking their gas. Today.

 

[DaGaffer]

I think "shitshow" is the most accurate word in this sentence.

I get where you're coming from - but painting the russian military as "bad guys" is just overly simplistic asshattery and you know it very well.

I'd rather be called a hand-wringing pussy than jump on the sort of pointless jingoistic wagon that humans have used as part of the self-justification for killing each other down through the aeons.

There IS no justification for it. It's because we're fucking dumb fucks as a species. The only solution to this problem is to think a different way about the world - and "fighting for country" and "cheering on the good guys" isn't doing that.

Really? How is it over simplistic? Russians are invading Ukraine, not the other way around, and they're doing it for nothing, and I'm sorry but the one time when "fighting for you country" is not jingoistic, is not irrational, is not "oh stoopid hoomans" is when you're actually fighting for your country, for your family and your home. Trying to couch this in six of one, half a dozen of the other terms is just you trying to show off some perceived moral or intellectual superiority, and if this was a conversation about Iraq, or Afghanistan, I might give your argument the time of day, but its not.

 

[Gwadien]

I still don't think we should be celebrating the deaths of people like these


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nifxKIhFSuw&


They're not ISIS.

 

[DaGaffer]

I still don't think we should be celebrating the deaths of people like these


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nifxKIhFSuw&


They're not ISIS.

You can celebrate Ukraine standing up to bullies whilst not celebrating the deaths of individual Russian conscripts. Holding two thoughts in your head at the same time doesn't make your brain explode.

 

[Gwadien]

You can celebrate Ukraine standing up to bullies whilst not celebrating the deaths of individual Russian conscripts. Holding two thoughts in your head at the same time doesn't make your brain explode.

That's not the rhetoric I'm seeing though, and that's what is important, not what's in my brain.

...

 

[Aoami]

That's not the rhetoric I'm seeing though, and that's what is important, not what's in my brain.

...

From who? A few wankers on twitter?

 

[Wij]

View: https://twitter.com/MelnykAndrij/status/1498258622127742977


A city of 1.5 million people.

 

[Scouse]

Really? How is it over simplistic? Russians are invading Ukraine, not the other way around, and they're doing it for nothing, and I'm sorry but the one time when "fighting for you country" is not jingoistic, is not irrational, is not "oh stoopid hoomans" is when you're actually fighting for your country, for your family and your home. Trying to couch this in six of one, half a dozen of the other terms is just you trying to show off some perceived moral or intellectual superiority, and if this was a conversation about Iraq, or Afghanistan, I might give your argument the time of day, but its not.

Russians = Bad Guys, which is what you said, is clearly oversimplistic.

I'm not trying to couch it as "six of one, half a dozen of the other". I'm not even trying to couch it as "Ukraine vs Russia" - because it isn't helpful. There's nothing to be gained from thinking about this conflict in those terms that we don't already know - because that's how we've thought about and experienced conflict since we invented war.

I would very much like if we thought about the whole shitshow differently - and I mean that not just about this war. And not just relationships with countries. But the very definition of what country, government and relationship means.

I don't think we will - which is why we keep going to war. We are dumb fucks.

In the meantime, I won't cheer any of it on. Between Ukranian lives being lost (unjust as all of it is) and Russian soldiers being killed (as unjust as that is) - you can indeed make an argument, if you want to, that Ukranians "didn't start it". But I won't be drawn into schoolyard talk.

Thinking of war in traditional terms is pointless. We've proven that time and again. I'm only interested in trying to view war now as a result of how human societies have arranged themselves. And if that makes me a hand-wringer then so be it. But at least I'm trying - because the alternative is just more of this shit, forever (if we don't destroy the planet along the way).

 

[Deebs]

Switzerland joining the club.


View: https://twitter.com/Osinttechnical/status/1498293462898294784

 

[Gwadien]

Ping Putin

Relentlessly ping Putin's servers

pingputin.com

PEOPLE POWA!

