7 ms·

The side by side satellite images really show you the devastating effect of the Russian bombings. It looks like a hurricane or tsunami hit the land. How is thi

by tiku 5y ago

The side by side satellite images really show you the devastating effect of the Russian bombings. It looks like a hurricane or tsunami hit the land. How is this handled after the war, the aggressor should pay for the damages but we can't really force them.

tomjen3 5y ago
We should pay them out the siezed Russian assets. That won't be enough, but it will be a start.
- gruez 5y ago
  What "siezed Russian assets" are we talking about here? The russian centeral bank deposits held with the federal reserve? Foreign assets of russian companies? Assets of russian "oligarchs"?
  - emteycz 5y ago
    Yes
    - gruez 5y ago
      Really? The last item 'Assets of russian "oligarchs"' seems like a massive violation of due process. It's basically civil forfeiture 2.0.
      - heartofadog 5y ago
        War is, by definition, a "massive violation of due process". I get your point (that ethics and law matter -- including basic principles of law where international law is not codified), and on a certain level this is valid. But historically speaking, once things ratchet up to a certain level and scope of barbarity (as we are seeing unfold in real time) -- it's just not realistic to sit and wait for a "fair" solution to emerge (in the near term or ever). People are going to be hurt (and treated unfairly) one way or another. It's just a question of who is going to take the hit, and in what form. So if it's at least arguably plausible that measures that inconvenience a few individuals in the top .1 percent net-worth-wise might bring this insane situation to a close sooner rather than later -- I can go with that. And there's no reason we can't "rub" a bit of due process into the situation -- by saying "OK sure, you can file an appeal, and have a shot at getting your toys and baubles back -- after Russia returns to its borders, and Putin has been decisively removed from power."
      - ChuckNorris89 5y ago
        >It's basically civil forfeiture 2.0. That's .... the point.
        gruez 5y ago
        "we're going to violate people's rights, but don't worry because we promise that we'll only be using it against Bad People. You're not a Bad People supporter/sympathizer, are you? Yeah that's what we thought."
      - CamperBob2 5y ago
        gruez 5y ago
        >(You do realize these aren't US citizens we're talking about, correct? You realize that due process isn't something that's reserved for US citizens, right? > These are Putin's economic hitmen. Fuck them. Note that I objected to the lack of due processes, not to seizing their assets. Until they have been granted due process, they're merely accused of being "Putin's economic hitmen".
        PostOnce 5y ago
        Consider this an arrest, rather than imprisonment. We don't have to prove a man with blood on his hands is the murderer before we arrest him, that comes later. People are dying every day -- obviously lawsuits and criminal trials take years in complex cases. A lot more people would be dead by then. Our goal in the immediate term is to stop the war. One of the strongest non-kinetic tools we have for that is these sanctions. When the war ends, then we can figure out due process... for these guys hundred million dollar yachts. I'm sure they can live without a cruise to a resort island in the mean time while we try to save lives in Mariupol.
        gruez 5y ago
        > Consider this an arrest, rather than imprisonment. We don't have to prove a man with blood on his hands is the murderer before we arrest him, that comes later. OP isn't talking about freezing the funds, OP is literally asking for the funds to be redistributed right now.
      - sorokod 5y ago
        All sorts of things get violated during war time - what due process would you have?
        gruez 5y ago
        The willingness of people to upend civil rights and due process in times of "emergency" never creases to horrify me. Please remember that the japanese internment camps were basically justified using similar lines of thought.
        sorokod 5y ago
        An interesting use of double quotes around emergency, given the topic. Since it will be governments (maybe) seizing those assets and not members of HN - would that be sufficient to not horrify you?
        gruez 5y ago
        >Since it will be governments (maybe) seizing those assets and not members of HN - would that be sufficient to not horrify you? I'm not arabic/muslim so the chances of me being targeted by anti-terror regulation is probably fairly low. Yet, I'm still against them. This comes to mind: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came_...#Text https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came_...#Text
        ModernMech 5y ago
        I think it's pretty rich to link to that poem given the context. It's a poem about the rise of authoritarianism, a poem Putin could have mistaken for a blueprint rather than a warning. Today as people speak out in Russia they are arrested, and that insulates Putin to believe he has the power and right to invade foreign countries. To use this poem as an argument against measures taken to nonviolently stem the tide of authoritarianism is particularly perverse, especially when what we're talking about here is no more abhorrent than seizing luxury assets like yachts and apartments from billionaires.
      - spacemanmatt 5y ago
        Haha. Personal cronies of a foreign adversary don't get due process.
        gruez 5y ago
        We literally give accused child rapists and serial killers due process. Are you suggesting that's a mistake, or that people accused "Personal cronies of a foreign adversary" are somehow worse?
        properparity 5y ago
        It's not worse, but then seizing a billionaires boat is also not a huge grievance in the grand scheme of things, so it's not really a thorny ethical problem. I'm OK living in a world where elites might have higher risks of having their property rights violated during crisis times.
        gruez 5y ago
        > It's not worse, but then seizing a billionaires boat is also not a huge grievance in the grand scheme of things, so it's not really a thorny ethical problem. If you're approaching this from a consequentialist perspective, would you also be for preemptively seizing billionaire's assets the moment they're accused of kicking a puppy or whatever? After all, it's "also not a huge grievance in the grand scheme of things, so it's not really a thorny ethical problem". >I'm OK living in a world where elites might have higher risks of having their property rights violated during crisis times. Sounds great in theory until one day you're declared an elite[1]. Apparently 16% of peasants were considered kulaks in 1912, although the definition was later changed by the Bolsheviks so I'm not sure how much % actually got persecuted. Regardless I'd say the typical HN reader is at a risk of being considered a kulak. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kulak#Dekulakization https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kulak#Dekulakization
        spacemanmatt 5y ago
        I'd love to have enough money to be realistically called elite. That's a good problem.
      - deleted 5y ago
        [deleted]
      - verve_rat 5y ago
        They are quasi-government entities of a hostile power. