16 ms·

So many people cheering on the "inevitable" nuclear escalation. I wonder why. For those of you cheering it on, are you personally suicidal? An accelerationist?

So many people cheering on the "inevitable" nuclear escalation. I wonder why. For those of you cheering it on, are you personally suicidal? An accelerationist? Do you wish others to die (maybe you're one of those "humanity is a plague" types)? Do you live far away from any cities and thus feel safe? I don't understand.

nemothekid 5y ago
I think there is a latent apathy in the United States; or a fervor to "shake things up" (not unlike people voting in Trump to see what would happen). I have a feeling that things aren't really that stable at all.
- scotty79 5y ago
  USA is just a nation that invents their enemies and imbues them narratively with demonic power which they are later really too scared of to efficiently act upon in any manner.
  - imtringued 5y ago
    Europe had no common enemy a few months ago. European countries wanted to subconsciously tear each other apart. Now Putin has created a common scapegoat. As long as nukes don't fly, the west is actually better off than before.
    - scotty79 5y ago
      Actually there's no scenario where Europe or the planet ends up better of as a result of this. All of that will increase resources wasted for militarization, lower the efficiencies of the economies and delays action on climate change. And all of that is the best case scenario. Europe is now (possibly) united, but only in suffering.
- noduerme 5y ago
  I think this is true across the entire political spectrum in the US. Our social media reads as a mix of apathy, nihilism, signaling and historical ignorance. In other words, many of the people who by all rights should be happy with their comfortable lives in the wealthiest country on earth have somehow decided the world is a terrible place, everything is terrible, it's all going to hell, so let's just pull whatever thread seems likely to piss someone off who's got it slightly better than me and see what unravels. Americans are ingrates.
dimal 5y ago
Wait. What? People are cheering on the idea of nuclear conflict? I missed that. Links?
- lamp987 5y ago
  Plenty of people call for NATO enforcing no-fly-zone over Ukraine, including Ukrainian president.
  - gambiting 5y ago
    I do, because I believe we should call Putin's bluff. He wouldn't dare to shoot down NATO planes above Ukraine and would have to back down. In line with that, I don't believe NATO planes shooting down russian planes above Ukraine or vice versa would lead to a nuclear escalation.
    - bombcar 5y ago
      Are you sure the world would react the way you expect to a NATO shoot down? To a nuke in Poland? Maybe our side isn’t willing to roast 100s of millions of Russians if push came to shove.
      - gambiting 5y ago
        I don't know how you arrived from "shooting a plane above Ukraine" to a "nuke in Poland". And no, of course we don't have any guarantees either way. But just like Putin puts his troops in Ukraine and says "what are you going to do about it", I believe we should do the same thing back - impose a no fly zone above Ukraine and call his idiotic bluff, he knows what attacking NATO would mean for him too.
        armitron 5y ago
        Normally, I'd find your comment amusing, but I know there are policy folks out there with decision-making power that are pushing similar utterly idiotic narratives. That's very scary.
credit_guy 5y ago
I'm one of those who thinks the likelihood of Putin using a nuke is quite high. I don't cheer that. Once the nuclear threshold is crossed, there's a non-negligible chance the escalation leads to full-blown nuclear war, and since I live in the center of one of largest cities in the US, my family and I could face at the minimum the loss of our home, and obviously, we can also all die. I certainly don't like that. My lease renewal won't come for quite a few months, but I'm seriously considering moving to the suburbs, depending on what happens in this period. But why do you get the impression that some people would be happy to see a nuclear war happening?
- scotty79 5y ago
  I think that's the point where NATO should show restraint. To not respond to nuke with a nuke. But before that, given the apparent weakness of Russian conventional army NATO should show no restraint and pay no attention to a single word out of Putins mouth. Basically demand from Russian system of power to deliver war criminal mr. Vladimir Putin to Hague before talks can be resumed and Russia may have any hope of loosening economic sanctions.
  - politician 5y ago
    If NATO fails to respond in kind or to escalate, then the deterrence policy has failed and everyone will be free to blackmail the West. NATO cannot show weakness in this regard. Please, think it through.
    - scotty79 5y ago
      Restraining yourself from using your most powerful weapon especially if enemy uses his is not a sign of weakness but of strength.
      - politician 5y ago
        If MAD collapses, you won’t be around to say the same things from the smoldering radioactive ruins of your home town. Loss of the ability or will to retaliate at scale means death on a vast scale. Those that survive face demilitarization and slavery, forever. MAD has protected the peace for 70 years. Going around saying that it’s best to take the morale high ground is a nice sound bite, but it is not reality. Your freedoms and lifestyle is paid for by the mutual unwillingness of a handful of governments to not destroy the Earth. This balance has been in place 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year for 70 years. When you’re out at movies, playing soccer with your kids, or protesting some injustice, the only reason you’re able to do those things are because there are another group of far more serious people ready to glass the Russians and the Chinese if they try anything.
ip26 5y ago
They may simply be cheering that we have not chosen appeasement.
