It would be if using or not using terror would be orthogonal to success in war. War is a zero-sum game and you simply can’t throw out anything giving advantage - you’ll be punished by evolution, as simple as that.
Unless you are in some artificial situation where rules of war are respected and if they are not you are punished by neutral sides. Sadly our era doesn’t have any such mechanism despite all the declarations. It’s not Frederic the Great’s time.
It’s what terrorists do.
This particular sentence is not entirely correct, as it implies that freedom fighters can’t use terror tactics and thus be terrorists.
Say, if some Armenian force (there are none that’d have the balls) would bomb the Mingechaur dam, the pipes and infrastructure going through Tovuz, other smaller hydroelectric objects etc in Azerbaijan, - these would be actions aimed at fighting for freedom, but very important part of their effect would be terror.
In some way any violent activity aimed at denying someone their feeling of safety is terrorism. Like, say, allied bombing campaign of Germany (its goals were even formulated like that).
I agree that Hamas are not freedom fighters, their ideology is pretty Nazi.
In the end faulty security always gives edge to the stronger and more malicious side.
So if you want to protect the weak and allow people to defend themselves, you’d want such mechanisms to not be rigged for any abstract noble goal, because otherwise you are going to get fucked very practically.
Time flows too slow until Ursula von der Leyen is in court facing such charges and more.
TIL USSR was capitalist. /s.
No, trying to do more with less is not capitalism. It’s material reality.
It’s power being the only criterion, which means there’s no working fallback criterion. There should be at least one (which is where left libertarians are), or the structure of power should be different (which is where right libertarians are). Neither thing can be made fact to full extent, which is why we need both.
Which is why I am a distributist.
Thank you for having a brain in this thread.
Only it’s the mass media system that failed rather. Which works in the way allowing to spend money on forming opinions with predictable outcomes. Which enables much worse things than dangerous customer service.
Interesting, actually, in Russia I’ve never had that particular problem.
Maybe there actually is some regulation in place, makes me wonder.
Bye, moscovite.
What an ape FFS. Don’t say bye the third time.
EDIT:
I mean, you say “genocide” as if China is being sanctioned or punished for Xinjiang, and very little pressure would be required to make them stop, or Azerbaijan for Artsakh, and Azerbaijan is a bug to squash, one phone call would be enough, and Turkey itself mostly does all the things it does to pressure concessions, so they are ready to negotiate in every moment.
Ah, and Ukraine supports Azeri genocidal crimes in Artsakh, so fuck them.
Your country, if that’s US, doesn’t do anything about these. It cooperates with the criminal terrorist states I’ve mentioned. And yet you have the gall to throw the word “genocide” around about something which is war crimes, yes, and even sometimes acts of genocide, but that would mean that a Ukrainian life is worth more than an Armenian life, and I don’t agree. A Ukrainian life is worth more than your life, surely, but not more than an Armenian life.
Now, you can say that yes, these are all genocides much more real about which you don’t care, cause your side is of the perpetrators there.
You don’t fucking know which things the words you use mean. And since you still dare voice your opinions on real world - blocking me is an important first step at stopping that.
I suspect they are getting second thoughts there about those fallout shelters and how different they are from wow hypersonic missiles and wow radioelectronic warfare and other kinds of wow they considered real.
Well, in Russian it’s a swear word meaning a faggot, which refers to prison hierarchy.
Murdering, kidnapping and brainwashing Ukrainian children is genocide.
Then we’ll have to introduce degrees of genocide.
Attempting to exterminate the Ukrainian people is genocide.
Which is not happening.
I said “in some moments”. There were days and places under Kherson a few months before.
Like every ceasefire.
I suppose right now Ukraine just wants some better guarantees while it has a strong negotiating position.
So that it takes some effort from Putin to even be heard.
Or maybe what Zelensky says is what he means, you can’t negotiate with a pathological liar (just like a few of Ukraine’s allies, though) who doesn’t know how to lose with dignity. Be it a person or a whole elite of some country, like Russia. I mean, emotionally I’ve met some and I’d agree. Just don’t know what it is rationally.
We’ll see. Ukraine is still regaining land, albeit slowly. In some moments - rather fast and cheap even.
But also yes, the Russian forces have learned something.
OK, with this I agree.