 

[Aoami]

Some achievement that, making the Swiss do something

 

[Overdriven]

Ping Putin

Relentlessly ping Putin's servers

pingputin.com

PEOPLE POWA!

If you do that: Make sure you're on a VPN. It's illegal.

 

[DaGaffer]

Russians = Bad Guys, which is what you said, is clearly oversimplistic.

I'm not trying to couch it as "six of one, half a dozen of the other". I'm not even trying to couch it as "Ukraine vs Russia" - because it isn't helpful. There's nothing to be gained from thinking about this conflict in those terms that we don't already know - because that's how we've thought about and experienced conflict since we invented war.

I would very much like if we thought about the whole shitshow differently - and I mean that not just about this war. And not just relationships with countries. But the very definition of what country, government and relationship means.

I don't think we will - which is why we keep going to war. We are dumb fucks.

In the meantime, I won't cheer any of it on. Between Ukranian lives being lost (unjust as all of it is) and Russian soldiers being killed (as unjust as that is) - you can indeed make an argument, if you want to, that Ukranians "didn't start it". But I won't be drawn into schoolyard talk.

Thinking of war in traditional terms is pointless. We've proven that time and again. I'm only interested in trying to view war now as a result of how human societies have arranged themselves. And if that makes me a hand-wringer then so be it. But at least I'm trying - because the alternative is just more of this shit, forever (if we don't destroy the planet along the way).

Pointless waffle. Sorry but it is. You deal with things as they are, not as you want them to be. And no, Russian soldiers being killed is not "as unjust" as Ukrainians being killed. It just isn't.

 

[Gwadien]

If you do that: Make sure you're on a VPN. It's illegal.

It'd genius if was actually a Russian creation targeting our websites.

 

[Wij]

Pointless waffle. Sorry but it is. You deal with things as they are, not as you want them to be. And no, Russian soldiers being killed is not "as unjust" as Ukrainians being killed. It just isn't.

The key thing is that many Ukrainians being killed are civilians and even when it's the Ukrainian military being killed this military aren't actively trying to murder anyone who isn't trying to murder them. Taking out a piece of artillery will SAVE lives even if it's operators die.

 

[old.Osy]

Pointless waffle. Sorry but it is. You deal with things as they are, not as you want them to be. And no, Russian soldiers being killed is not "as unjust" as Ukrainians being killed. It just isn't.

Life should not have a value attached - either ethically or otherwise. I know it sounds idealistic, but it's the reality towards each human being should strive for.

Russian soldiers don't deserve to die, as much as the Ukrainian soldiers or civilians don't. It's a theater of war, and loss of life is un-avoidable, but placing value on someone's life based on his shoulder patch is reprehensible.

 

[Scouse]

Pointless waffle. Sorry but it is. You deal with things as they are, not as you want them to be. And no, Russian soldiers being killed is not "as unjust" as Ukrainians being killed. It just isn't.

I never said "as unjust". There's nothing just about any of it.

But trying to change the way that people think about things isn't "pointless waffle". If you don't try things will never change. And if we can't be arsed trying to change the way people think about how countries relate to each other, and how we assess war, then war will never change.

If you think it's pointless trying to change that, then fair enough. I already said this:

I don't think we will - which is why we keep going to war. We are dumb fucks.

I'm not saying you are a dumb fuck. I'm saying all of us are. Including me.

But the attempt to change minds isn't pointless waffle. To make no attempt would be morally repugnant to me.

 

[Scouse]

The key thing is that many Ukrainians being killed are civilians

All people being killed are humans.

Maybe there's a different way to organise societies?

I think we need to start with how we view everything - not just this conflict.

 

[Wij]

Killing the people who are doing war crimes is obviously less bad than killing the people who aren’t.


View: https://twitter.com/bellingcat/status/1497921707901956103

 

[Gwadien]

View: https://www.reddit.com/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/t391pz/russian_soldiers_surrendering_to_ukraine_will/?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share

 

[Scouse]

Killing the people who are doing war crimes is obviously less bad than killing the people who aren’t.

