That's a bit difficult argument to exhaustively address.
Personnel mines has been a topic of considerable public, political and military discussion about personnel mines in Finland for a long time and has been analyzed in depth. Even now, after a significant political mood change at around 2024, the official line (e.g. in the government proposal[1] that led to the withdrawal) is that personnel mines have mostly an auxiliary role in the defence strategy.
Indeed, but without them Ukraine would have been overrun by now. They are 'auxiliary' but very important. Ukraine is pretty clever about them too: most of these expire after a few days or weeks.
Well, there is a bit of a problem. Ukraine has shown the reality of dealing with Russia and unfortunately landmines are back on the menu. Yes, it would be much better if we didn't need to defend from aggressors. But if you tie your own army one hand behind their backs then they will lose for sure. This about war, not Oxford boxing rules, and if one side commits one human rights violation after the other it would be great if you could keep the high ground but there are practical limits to that.
Note the incredible restraint of Ukrainians troops in dealing with Russian civilians and captured Russian military. But that does not translate into 'let's handicap our own forces'.
The warmongers are on the other side of the border. Europe is just reacting to this and the states that have rescinded the landmine ban are all directly in the line of fire.
In the interest of figuring out whether you are trolling or not, can you please describe which problems these are and what diplomatic solutions you believe exist?
I'm not trolling - its pretty evident that diplomacy was not effective and that the decision was made to go to war, whatever the cost - because thats what happened.
The diplomatic effort to save over a million men from needless massacre on the battlefield was not considered worthwhile by the ruling elites running Ukraine for the past two decades, in face of the immense profits to be made - by an elite few - in war profits.
In the interest of figuring out whether you profit from war or not, why don't you tell us the extent of your own investment in the military industrial complex which currently profits from propagating the "ma' Russia" trope ..
Ukraine did not decide to go to war. I really don't know where you got the idea that they had any agency in preventing this short of giving Russia all of their territory and fleeing West. Since you're an immigrant into Europe maybe study the lay of the land a bit before having such outspoken opinions. You are effectively a mouthpiece for Russian propaganda which I have now idea where you picked it up (you're from Australia originally iirc and you are currently in Austria so you have access to information just like everybody else).
> I really don't know where you got the idea that they had any agency in preventing this short of giving Russia all of their territory and fleeing West.
This is at best a conjecture. It's arguable what terms are acceptable and to whom, but Russia has offered and is offering substantially milder terms than taking all of Ukraine. They probably wouldn't even want western Ukraine if offered.
No, they would definitely want western Ukraine and they would take it too. From the beginning of the war it was pretty clear that they were going for all of it. Remember the assault on Kyiv, as well as the leaked map that showed all of Ukraine and Moldova as the target of the 'special operation'.
Ukraine decided war with Russia was worth the cost that would otherwise have been imposed on it by Russia, during negotiations. Both nations chose war, because their cultures require it.
>Immigrant to Europe
To me, this reads as a banal attempt at doxxing, since you have assumed yourself the position of arbiter of moral authority, which is being challenged by my assertions - but since you choose to frame things in this context, I can say with positive certainty that my cosmopolitan, multi-national, multi-language lifestyle, carried on over 4 decades, has well and truly led me to what I consider to be an elevated position: that all cultures are arbitrary and choose war instead of peace overtly, and often blindly.
The narrative that "all Russians are bad" or that "Russia can never be trusted" is as banal as the narrative - although equally 'true' - that "all Americans are bad" and that "America cannot be trusted", also. The simple fact of the matter is, I know plenty of great Russians. And Americans. And Iraqis', and Afghani's, and Kurds and Israeli's and Iranians and Egyptians and a few great Brits, a very hilarious Yemeni family (also immigrants), and a handfull of other wonderful people, on the other side of the _label_.
Russia and Ukraine are in the mess they are in because their arbitrary cultures are perpetuating the hatred, like you, instead of postulating peace and prosperity, like me.
The simple fact is, our current set of nations, equally human, is currently too incompetent to attain the wishes of the greater human entity, which exists well and truly beyond the sphere of those claiming that "mouthpieces of Russian propaganda" are something to be worrying about.
And the reason for that incompetence is, in my well-travelled and -spoken opinion, due to one factor only: the laziness of those who would use "those of another culture, over there", to manifest their own self-hatred. Because, as an American, you must surely, surely understand that there is a growing stack of reasons for the rest of the world to hate America right now - and yet, here we are, having a civil discussion about the state of things.