- another_why 5y ago
  In this situation it's the same thing. Seeing only the desirable outcome without considering the consequences
nsonha 5y ago
Because the media keep saying that word, someone should tell them to shut up. And maybe a Russian speaker could tell me if Putin did actually say "nuclear" because it sounds like he just said "deterrent forces". And then there are all these batshit crazy rumours about them destroying nuclear power plants or holding it hostage. Why the fuck would Putin do that?
- bigDinosaur 5y ago
  'Deterrent forces' are understood to be a nuclear threat. If you do not mean a nuclear threat, then you explicitly say so.
  - nsonha 5y ago
    > if you do not mean a nuclear threat, then you explicitly say so. That's not how people make threats. They are ambiguous for their own reasons. The media is supposed to report what's said, then people who know these things will tell what Putin actually means. The media jump the gun and put words in people's mounth is highly unethical, given the stake.
    - bigDinosaur 5y ago
      Yes, and that's my point. That's why 'deterrence' is understood to be nuclear. If someone threatened you with 'dark consequences' would you understand that to mean they were going to egg your house, or something worse?
      - nsonha 5y ago
        I don't care what you think it means because your opinion on this matter is wordless. My point which you don't seem to get is that the media should report honestly, then opinion men like you can jump the gun and say nuclear. It's not the media's job to do that. Deterrence isn't synonymous to nuclear why do I have to explain this. If you aim normal missiles to someone that's deterrence too.
3s 5y ago
I think there has to be a component of “jadedness” in this attitude, for lack of a better term. It feels as though there are so many problems in the world (income inequality, climate change, covid, homelessness, political polarization, and now the very real possibility of a nuclear war). The world doesn’t feel like a place we can save anymore, which I think can be a driver of the “bring it on” attitude you mention, not unlike the Monty python scene with the defeated knight…
smegger001 5y ago
I am not cheering it one but I think it may be sadly inevitable, and it scares the shit out of me. Putin thinks he can't back down with out loosing face and looking weak which from his prospective is a danger to him from both internal and external threats.
ihatelife222 5y ago
I'll chime in, though I am sure Dang will ban because he doesn't appreciate honesty. I want humanity to perish. Abused my whole life, but promised my college tuition would be paid for by parents. That was a lie so I have no family and 110k in debt. 15 years out of college and I still can't get a development job. Been working as a Baker most of my life. I saw an ex girlfiend become big time designer at Microsoft with a portfolio of stick figures. An old friend with no high school diploma get a job at Facebook. Meanwhile, fuck me. I have designed and developed my own apps, started my own businesses, learned to fly a plane, and earned a black belt. Meanwhile, I can't convince an HR person with a sociology degree to notice anything (which why am I even talking to someone that isn't in the same field as me?). Everyone who claimed to love me has back stabbed me emotionally and financially.I am half Mexican and white and fit in with absolutely no one. I have experienced extreme racism my whole life, but I look white so no one gives a fuck. Individualism makes absolutely no sense to me. Humanity doesn't really seem to be working together towards anything so I don't see a future worth living for. People seem to hate space exploration, so why bother continuing. Ultimately, I was probably going to kill myself when the government starts garnishing my wages since I am not paying back my college loans and don't intend to. I would rather die that be an indentured servant for something I never would have done if it wasn't promised to be paid for. So a nuclear strike sounds way more fun than sleeping pills. It's incredibly selfish, but most of you are spoiled and privileged that you think the majority of people have time to think about pronouns, which I find far more selfish of an act. So yeah, I would love to see humanity perish.
- dang 5y ago
  I appreciate honesty very much, including yours. I'm sorry that it has been so hard for you and wish you everything you need. There are a bunch of moderation issues raised by posts like this, but none of them have to do with not caring about the people who are writing them, and that certainly includes you.
stjohnswarts 5y ago
I haven't seen anyone "cheering it on" but I have seen many people point out that it isn't a 0% chance endgame and we should all be aware of how unstable Putin has gotten as he ages and sees his dream of a united USSR becoming more remote
imtringued 5y ago
I obviously don't want any of this nonsense, however I personally believe that we deserve it. We failed to get along, now we must pay the price. World peace is trivial and inevitable, yet we mess up all the time. Every single person subconsciously votes against world peace. Some votes may count more than others but ultimately it's not a tiny minority that wants to see conflict. It's absolutely everyone. I've stopped believing all conspiracy theories that involve small groups of elites running the show. Sure, there is always going to be a handful of people at the top but this is true for everything. The elites may benefit disproportionately, however, they benefit precisely because the vast majority support them directly or indirectly. Sure, you can make some people a head shorter but the people that granted them power aren't gone. For Russia the trail is pretty obvious. We buy Russian oil and directly support Putin. Even if you get rid of Putin, someone else will take his place because we still want to buy the oil after the war.

