Ukraine Conflict - "The nationalist not only does not disapprove of atrocities committed by his own side, but he has a remarkable capacity for not even hearing about them."

[Zoraptor]

I've never seen a Storm Shadow do the sort of damage you'd expect from a 450kg warhead, if you compare it to the HE Kalibr or Tomahawk. IIRC its warhead only has ?100kg? of actual explosive since it's designed as a bunker buster.

[Gfted1]

Ah, I see. I was deceived by the wiki entry: Storm Shadow - Wikipedia. The BROACH link isnt very informative either: BROACH warhead - Wikipedia

[xzar_monty]

7 hours ago, Sarex said:

I wasn't talking about the pictures in the link above specifically, but I would still think the person is trying to hide anything that could help identify him. For an example, the picture shows a person standing on the dock, they could then ask that person who was on the other side of the dock, a long shot but why take the risk.

There's quite possibly something like this in the picture somewhere, something that isn't easily inferrable from what is seen but might look obvious in the sense you mean if it was visible. (So we may have the riddle explanation here: difficult to get right but obvious in hindsight. Pedo mellon.)

As for the location etc., I think Zoraptor countered that side of it pretty well. I thought about that, too, but quickly realized that that side of it probably isn't the reason for the blurring.

[Malcador]

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/18/world/europe/ukraine-missile-kostiantynivka-market.html

NYT looking for trouble, now.

[Zoraptor]

That always looked like a Ukrainian hit. Even had stridently pro Ukrainian people like Roepke saying it.

Funny how the first version of the video was 'doctored by Russians' when that reflection got noticed since it (and the later actually doctored version) was released by Zelensky himself.

[Hurlshort]

I've never understood the big concern over whether something gets blown up by Russians or Ukrainians. Whether it is a Russian attack or a Ukrainian accident doesn't change the fact that Russia is the aggressor and this is all on them.

[Malcador]

1 hour ago, Hurlshort said:

I've never understood the big concern over whether something gets blown up by Russians or Ukrainians. Whether it is a Russian attack or a Ukrainian accident doesn't change the fact that Russia is the aggressor and this is all on them.

That's a convenient dodge for Ukrainian soldiers then.

[Zoraptor]

Problem with argument is that it's kind of... specious. And never gets applied evenhandedly. Consider:

"I've never understood the big concern over whether something got blown up by ISIS or the US. Whether it was an ISIS or US attack doesn't change the fact that ISIS wouldn't exist without the US invasion of Iraq so blame wise it's all on the US anyway".

A great argument for rhetoric, and for generating butthurt among certain people; not so great for anything else. But it too is the logical progression of "everything is [originator's] fault". That argument has also been extensively used to excuse probable Ukrainian war crimes when it quite specifically cannot be used that way, and also whenever Ukraine has been caught gilding the lily ("Ukraine wouldn't have to lie if Russia didn't invade!")

In this case it's precisely Ukraine gilding the lily which is most significant- it was extremely unlikely to be a deliberate act either way whoever did it- and some of the more intemperate and knee jerk remarks from those whose job it is to do and know better.

[Sarex]

 

[xzar_monty]

Here's an extremely interesting interview that provides quite a lot of fascinating historical context that doesn't disregard, for instance, the manifold failures of the US along the way, particularly in its politics. I'm especially thinking of people like @Gorth and @BruceVC who might be interested to take the time (which I personally took during a work project that allowed it, but only in the listening sense).

 

[BruceVC]

7 hours ago, Zoraptor said:

Problem with argument is that it's kind of... specious. And never gets applied evenhandedly. Consider:

"I've never understood the big concern over whether something got blown up by ISIS or the US. Whether it was an ISIS or US attack doesn't change the fact that ISIS wouldn't exist without the US invasion of Iraq so blame wise it's all on the US anyway".

A great argument for rhetoric, and for generating butthurt among certain people; not so great for anything else. But it too is the logical progression of "everything is [originator's] fault". That argument has also been extensively used to excuse probable Ukrainian war crimes when it quite specifically cannot be used that way, and also whenever Ukraine has been caught gilding the lily ("Ukraine wouldn't have to lie if Russia didn't invade!")

In this case it's precisely Ukraine gilding the lily which is most significant- it was extremely unlikely to be a deliberate act either way whoever did it- and some of the more intemperate and knee jerk remarks from those whose job it is to do and know better.

