Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
slurm
Jul 28, 2022

by Hand Knit

cinci zoo sniper posted:

There’s no reason to debate that. I’m simply asking that people refrain from explicitly call for this or that group of civilians to be killed. If you want the bridge to be blasted again when empty or in unspecified circumstances, fine by me - I’m not after prosecuting thought crimes here. Same goes for the repair boat itself, it doesn’t have smaller repair boats waiting for it to come back to the wharf.

The other thing specifically with a very specialized piece of equipment like a crane barge is it's going to be fairly difficult to replace. There's not more than at most a few dozen of that size in the region. If you destroy them, the crews are probably going to die, I don't know any other way to put it, but with specialized stuff like that the lines are unavoidably blurred.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

cinci zoo sniper
Mar 15, 2013




slurm posted:

The other thing specifically with a very specialized piece of equipment like a crane barge is it's going to be fairly difficult to replace. There's not more than at most a few dozen of that size in the region. If you destroy them, the crews are probably going to die, I don't know any other way to put it, but with specialized stuff like that the lines are unavoidably blurred.

Or you could destroy the barge during a night, or in some way that allows the crew to evacuate. As I’m saying for the third time in 20 minutes, there’s no issue with expressing a wish that a major military logistics artery becomes or remains inoperable. One simply can express that without explicitly designating a group of civilians as a legitimate target for a suicide drone strike.

cinci zoo sniper fucked around with this message at 22:51 on Oct 12, 2022

cinci zoo sniper
Mar 15, 2013




Russian government has placed an order for 800 modernisations of T-62 tanks. Not entirely clear if we’re talking about the T-62M, or the new T-62 modernisation kit showcased 2 months ago. https://rg.ru/amp/2022/08/15/radikalnuiu-modernizaciiu-t-62-vpervye-pokazali-na-armii-2022.html

The article about modernisation procurement suggests the latter. In any case, they’re saying that the factory is working in 2 shifts, and it would take them 3 years to chew through this order, unless they go to working in 3 shifts and modernise the factory floor as well, which they’re looking into. The source for the article is a federal parliament member, who also said that the were is going to drag out. https://newizv.ru/news/society/12-10-2022/zabaykalskiy-tankovyy-zavod-poluchil-goszakaz-na-remont-i-modernizatsiyu-800-tankov

https://twitter.com/ian_matveev/status/1580216195546243072

slurm
Jul 28, 2022

by Hand Knit

cinci zoo sniper posted:

Or you could destroy them during night, or in some way that allows the crew to evacuate. As I’m saying for the third time in 20 minutes, there’s no issue with expressing a wish that a major military logistics artery becomes or remains inoperable. One simply can express that without explicitly designating a group of civilians as a legitimate target for a suicide drone strike.

I'm just trying to be very clear on this because 24h + escalator is a steep punishment for something that can just kind of be blundered into. So the crane barge/bridge can be discussed as a target so long as the crew etc. isn't mentioned, or do we have to say something like "as long as the crew is ok" every time to signify our intent?

Popete
Oct 6, 2009

This will make sure you don't suggest to the KDz
That he should grow greens instead of crushing on MCs

Grimey Drawer
.

Popete fucked around with this message at 23:01 on Oct 12, 2022

ZombieLenin
Sep 6, 2009

"Democracy for the insignificant minority, democracy for the rich--that is the democracy of capitalist society." VI Lenin


[/quote]

mobby_6kl posted:

:hmmyes:

The bridge is clearly how they're funneling supplies to the south, so it totally a legit target. It also didn't exist until 2018 and the world didn't end.

IIRC basically the requirement is that you do everything possible to minimize civilian casualties when they aren't completely avoidable. So yeah when the workers are on a break, or in the middle of the night if possible.

If something is serving both a military and civilian function, it is a legitimate military target even if civilians are there; however, you are correct in that the attacking belligerent is treaty bound to take every step possible to minimize harm to civilians.

Edit

Incidentally there is no difference between the bridge in question, and any of the other bridges that have been targeted already in this war.

They were almost all serving both a military and civilian function.