But still bad, right?

 

[Scouse]

BTW - are you OK with the Taliban killing our boys when they commit war crimes? Or are you just pissed off at the blonde arsehole who releases the information that shows that we're guilty?

 

[Wij]

But still bad, right?

Depends on how you frame it. Bad that it has to happen but good that given what actually IS happening it will help prevent further war crimes.

 

[Gwadien]

View: https://youtu.be/hzBxFH_hEwA

 

[Wij]

BTW - are you OK with the Taliban killing our boys when they commit war crimes? Or are you just pissed off at the blonde arsehole who releases the information that shows that we're guilty?

I know the incident you are referring to, which was the US, not the UK, and the version released by Assange was heavily edited so what happened is still disputed, but even if I accept that was a war crime, considering the length of the fighting with the Taliban, the number of war crimes committed by the US and UK was very low. We don't do them as a matter of policy. Russia and the Taliban do. Sometimes they happen on our side too and it's right that they are investigated.

If you look at the incident the other week, the usual suspects were claiming that the US had caused several kids to die when in actual fact they'd been suicide bombed. On the whole US precision strikes kill the intended target and not much else. Nasty business but not as nasty as flattening whole cities.

 

[DaGaffer]

Life should not have a value attached - either ethically or otherwise. I know it sounds idealistic, but it's the reality towards each human being should strive for.

Russian soldiers don't deserve to die, as much as the Ukrainian soldiers or civilians don't. It's a theater of war, and loss of life is un-avoidable, but placing value on someone's life based on his shoulder patch is reprehensible.

You aren't placing a value on someone's life based on a shoulder patch, you're basing it on their actions as part of an invading army with no justification for that invasion! There is no moral equivalence here.

 

[caLLous]

This is depressingly believable.

 

[Aoami]

This is depressingly believable.

According to Russian media reports, not denied by the UK side, Truss’s chilly encounter with her vastly more experienced Russian opposite number, Sergey Lavrov, included an exchange that went roughly like this.

Truss: ‘Russia must move its troops away from the Ukrainian border, or else…’ Lavrov: ‘Why should we? It’s up to Russia where it deploys its troops inside Russia’ (which, of course, it is). He then asked, for good measure: ‘Do you recognise Russia’s sovereignty over the Rostov and Voronezh regions?’ At which point Truss mounted her high horse and responded with all the authority of the UK’s chief diplomat: ‘The UK will never recognise Russia’s sovereignty over these regions.’

This is where the UK’s ambassador to Moscow, Deborah Bronnert, is said to have leant across to Truss and discreetly informed her that these regions were actually in Russia.

 

[Wij]

You aren't placing a value on someone's life based on a shoulder patch, you're basing it on their actions as part of an invading army with no justification for that invasion! There is no moral equivalence here.

The blame for the deaths of Russian soldiers should be laid at Putin. Not the people being put in a kill-or-be-killed situation.

 

[Wij]

According to Russian media reports, not denied by the UK side, Truss’s chilly encounter with her vastly more experienced Russian opposite number, Sergey Lavrov, included an exchange that went roughly like this.

Truss: ‘Russia must move its troops away from the Ukrainian border, or else…’ Lavrov: ‘Why should we? It’s up to Russia where it deploys its troops inside Russia’ (which, of course, it is). He then asked, for good measure: ‘Do you recognise Russia’s sovereignty over the Rostov and Voronezh regions?’ At which point Truss mounted her high horse and responded with all the authority of the UK’s chief diplomat: ‘The UK will never recognise Russia’s sovereignty over these regions.’

This is where the UK’s ambassador to Moscow, Deborah Bronnert, is said to have leant across to Truss and discreetly informed her that these regions were actually in Russia.

She's thick but claiming that Lavrov thought she meant that the UK would nuke Russia is not credible. He knows perfectly well that wasn't what was meant.