It is my learned opinion that there are no greater or lesser, more inferior or superior cultures - that all humans have the same constraints hefted upon them in greater or lesser magnitude, and those of us who have the freedom of expression and travel to maintain a multi-cultural, cosmopolitan lifestyle, must never submit to those incapable of escaping the propaganda and hubris of their own mono-culture.
All culture is a lie, which only persists in the re-telling. "Russians are evil" and "Americans are evil" are lies, persisted by those who re-tell them, designed to keep Russians and Americans from doing great things, together.
And if you think this isn't applicable, in every single human case tested so far, then you need to travel more. And not as a tourist: as a local.
It's the only way to be sure you know what you're talking about with regards to world affairs...
> Ukraine decided war with Russia was worth the cost that would otherwise have been imposed on it by Russia, during negotiations. Both nations chose war, because their cultures require it.
Ukraine certainly could have chosen to accept Russia's demands, but the demand was essentially the extinguishment of soverign Ukraine, and the extinguishment of Ukrainian identity. At least, those were the demands I saw.
Not a lot of diplomatic room. Also, Ukraine had engaged diplomatically with Russia in the past, but it turns out there's no mechanism for Ukraine to enforce treaties that Russia signed.
In which documents, please? I would like to see for myself where Russia demands the extinguishment of sovereign Ukraine, that's bound to be interesting language.
> “I have said many times that I consider the Russian and Ukrainian people to be one nation. In this sense, all of Ukraine is ours,” Putin said, according to Sky News.
Russia's intentions for Ukraine were not limited to only destruction of statehood and identity, but included the physical extermination of Ukrainians too; at least to such extent that Ukrainians would not be able to self-govern anymore: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/What_Russia_Should_Do_with_Ukr...
This closely mirrors the actions of Russians in the 1940s against a number of countries in Eastern Europe. Exterminate doctors-lawyers-merchants to destroy natural leaders, and then exploit the working class people as slaves to the immigrant class of Russian masters. This is the blueprint of how Russia has grown from a small city-state to span 11 timezones. The parent poster mentioned banality several times. It's utterly banal to believe that you can smooth talk your way out of this.
As much as the poster criticizes Western attitudes, they end up reproducing one of the most characteristic ones: the belief that every conflict can be managed through negotiation and that there is always some mutually acceptable deal to be made. This reflects the Anglo-American bubble and bias toward materialism, which leads to serious misjudgements when applied to situations where motivations other than economic.
If you are using Wikipedia as a source to determine "what Russia wants", instead of Russian sources, then whose propaganda are you truly propagating?
Which is to say, your "What Russia Should Do with Ukraine" is just a projection of the, indeed very materialist, "Project for a New American Century" - so shall we castigate all Americans for callously allowing such totalitarian schemes to have been committed, in their names?
Your agitation against Russia is the kind of smooth talking that gets people into conflict, not out.
Regardless, let us not ignore the statistics for "# of states considered inferior by ones own states' ruling elite and thus qualified for destruction and then actually destroyed", per-state, shall we .. the OP is right to point out the sheer magnitude of crimes when comparing Russia vs. Western-5-eyes states...
Perhaps you use Wikipedia as a source for your information, but there are still a lot of people alive, like myself, from all the countries that are or have been neighbors of Russia, who know from first-hand experience how the Russians have treated all the territories that they have invaded, by killing the natives, deporting them to Siberia (where those deported were chosen for having "dangerous" professions, like school teacher or any other "intelectual"), installing Russian colonists in their former houses, stealing everything from the leftovers and then attempting to brainwash their children by teaching them that everything useful in the world has been invented by Russians and that the Russians are their "liberators", to whom they must be eternally grateful.
I would like to see which would be your opinion about Russians if you had the luck to live in a place close to them, so you would have seen your family kidnapped and sent to forced work in Siberia and everything they owned stolen from you.
This is something that the Russians have done everywhere around them, whenever they could, and it was always done unprovoked, before any of those neighbors had done anything against them. When those attacked by Russia during WWII have fought back, after Russia was among the victors, with the help of USA and UK Russia has extracted huge "war reparations" from those who have fought against the Russian aggression, besides transforming all the Eastern European countries into vassal states.
The traditional joke about Russia was: "Who are the neighbors of Russia? ... Whoever Russia wants."
So there is no wonder that anyone whose memories are intact will do anything to prevent the Russians from repeating such actions.