ZombieLenin fucked around with this message at 23:12 on Oct 12, 2022

sean10mm
Jun 29, 2005

It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, MAD-2R World

cinci zoo sniper posted:

Russian government has placed an order for 800 modernisations of T-62 tanks. Not entirely clear if we’re talking about the T-62M, or the new T-62 modernisation kit showcased 2 months ago. https://rg.ru/amp/2022/08/15/radikalnuiu-modernizaciiu-t-62-vpervye-pokazali-na-armii-2022.html

The article about modernisation procurement suggests the latter. In any case, they’re saying that the factory is working in 2 shifts, and it would take them 3 years to chew through this order, unless they go to working in 3 shifts and modernise the factory floor as well, which they’re looking into. The source for the article is a federal parliament member, who also said that the were is going to drag out. https://newizv.ru/news/society/12-10-2022/zabaykalskiy-tankovyy-zavod-poluchil-goszakaz-na-remont-i-modernizatsiyu-800-tankov

https://twitter.com/ian_matveev/status/1580216195546243072

Where did those reserve stocks of 7,000 T-72 and 3,000 T-80 tanks go? Even Ukraine "only" claims ~2,400 tank kills. Russia shouldn't be anywhere near to needing to milk their stocks of T-62 shitboxes.

(Obviously they were just made up and/or sold for scrap to buy yachts lol)

OddObserver
Apr 3, 2009
^^^
There are repairing some T-80s as well, just elsewhere. Dunno about T-72s, but those are the most likely to be cannibalized for parts, as the most widely used model.

cinci zoo sniper posted:

Russian government has placed an order for 800 modernisations of T-62 tanks. Not entirely clear if we’re talking about the T-62M, or the new T-62 modernisation kit showcased 2 months ago. https://rg.ru/amp/2022/08/15/radikalnuiu-modernizaciiu-t-62-vpervye-pokazali-na-armii-2022.html

The article about modernisation procurement suggests the latter. In any case, they’re saying that the factory is working in 2 shifts, and it would take them 3 years to chew through this order, unless they go to working in 3 shifts and modernise the factory floor as well, which they’re looking into. The source for the article is a federal parliament member, who also said that the were is going to drag out. https://newizv.ru/news/society/12-10-2022/zabaykalskiy-tankovyy-zavod-poluchil-goszakaz-na-remont-i-modernizatsiyu-800-tankov

https://twitter.com/ian_matveev/status/1580216195546243072

The ones on the picture are already (at least partly towards) T-62M, you can tell 'cause they have the "Brezhnev's Eyebrows" additional armor pads on the turret front.
(This is the only tank variant modification I am capable of identifying)

OddObserver fucked around with this message at 23:19 on Oct 12, 2022

cinci zoo sniper
Mar 15, 2013




slurm posted:

I'm just trying to be very clear on this because 24h + escalator is a steep punishment for something that can just kind of be blundered into. So the crane barge/bridge can be discussed as a target so long as the crew etc. isn't mentioned, or do we have to say something like "as long as the crew is ok" every time to signify our intent?

24h+ramp is specific to the poster - but that’s the extent of what I’m going to say about the technical decision making here. Someone making their first post in D&D like that would’ve gotten 6-12 hours from me for this.

Regarding the expected use of language, you don’t need to invoke any shibboleths to the tune of “as long as the crew is okay”. Just don’t say things like “those civilians are a legitimate military target”, which will have me develop a suspicion of bloodlust - especially when it’s corroborated by you devising a particular, arguably graphic, method of delivery, describing the overall opportunity in no less certain terms than “great”.

Of course, there’s a line to cross there as well, as dejectedly salivating over hitting a hospital or some such won’t speak highly of your motives, but the bridge is an explicitly dual-use piece of Russia’s settler-colonial infrastructure in Crimea. Undoubtedly, having that bridge inoperable throughout winter would cause grief to people living in Crimea, but the bridge has explicitly contributed to endless grief in mainland Ukraine as well, and I therefore cannot characterise a desire to see it gone as an arrant iniquity. The matter of it is simply yet another problematic consequence of Russia’s brass-necked imperial ambition in Ukraine.

Charliegrs
Aug 10, 2009

sean10mm posted:

Where did those reserve stocks of 7,000 T-72 and 3,000 T-80 tanks go? Even Ukraine "only" claims ~2,400 tank kills. Russia shouldn't be anywhere near to needing to milk their stocks of T-62 shitboxes.

(Obviously they were just made up and/or sold for scrap to buy yachts lol)

I think it was Perun that did a video about Russias tank reserves. Satellite photos of various depots showed lots of tanks of all different types in various stages of decay, many of them in really bad shape. So it's quite possible that Russia actually has more T62s in better shape if they were modernized more recently than rusted out hulks of T72s.