Yes and we can  go around in circles with that type of argument and historical reasons for geopolitical developments

"ISIS wouldn't  exist if the Soviets hadnt invaded Afghanistan because AQ was only created because of the outcomes of that war. And then AQ attacked the US in 2001 which led to the understandable invasion of Afghanistan and then the mistake of invading Iraq. ISIS wouldnt exist in its current form if the US hadnt invaded Iraq but the US wouldnt have justified the Iraq invasion without 9/11 so the Soviet Invasion of Afghanistan is the real reason that ISIS exists because that spawned AQ which attacked the US " 

So its easy to do that and doesnt really help or change the reality of the unprovoked invasion of Ukraine by Russia or the  long list of war crimes that Russia is responsible for

 

 

 

 

 

[BruceVC]

9 hours ago, Hurlshort said:

I've never understood the big concern over whether something gets blown up by Russians or Ukrainians. Whether it is a Russian attack or a Ukrainian accident doesn't change the fact that Russia is the aggressor and this is all on them.

Its partly because people want to say " look Ukraine is also bad like Russia " because they think its going to the change or reduce the warmongering and brutal nature of the Russian military in Ukraine 

But it doesn't convince or change anyone's views and who is responsible for this war 

[Malcador]

5 hours ago, Sarex said:

 

Ukrainian diplomacy is a sight to behold.  Money talks.

[Lexx]

The grain thing just shows how much corruption there is in europe as well. I can understand both sides - ukraine who just want to move their grain through poland, etc. and the bordering countries who are worried about crashing grain prices because they can't compete with them. On the other hand, there are already rules that the ukraine grain can't be sold in european stores... but why does it happen anyways? Look at the people who are mixing the local stuff with it. This is where they have to crack down - give them huge fines or whatever, I don't know. I'm sure the authorities could find out who's behind it if they would try.

[kanisatha]

5 hours ago, BruceVC said:

Its partly because people want to say " look Ukraine is also bad like Russia " because they think its going to the change or reduce the warmongering and brutal nature of the Russian military in Ukraine

No, the reason people say things along these lines is so that it serves to justify their indifference toward the war and the plight of the Ukrainians. A lot of people in the world today, unfortunately, just don't want to be bothered by the plight of other people in the world. But they also want all those bad things happening out there to "go away" so that their indifference doesn't make them look bad.

[xzar_monty]

1 minute ago, kanisatha said:

A lot of people in the world today, unfortunately, just don't want to be bothered by the plight of other people in the world.

I agree that this is true. However, I don't think that the word "today" is in any way operative. It has always been so, and in fact, for most of history, it has been much more so.

[BruceVC]

8 minutes ago, kanisatha said:

No, the reason people say things along these lines is so that it serves to justify their indifference toward the war and the plight of the Ukrainians. A lot of people in the world today, unfortunately, just don't want to be bothered by the plight of other people in the world. But they also want all those bad things happening out there to "go away" so that their indifference doesn't make them look bad.

Yes I agree but I can guarantee you most of those same people will be outraged about any Western country, and particularly the US, doing anything similar to Russia. So they not indifferent when Western countries are involved in wars or invasions, so its selective indifference thats based on ideological reasons and anti-Western bias. This is common in SA from those who support Russia 

 

[Lexx]

This is interesting and explains the outward facing hole in the sub:

[Gfted1]

I think the 1, 2, 3, 4 on the right side of the picture are misnumbered for 9, 10, 11, 12.

[Malcador]

6 hours ago, BruceVC said:

Its partly because people want to say " look Ukraine is also bad like Russia " because they think its going to the change or reduce the warmongering and brutal nature of the Russian military in Ukraine 

But it doesn't convince or change anyone's views and who is responsible for this war 

Not sure the aspiration you're attributing is that on, Ukraine killing their own people with an errant missile or bullet isn't really showing them as "bad".  Worst it will be is just liars, but lying in war is to be expected. 

As for indifference to people getting wasted, nothing new. Maybe D'Agata was on to something though about relative civilization.

Edited September 20, 2023 by Malcador

[Zoraptor]

The indifference accusation is incredibly rich, really. I'd bet most people aren't even aware what the conflict is that has killed the most people in the 21st century- it isn't Iraq, or Syria, or Ukraine. The only way the vast majority of people would notice would (have) be(en) if the the coltan spigot had got turned off and their iPhones started costing $100 more.