nemothekid 5y ago

I think there is a latent apathy in the United States; or a fervor to "shake things up" (not unlike people voting in Trump to see what would happen). I have a feeling that things aren't really that stable at all.

scotty79 5y ago
USA is just a nation that invents their enemies and imbues them narratively with demonic power which they are later really too scared of to efficiently act upon in any manner.
- imtringued 5y ago
  Europe had no common enemy a few months ago. European countries wanted to subconsciously tear each other apart. Now Putin has created a common scapegoat. As long as nukes don't fly, the west is actually better off than before.
  - scotty79 5y ago
    Actually there's no scenario where Europe or the planet ends up better of as a result of this. All of that will increase resources wasted for militarization, lower the efficiencies of the economies and delays action on climate change. And all of that is the best case scenario. Europe is now (possibly) united, but only in suffering.
noduerme 5y ago
I think this is true across the entire political spectrum in the US. Our social media reads as a mix of apathy, nihilism, signaling and historical ignorance. In other words, many of the people who by all rights should be happy with their comfortable lives in the wealthiest country on earth have somehow decided the world is a terrible place, everything is terrible, it's all going to hell, so let's just pull whatever thread seems likely to piss someone off who's got it slightly better than me and see what unravels. Americans are ingrates.

dimal 5y ago

Wait. What? People are cheering on the idea of nuclear conflict? I missed that. Links?

lamp987 5y ago
Plenty of people call for NATO enforcing no-fly-zone over Ukraine, including Ukrainian president.
- gambiting 5y ago
  I do, because I believe we should call Putin's bluff. He wouldn't dare to shoot down NATO planes above Ukraine and would have to back down. In line with that, I don't believe NATO planes shooting down russian planes above Ukraine or vice versa would lead to a nuclear escalation.
  - bombcar 5y ago
    Are you sure the world would react the way you expect to a NATO shoot down? To a nuke in Poland? Maybe our side isn’t willing to roast 100s of millions of Russians if push came to shove.
    - gambiting 5y ago
      I don't know how you arrived from "shooting a plane above Ukraine" to a "nuke in Poland". And no, of course we don't have any guarantees either way. But just like Putin puts his troops in Ukraine and says "what are you going to do about it", I believe we should do the same thing back - impose a no fly zone above Ukraine and call his idiotic bluff, he knows what attacking NATO would mean for him too.
      - armitron 5y ago
        Normally, I'd find your comment amusing, but I know there are policy folks out there with decision-making power that are pushing similar utterly idiotic narratives. That's very scary.

credit_guy 5y ago

I'm one of those who thinks the likelihood of Putin using a nuke is quite high. I don't cheer that. Once the nuclear threshold is crossed, there's a non-negligible chance the escalation leads to full-blown nuclear war, and since I live in the center of one of largest cities in the US, my family and I could face at the minimum the loss of our home, and obviously, we can also all die. I certainly don't like that. My lease renewal won't come for quite a few months, but I'm seriously considering moving to the suburbs, depending on what happens in this period. But why do you get the impression that some people would be happy to see a nuclear war happening?

scotty79 5y ago
I think that's the point where NATO should show restraint. To not respond to nuke with a nuke. But before that, given the apparent weakness of Russian conventional army NATO should show no restraint and pay no attention to a single word out of Putins mouth. Basically demand from Russian system of power to deliver war criminal mr. Vladimir Putin to Hague before talks can be resumed and Russia may have any hope of loosening economic sanctions.
- politician 5y ago
  If NATO fails to respond in kind or to escalate, then the deterrence policy has failed and everyone will be free to blackmail the West. NATO cannot show weakness in this regard. Please, think it through.
  - scotty79 5y ago
    Restraining yourself from using your most powerful weapon especially if enemy uses his is not a sign of weakness but of strength.
    - politician 5y ago
      If MAD collapses, you won’t be around to say the same things from the smoldering radioactive ruins of your home town. Loss of the ability or will to retaliate at scale means death on a vast scale. Those that survive face demilitarization and slavery, forever. MAD has protected the peace for 70 years. Going around saying that it’s best to take the morale high ground is a nice sound bite, but it is not reality. Your freedoms and lifestyle is paid for by the mutual unwillingness of a handful of governments to not destroy the Earth. This balance has been in place 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year for 70 years. When you’re out at movies, playing soccer with your kids, or protesting some injustice, the only reason you’re able to do those things are because there are another group of far more serious people ready to glass the Russians and the Chinese if they try anything.

ip26 5y ago

They may simply be cheering that we have not chosen appeasement.

another_why 5y ago
In this situation it's the same thing. Seeing only the desirable outcome without considering the consequences

nsonha 5y ago

Because the media keep saying that word, someone should tell them to shut up. And maybe a Russian speaker could tell me if Putin did actually say "nuclear" because it sounds like he just said "deterrent forces". And then there are all these batshit crazy rumours about them destroying nuclear power plants or holding it hostage. Why the fuck would Putin do that?

bigDinosaur 5y ago
'Deterrent forces' are understood to be a nuclear threat. If you do not mean a nuclear threat, then you explicitly say so.
- nsonha 5y ago
  > if you do not mean a nuclear threat, then you explicitly say so. That's not how people make threats. They are ambiguous for their own reasons. The media is supposed to report what's said, then people who know these things will tell what Putin actually means. The media jump the gun and put words in people's mounth is highly unethical, given the stake.
  - bigDinosaur 5y ago
    Yes, and that's my point. That's why 'deterrence' is understood to be nuclear. If someone threatened you with 'dark consequences' would you understand that to mean they were going to egg your house, or something worse?
    - nsonha 5y ago
      I don't care what you think it means because your opinion on this matter is wordless. My point which you don't seem to get is that the media should report honestly, then opinion men like you can jump the gun and say nuclear. It's not the media's job to do that. Deterrence isn't synonymous to nuclear why do I have to explain this. If you aim normal missiles to someone that's deterrence too.

3s 5y ago

I think there has to be a component of “jadedness” in this attitude, for lack of a better term. It feels as though there are so many problems in the world (income inequality, climate change, covid, homelessness, political polarization, and now the very real possibility of a nuclear war). The world doesn’t feel like a place we can save anymore, which I think can be a driver of the “bring it on” attitude you mention, not unlike the Monty python scene with the defeated knight…

smegger001 5y ago

I am not cheering it one but I think it may be sadly inevitable, and it scares the shit out of me. Putin thinks he can't back down with out loosing face and looking weak which from his prospective is a danger to him from both internal and external threats.

ihatelife222 5y ago

I'll chime in, though I am sure Dang will ban because he doesn't appreciate honesty. I want humanity to perish. Abused my whole life, but promised my college tuition would be paid for by parents. That was a lie so I have no family and 110k in debt. 15 years out of college and I still can't get a development job. Been working as a Baker most of my life. I saw an ex girlfiend become big time designer at Microsoft with a portfolio of stick figures. An old friend with no high school diploma get a job at Facebook. Meanwhile, fuck me. I have designed and developed my own apps, started my own businesses, learned to fly a plane, and earned a black belt. Meanwhile, I can't convince an HR person with a sociology degree to notice anything (which why am I even talking to someone that isn't in the same field as me?). Everyone who claimed to love me has back stabbed me emotionally and financially.I am half Mexican and white and fit in with absolutely no one. I have experienced extreme racism my whole life, but I look white so no one gives a fuck. Individualism makes absolutely no sense to me. Humanity doesn't really seem to be working together towards anything so I don't see a future worth living for. People seem to hate space exploration, so why bother continuing. Ultimately, I was probably going to kill myself when the government starts garnishing my wages since I am not paying back my college loans and don't intend to. I would rather die that be an indentured servant for something I never would have done if it wasn't promised to be paid for. So a nuclear strike sounds way more fun than sleeping pills. It's incredibly selfish, but most of you are spoiled and privileged that you think the majority of people have time to think about pronouns, which I find far more selfish of an act. So yeah, I would love to see humanity perish.

dang 5y ago
I appreciate honesty very much, including yours. I'm sorry that it has been so hard for you and wish you everything you need. There are a bunch of moderation issues raised by posts like this, but none of them have to do with not caring about the people who are writing them, and that certainly includes you.

stjohnswarts 5y ago

I haven't seen anyone "cheering it on" but I have seen many people point out that it isn't a 0% chance endgame and we should all be aware of how unstable Putin has gotten as he ages and sees his dream of a united USSR becoming more remote

imtringued 5y ago

I obviously don't want any of this nonsense, however I personally believe that we deserve it. We failed to get along, now we must pay the price. World peace is trivial and inevitable, yet we mess up all the time. Every single person subconsciously votes against world peace. Some votes may count more than others but ultimately it's not a tiny minority that wants to see conflict. It's absolutely everyone. I've stopped believing all conspiracy theories that involve small groups of elites running the show. Sure, there is always going to be a handful of people at the top but this is true for everything. The elites may benefit disproportionately, however, they benefit precisely because the vast majority support them directly or indirectly. Sure, you can make some people a head shorter but the people that granted them power aren't gone. For Russia the trail is pretty obvious. We buy Russian oil and directly support Putin. Even if you get rid of Putin, someone else will take his place because we still want to buy the oil after the war.