Sucrose
Dec 9, 2009
I think we should at least stop using the terms “suicide boat,” “suicide drone” etc, because those terms are really goddamn stupid and confusing and I wish the media would stop using the latter. Nobody is committing suicide. Even “kamikaze drone” which I’ve seen the media use seems questionable. It’s an airborne loitering munition. It’s an explosive drone.

I know this just seems like stupid semantics, but I was skimming the thread and 100% thought that one poster was suggesting the Ukrainians blow up the bridge repair machines with a suicide bomber.

TheKingofSprings
Oct 9, 2012
I find it very difficult to call the people who would be directly facilitating their countrymen going to kill the people in another country either civilians or, particularly, innocent

Obviously I don’t want them to die but maybe they could also just choose not to work on the bridge

cinci zoo sniper
Mar 15, 2013




TheKingofSprings posted:

I find it very difficult to call the people who would be directly facilitating their countrymen going to kill the people in another country either civilians or, particularly, innocent

Obviously I don’t want them to die but maybe they could also just choose not to work on the bridge

The bridge repair tech who is a few missed salaries away from getting his home foreclosed on him is not going to take a moral stance on being offered to repair a bridge, that’s not really how real life works. Also, I would appreciate if you can refrain from using your alternative definitions of what counts as a civilian, or moralistic characterisation of words left unsaid, as far as your posting career in D&D is concerned.

Dirt5o8
Nov 6, 2008

EUGENE? Where's my fuckin' money, Eugene?

Ynglaur posted:

I'm actually not convinced US doctrinal changes will be glacial. It changed remarkably quickly in both the 1930s and 1970s, and was not necessarily driven solely off of its own experience. Parts have remained consistent (we still don't bother with any double-envelopment complexity), but the state of US doctrine has not been static.

I do agree that the operational and even tactical depth of the fight is vastly different now than even 20 years ago. A British general was on one of the podcasts (MWI, I think) discussing this fact. Units 50km from the line of contact need to exercise significant noise, light, and EM discipline if they want to survive; if it's not mobile, it dies; and even logistics assets need at least some armored protection.

I won't say that the U.S. can't shift gears quickly. I just think there needs to be the right catalyst and the right people in charge to start that change. I'm just not convinced the U.S. military is there yet but I'll stay open minded.

50KM sounds like a reasonable distance for the current generation of UAVs/Loitering Munitions. 50-150KM is what I think the deep fight will turn into.


Charliegrs posted:

I think another thing this war has shown is how limited NATO is in the area of anti aircraft defenses. Especially the US. I mean since the end of the cold war what has the US really had in their arsenal? Manpads like the stinger, which are limited in range and mainly useful against helicopters and low flying planes, and Patriot missiles which are big, complex and take a lot of time to train a crew to use. I guess this hasn't been much of an issue for the US since they just use their own aircraft and cruise missiles to take out the enemies airforce while they are on the ground. And 20 years of fighting enemies that don't even have an airforce has probably done little to prioritize development of new systems. And the NASAMS system seems to be pretty good but it doesn't look like the US has many in storage so it's been taking forever to get them sent to Ukraine.

I can't speak too much about ADA since I have literally zero experience there. I do know that the U.S. recognized this weakness years ago and made modernizing equipment and doctrine a major goal thru the next 2 decades.

Vincent Van Goatse
Nov 8, 2006

Enjoy every sandwich.

Smellrose

cinci zoo sniper posted:

The bridge repair tech who is a few missed salaries away from getting his home foreclosed on him is not going to take a moral stance on being offered to repair a bridge, that’s not really how real life works. Also, I would appreciate if you can refrain from using your alternative definitions of what counts as a civilian, or moralistic characterisation of words left unsaid, as far as your posting career in D&D is concerned.

Do we even know the composition of the Russian bridge repair crews? Are they government guys, military, private contractors? Not that it changes my opinion that Ukraine should knock down that stupid bridge in the way that kills the least amount of people.

slurm
Jul 28, 2022

by Hand Knit

Vincent Van Goatse posted:

Do we even know the composition of the Russian bridge repair crews? Are they government guys, military, private contractors? Not that it changes my opinion that Ukraine should knock down that stupid bridge in the way that kills the least amount of people.

Is there a meaningful distinction in Putin's Russia, where Putin is Russia?

(USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)

MrYenko
Jun 18, 2012

#2 isn't ALWAYS bad...

cinci zoo sniper posted:

Russian government has placed an order for 800 modernisations of T-62 tanks. Not entirely clear if we’re talking about the T-62M, or the new T-62 modernisation kit showcased 2 months ago. https://rg.ru/amp/2022/08/15/radikalnuiu-modernizaciiu-t-62-vpervye-pokazali-na-armii-2022.html

The article about modernisation procurement suggests the latter. In any case, they’re saying that the factory is working in 2 shifts, and it would take them 3 years to chew through this order, unless they go to working in 3 shifts and modernise the factory floor as well, which they’re looking into.

:lol:

So if they can find the manpower (which is clearly not a given,) they can modernize the loving T-62s the they have laying around in a year or two.

For those just tuning in, this is akin to the US dipping into M60 stocks (not even A3s, but OG M60s) to replenish M1A2 losses. I don’t think the US even has M60A3s kicking around anymore.

cinci zoo sniper
Mar 15, 2013




Vincent Van Goatse posted:

Do we even know the composition of the Russian bridge repair crews? Are they government guys, military, private contractors? Not that it changes my opinion that Ukraine should knock down that stupid bridge in the way that kills the least amount of people.

We know that both public and private companies are participating in it. Not sure about the military engineers specifically. Speaking of the repairs, current best-case estimates being aired in Russian discourse are 1.5-3 months, and fairly high profile construction professionals are saying that this would get the bridge back into operation the shortest way possible, not to have it work safe and sound for the decades to come. In terms of damages, there seem to be some pillar cracks that they've supposedly fixed, near the top I presume, with diver work on going to figure out if there's any "deep" damage in the support pillars.

cinci zoo sniper fucked around with this message at 00:17 on Oct 13, 2022

Goatse James Bond
Mar 28, 2010

If you see me posting please remind me that I have Charlie Work in the reports forum to do instead

Ynglaur posted:

If India and China want to be seen as global leaders, they need to start having opinions on questions such as "should one country genocide another country".

I don't think you really want to hear Modi's opinion on genocide

Zedsdeadbaby
Jun 14, 2008

You have been called out, in the ways of old.

The X-man cometh posted:

China is currently genociding the Uyghurs and the Prime Minister of India looked the other way when he was a provincial governor and 3000 Muslims were slaughtered in his province.

Modi's clown hindutva bullshit is messing my city (leicester) up right now, I have zero love for him and his insane nonsense. India and China will always be bad faith actors as far as I'm concerned.

Charliegrs
Aug 10, 2009
So do countries like India, Iran, and Belarus just hate Ukraine? Because I don't get why they are literally helping Russia genocide their country. Do they actually hate Ukraine or is it like an ideological thing where might makes right to these countries? Or is it just simple dollars and sense? (India needs oil, Iran likes to sell weapons etc).

cinci zoo sniper
Mar 15, 2013




Charliegrs posted:

So do countries like India, Iran, and Belarus just hate Ukraine? Because I don't get why they are literally helping Russia genocide their country. Do they actually hate Ukraine or is it like an ideological thing where might makes right to these countries? Or is it just simple dollars and sense? (India needs oil, Iran likes to sell weapons etc).

It’s mostly just business, I’d say. I don’t think that Belarus has it out for Ukraine directly, or that countries like India or Iran care about it at all.

dr_rat
Jun 4, 2001

Charliegrs posted:

So do countries like India, Iran, and Belarus just hate Ukraine? Because I don't get why they are literally helping Russia genocide their country. Do they actually hate Ukraine or is it like an ideological thing where might makes right to these countries? Or is it just simple dollars and sense? (India needs oil, Iran likes to sell weapons etc).

The Belarus goverment is in power basically with the help of Russia, India in the past has had a good relationship with Russia, and it's government is sort of keen on the idea of a "multi-polar" world in which there's not just one global political power ("US/Western powers are consider a singular power in this"). Iran just doesn't like the US very much, for some historic reasons, but also their continued support of Saudi Arabia. So simplified, but that's the sort of basics.

So yeah, not much against Ukraine itself (although not sure if there is some History between Belarus/Belarus government and Ukraine, but seems it's more just pressure from Putin).

dr_rat fucked around with this message at 00:46 on Oct 13, 2022

the holy poopacy
May 16, 2009

hey! check this out
Fun Shoe

Charliegrs posted:

So do countries like India, Iran, and Belarus just hate Ukraine? Because I don't get why they are literally helping Russia genocide their country. Do they actually hate Ukraine or is it like an ideological thing where might makes right to these countries? Or is it just simple dollars and sense? (India needs oil, Iran likes to sell weapons etc).