Of course, that was a long way away from Europe or the US, so why should you care... now anyone care to guess how much further away from Europe/ Ukraine New Zealand is?

Given your history not exactly surprising most of the world actually does view your local troubles with supreme indifference. I'm not obligated to 'care' about the serried ranks of glorious blue eyed Ukrainians fighting off Sauron's minions in a struggle of pure light versus utter darkness; you're not obligated to care about a few million poor bastard(s) getting blatted so you can buy cheap electronics. Things will be far better once that's accepted because the Cope is extraordinarily repetitive and very, very boring.

(Never understood some people's need to have everything presaged with "Russia bad because Ukraine invasion". Especially since everyone knows that they'd blow a gasket if asked to presage everything with: "US/ NATO/ West bad because Iraq invasion"

next step:

Spoiler

well why haven't you created a thread on the Congo if you care so much then?)

 

[xzar_monty]

10 minutes ago, Zoraptor said:

I'd bet most people aren't even aware what the conflict is that has killed the most people in the 21st century- it isn't Iraq, or Syria, or Ukraine. The only way the vast majority of people would notice would (have) be(en) if the the coltan spigot had got turned off and their iPhones started costing $100 more.

Indeed. There's a Nobel Peace Prize winner from that country who made a fairly well constructed and impassioned speech on this very topic, asking the world to remember what a vast quantity of rare earth metals (and, consequently, technological pleasure) the country provides to the modern consumer, thanks to some rather special circumstances related to geology and plate tectonics. The speech had just as much effect as you'd expect, i.e. none.

[Off-topic but somewhat relevant: The superb NZ writer Eleanor Catton has managed to include the topic of rare earth metals extremely well in her new novel Birnam Wood; highly recommended.]

[Hurlshort]

37 minutes ago, Zoraptor said:

 

(Never understood some people's need to have everything presaged with "Russia bad because Ukraine invasion". Especially since everyone knows that they'd blow a gasket if asked to presage everything with: "US/ NATO/ West bad because Iraq invasion"

next step:

  Reveal hidden contents

well why haven't you created a thread on the Congo if you care so much then?)

 

But the US is bad because of the Iraq invasion. I'd say most people here don't defend the US and their actions in Iraq.

[Zoraptor]

And I'd agree, most people don't defend the US. That itself isn't the point though- they also aren't expected to say how bad the US is before saying anything critical of Russia (or ISIS, per the previous example). Very often that isn't the case when it comes to saying anything critical of Ukraine though, then some people want everything to come with a disclaimer about Russia being worse.

(generally that sort of thing forms what I tend to call the Pinochet defence: yeah maybe Pinochet did some bad things. But Pinochet wasn't a bad guy compared to... Stalin! Stalin was a communist, Pinochet was anti communist. He might have done some bad things but he wouldn't have, had communism not existed. If the communists had got in things would have been worse! Now, after those facts why are you criticising Pinochet without acknowledging that he only did stuff to protect people from communism and without saying how much worse Stalin was? It's a nice rhetorical construct especially if you're Margaret Thatcher, but Pinochet was still a bad guy whatever Stalin did.

much like Russian bot accusations, it's not like I really care since I tend to take people resorting to rhetorical constructs like that as, for want of a better term, a 'win'. It's just the sort of things that has tended to gum up other forums and the like and isn't really designed to be even slightly constructive; more to just get the target to shut up)

1 hour ago, xzar_monty said:

[Off-topic but somewhat relevant: The superb NZ writer Eleanor Catton has managed to include the topic of rare earth metals extremely well in her new novel Birnam Wood; highly recommended.]

I promise I will get around to reading Birnam Wood at some point.

Edited September 20, 2023 by Zoraptor

[Malcador]

UNSC meeting today was entertaining, Russian rep challenging Zelensky being there and then getting a shut down by the council President. The Albanian representative did comment on indifference to Ukraine, although he didn't really give a good argument about why this isn't like wars in other places where it's just a problem for local nations. "An aggression in Europe's heart cannot be Europe's problem only".

2 hours ago, Zoraptor said:

The indifference accusation is incredibly rich, really. I'd bet most people aren't even aware what the conflict is that has killed the most people in the 21st century- it isn't Iraq, or Syria, or Ukraine. The only way the vast majority of people would notice would (have) be(en) if the the coltan spigot had got turned off and their iPhones started costing $100 more.

I can't help but get a little bit of a laugh when people go on as if this war is a nightmare without compare in recent times.