> If you are using Wikipedia as a source to determine "what Russia wants", instead of Russian sources, then whose propaganda are you truly propagating?
Wikipedia says:
> What Russia Should Do with Ukraine" (Russian: Что Россия должна сделать с Украиной, romanized: Chto Rossiya dolzhna sdelat s Ukrainoy),[a][1] is an article written by Timofey Sergeytsev and published by the Russian state-owned news agency RIA Novosti.[2] The article calls for the full destruction of Ukraine as a state, as well as the full destruction of the Ukrainian national identity in accordance with Russia's aim to accomplish the "denazification" of the latter.
Sounds like Wikipedia describing an Russian source. I can't read Russian, can you? Is the description of the source inacurate? Is the summary inacurate?
You extensively comment on your history on HN when it suits you, and then you balk when that history is quoted and claim this is 'doxxing'? Sorry, but that's not how this works. Either you keep your history off HN or you can expect it to be quoted back at you when inconvenient.
> I can say with positive certainty that my cosmopolitan, multi-national, multi-language lifestyle, carried on over 4 decades, has well and truly led me to what I consider to be an elevated position: that all cultures are arbitrary and choose war instead of peace overtly, and often blindly.
Having lived in a few countries and always leaving those countries with a negative attitude (as you are doing now with Europe) sketches a very shallow level of engagement. You don't have an elevated position, you just believe you do and your comments here are testimony to how far off the mark you are.
> The simple fact is, our current set of nations, equally human, is currently too incompetent to attain the wishes of the greater human entity, which exists well and truly beyond the sphere of those claiming that "mouthpieces of Russian propaganda" are something to be worrying about.
They are something to worry about: they serve in Putin's army of useful idiots, and you are currently behaving like one of those.
> And the reason for that incompetence is, in my well-travelled and -spoken opinion
You can travel a lot and speak well but still spout nonsense.
> Because, as an American
Oh, this is hilarious.
> It is my learned opinion
You are coming across as someone who knows it all but fails to see the most basic stuff, that detracts from all of your other points.
> "Russians are evil" and "Americans are evil" are lies
Obviously they are, but I wasn't making any arguments along those lines. I know some fine Russians and I have more friends in the US than in Europe. I too have traveled a bit and spent some time abroad. It doesn't make me feel like I found the stone of wisdom and it certainly did not make me feel like I was qualified to start pissing on the cultures and leadership of the places that I've lived.
> And if you think this isn't applicable, in every single human case tested so far, then you need to travel more.
Because I haven't traveled enough? Or because we disagree and you think that by putting up some arbitrary bar you can pretend that you have the moral high ground?
> And not as a tourist: as a local.
Well, you are not a tourist: you are now a local. So we get to hold you to a higher standard than some random commenter.
> It's the only way to be sure you know what you're talking about with regards to world affairs...
Unbelievable. Anyway, I've yet to see such a pompous pile of junk on HN, you are dangerously misinformed and on top of that you come across as if you have achieved some level of enlightenment that gives you the right to pontificate to the lesser folks you interact with. I would suggest a more humble stance, one where you stop assuming that you know it all and start with actually listening a bit more.
I'm a pacifist at heart, but I also understand that if your country is attacked that you will defend it, and it is very clear who the aggressor is here and that there was no diplomatic solution other than to end up with Ukraine as a sovereign nation utterly destroyed. Russia (note: Russia, not Russians) has proven to be an utterly untrustworthy party to deal with at the diplomatic level. Their betrayal of Ukraine is horrific, mass murder, rape, daily attacks on civilians and civilian infrastructure. Many, many people dead, wounded and mentally destroyed for life. And here you are from your safe house in Vienna telling them that they should have engaged in more diplomacy? Unbelievable.
You like to travel? Good, I challenge you to go visit Ukraine and to spend some time there and befriend people, talk to them and get some actual perspective on this conflict. Then afterwards, you can go to Russia and do the same there. You will certainly come away with a slightly different point of view than what you have right now and since you feel the need to tell me to travel more (which is hilarious) I think it is fair for me to do the same to you.
Yes, and I also believe that the Western mindset is stuck in a collective dialectic which disallows honest discussion on the subject, because in fact Europe has a lot to answer for on the topic of war, recently, and there is a lot of profit being made by those very European institutions responsible for collectivizing and propagating war-monger groupthink. Europe does not have altruistic arms dealers - it has war-mongering profiteers who have historical ties to the subject dating back hundreds of years.