Belarus is firmly a Russian puppet and its foreign policy is effectively an extension of Russia's.

Iran has been sanctioned to hell and back by most of the west and Russia is one of the few large markets open to it.

India has a long history of good faith cooperation from the USSR and Russia and a long history of colonial oppression from Western Europe, so they're willing to stay on the fence for this one.

Telsa Cola
Aug 19, 2011

No... this is all wrong... this whole operation has just gone completely sidewaysface

Charliegrs posted:

So do countries like India, Iran, and Belarus just hate Ukraine? Because I don't get why they are literally helping Russia genocide their country. Do they actually hate Ukraine or is it like an ideological thing where might makes right to these countries? Or is it just simple dollars and sense? (India needs oil, Iran likes to sell weapons etc).

It's politics, basically. There are complicated reasons why those countries are supporting and or ambivalent about the whole thing that has to deal with a combination of decades of international relations between said countries and Russia, economic reasons, and internal political reasons.

Orthanc6
Nov 4, 2009

Charliegrs posted:

So do countries like India, Iran, and Belarus just hate Ukraine? Because I don't get why they are literally helping Russia genocide their country. Do they actually hate Ukraine or is it like an ideological thing where might makes right to these countries? Or is it just simple dollars and sense? (India needs oil, Iran likes to sell weapons etc).

Belarus is attached to Russia at the hip, and the US has isolated Iran for decades so they don't have anyone else on the world stage who will really accept them. As has been mentioned, Russia has given India a lot of support, but India does still have a lot of options so they're fence sitting as strategically as they can at the moment.

Anyone else on the fence or openly supporting Russia I suspect is more because the US has messed with them too much so out of principle they don't want to be on the same side. See; Cuba and Vietnam, abstaining but not directly supporting.

mobby_6kl
Aug 9, 2009

by Fluffdaddy

Charliegrs posted:

So do countries like India, Iran, and Belarus just hate Ukraine? Because I don't get why they are literally helping Russia genocide their country. Do they actually hate Ukraine or is it like an ideological thing where might makes right to these countries? Or is it just simple dollars and sense? (India needs oil, Iran likes to sell weapons etc).
They just like russia and want their protection of when they do horrible poo poo. Well except Belarus, Luka probably just has no choice now or get annexed/couped.

Although I've tried talking to some Indians (on the web obviously) and they do seem to have a handy list of every time they think Ukraine wronged them somehow. Like, I kid you not, the 1998 UN vote to condemn nuclear testing

quote:

Prior to its adoption, separate votes were taken on preambular paragraph 2 and operative paragraph 1. The second preambular paragraph, by which the Assembly bore in mind recent nuclear tests that challenged the international non-proliferation regime, was adopted by a recorded vote of 159 in favour to 1 against (India), with 3 abstentions (Bhutan, Israel, Pakistan) (Annex XXI).
https://press.un.org/en/1998/19981204.ga9526.html


E: A few years ago in South Africa I met one of their MPs at the airport. I still have her business card somewhere, I'll try to reach out and see what's up. I'm sure she has no control over foreign policy but it could be interesting to hear the actual thinking and maybe find an angle to move the opinion a bit.

mobby_6kl fucked around with this message at 00:54 on Oct 13, 2022

Discendo Vox
Mar 21, 2013

We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.
I recall that around March there was discussion of how a significant portion of Russia's foreign-facing propaganda apparatus was reoriented away from "Western" targets and toward potential ally populaces in Iran and India. That may also play a factor.

Herstory Begins Now
Aug 5, 2003
SOME REALLY TEDIOUS DUMB SHIT THAT SUCKS ASS TO READ ->>

Discendo Vox posted:

I recall that around March there was discussion of how a significant portion of Russia's foreign-facing propaganda apparatus was reoriented away from "Western" targets and toward potential ally populaces in Iran and India. That may also play a factor.

factor maybe but iran and india being closely aligned with russia is nothing new whatsoever. Iran just spent the last decade fighting along side Russia to prop up Assad's regime (against western backed forces, sound familiar?) and India's affinity for Russia is the better part of a century old

Quixzlizx
Jan 7, 2007

Leperflesh posted:

There's no bright line you can draw between definitely military and definitely non-military when a country is at war, it's just chains of connections. So I don't want you to feel like I'm attacking your ethics in particular, you're making a familiar argument that many people would agree with. There are degrees of separation between people acting within a nation that is at war and the people prosecuting that war that if you follow completely, ultimately drags everyone into the status of "legitimate target", including people growing the food that feeds the army, people who voted for the guy who is doing the war, whatever. I'm sure we'd both agree that voters and farmers are too far removed to be legitimate targets... so we're just not landing on the same fuzzy gray area in the same place.

For me, I draw a line that would protect civilians repairing infrastructure used by civilians, even if it's dual-use.

That argument aside, a post that amounts to "they should kill those civilians" is gross, while "I hope they find a way to keep that bridge out of commission" is not, even if they both imply that civilians could be killed - there's a difference in expressed intent, bloodthirstiness, etc.

I would respond that the only reason that particular bridge exists is to assist in illegally annexing and colonizing Crimea, along with the additional territories they claim to have annexed.

It's not just some random rail bridge in Russian territory that also happens to transport military equipment.

cinci zoo sniper
Mar 15, 2013




https://twitter.com/chriso_wiki/status/1580303771208339456

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1580303771208339456.html

Edit:

https://twitter.com/hallbenjamin/status/1580287358058270720

cinci zoo sniper fucked around with this message at 01:31 on Oct 13, 2022

mlmp08
Jul 11, 2004

Prepare for my priapic projectile's exalted penetration
Nap Ghost
Without contributing to derail, anyone who wants to read up on it can get the free PDF https://shop.icrc.org/international-humanitarian-law-answers-to-your-questions-print-fr.html

It gives pretty plain english (and many other languages!), education that troops and staffs can understand without being lawyers or specialists.

Leperflesh
May 17, 2007

I can imagine some reasons why both the chinese and indian governments do not want to help establish a record of harshly opposing the annexation of "disputed territories"

OddObserver
Apr 3, 2009

Leperflesh posted:

I can imagine some reasons why both the chinese and indian governments do not want to help establish a record of harshly opposing the annexation of "disputed territories"

Pretty sure they didn't sign multiple treaties recognizing those territories as non-disputed, though.

Flappy Bert
Dec 11, 2011

I have seen the light, and it is a string



I'm somewhat shocked that this seems... more or less plausible for a black bag job?

cinci zoo sniper
Mar 15, 2013




OddObserver posted:

Pretty sure they didn't sign multiple treaties recognizing those territories as non-disputed, though.

The thing is that supporting “secession” of any of the 5 involved regions of Ukraine would technically mean supporting the notion of Taiwan’s independence. From this perspective, it’s a very thorny issue for Xi to engage, a “tails - you win, heads - I lose” affair.

Cpt_Obvious
Jun 18, 2007

cinci zoo sniper posted:

The thing is that supporting “secession” of any of the 5 involved regions of Ukraine would technically mean supporting the notion of Taiwan’s independence. From this perspective, it’s a very thorny issue for Xi to engage, a “tails - you win, heads - I lose” affair.

Those are very different political situations. The official stance of the current Ukrainian government is that they are a separate country from Russia while the official stance of the Taiwanese government is that they are part of the same country as mainland China but that the Taiwanese government rule the whole thing (and mongolia). One is a conflict over borders while the other is an internal power struggle.

Morrow
Oct 31, 2010

Cpt_Obvious posted:

Those are very different political situations. The official stance of the current Ukrainian government is that they are a separate country from Russia while the official stance of the Taiwanese government is that they are part of the same country as mainland China but that the Taiwanese government rule the whole thing (and outer mongolia). One is a conflict over borders while the other is an internal power struggle.

The opposite: op meant that recognizing DL(ZK?)NR would be like recognizing Taiwan.

Cpt_Obvious
Jun 18, 2007

Morrow posted:

The opposite: op meant that recognizing DL(ZK?)NR would be like recognizing Taiwan.

O I C

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Senor Tron
May 26, 2006


TheKingofSprings posted:

I find it very difficult to call the people who would be directly facilitating their countrymen going to kill the people in another country either civilians or, particularly, innocent

Obviously I don’t want them to die but maybe they could also just choose not to work on the bridge

This is a really dangerous line of thought to head down. At the extreme ends (not saying you took it that far) you get things like people saying the 9/11 attacks were valid because they targeted the economic system that generates the money the US used to pay for its overseas adventures.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5