Russia is not even the worlds #1 source of war-mongering, by a long shot. (The UK and the USA are, having murdered millions of innocent human beings since 2003 in multiple different theatres - countries and cultures deemed inferior by Western, fundamentalist, racist, ruling elites...)
I am not Russian, and can thus do nothing effective about Russia. I am a subject of the criminal 5-eyes western alliance which has murdered millions of innocent human beings since 2003, however, and I no longer believe in Western moral authority which gives us the imperative to 'do something about their war criminals' without "first taking care of our own war criminals", because we have far, far more heinously evil individuals still running the show with bloodied hands and with massive war crimes and crimes against humanity to answer for - yet we do nothing while bleating about Putin.
> which has murdered millions of innocent human beings since 2003, however, and I no longer believe in Western moral authority which gives us the imperative to 'do something about their war criminals' without "first taking care of our own war criminals"
That goes back MUCH further than 2003.
> because we have far, far more heinously evil individuals still running the show with bloodied hands and with massive war crimes and crimes against humanity to answer for -
On this we agree, so what are you doing about it?
> yet we do nothing while bleating about Putin.
Yes, because Putin is currently waging a war of aggression against a much smaller nation which also matters.
The fact that there is more than one thing wrong with the world does not give you leeway to only see the one and ignore the other. Western leadership has often been found on the wrong side of many conflicts and the same goes for the current Russian leadership. But since you've chosen to throw your lot in with us Westerners we still sort of expect you to show some solidarity rather than to start carrying water for at least one enemy. Just so we can hold things together long enough to address all of those wrongs.
Europe has problems, there is no doubt about it. But it also has learned a lot of every expensive lessons and has the scars to prove that. You have yet to integrate or understand those lessons and yet you lecture us as though you've been invited to educate us poor backwards denizens with your superior insight. But all you've done is show the limits of your own understanding, of the history of the content, of how things go to where they are and how we are collectively trying very hard to improve things, which is hard and slow work.
A relatively small fraction of West-Europeans has visited the countries east of the line Berlin-vienna-Rome. In that sense Europe is more like two continents than one. In a nutshell, your viewpoint appears to be 'not my problem'. And I don't doubt it isn't your problem, you have no roots here and can pack up any day with your Australian passport to find a new home. But we actually live here and even though some of us have traveled as much (or maybe even more as you did) as you have and/or have lived in many different countries (which on HN isn't nearly as exceptional as you seem to think).
When you immigrate you accept that the country you immigrate to isn't perfect. But you do make a statement of loyalty, the country that accepts you accepts you with all your flaws and that's a two way street. You don't get to pretend you're some kind of alien from outerspace that expects the people around you to start living according to your ridiculously high and impractical standards. Because theory is fine, of course. The problem is that we don't live in your theoretical world where all conflict can be solved diplomatically so that nobody's holy houses and material gains get upset. Sometimes you really do get invaded, and sometimes you have to fight.
The country that I'm from has a long, long history of abuse that made us fabulously wealthy. This is not something to be proud of. At the same time it got invaded many times and somehow we managed to ultimately fight off the invaders or outsiders fought them off for us. I have no illusions about our leadership, but at the same time, when looking at the various alternatives it could be a lot worse. The last thing I would think of as an immigrant is to lecture the locals on how they should run their affairs. I would be the outsider and it would be up to me to learn, not lecture.
Most people who dox for a reason they think is justified will nonetheless reject the label of doxing for what they did. They'll say "I didn't dox him, I just discovered publicly available but obscure information about him and posted it."
I thought this but have since changed my mind. On board, real humans tax life-support systems in a way that’s difficult to simulate. And real human astronauts garble processes and communications with ground control in ways that a nation that hasn’t done deep spaceflight in a generation could probably do with practice on.
> thought the various space stations were there to develop & test life-support systems long term?
I thought ducks were a preparation of chicken until my early teens. I was wrong.
We have never flown this deep-space life-support system on the ISS together. In parts, yes. But that doesn’t substitute for a real mission. As for simulations, how would you rate your experience from a role play versus the real deal?
Grok and Elon's ventures in general should really get the Purpose of a System treatement in public discourse. For all we know the purpose of Grok is to make nude edits of people. You can assign this to left or right leaning as you please.
He is a literally walking felony who in an era with an effective regulatory system would be at minimum barred from running public companies.
If you’re not one of the nerds stuck in 2014, and still enthralled with the Elon reality field and the Mars grift, taxi grift, robot laundry grift, etc, it’s pretty obvious.
reply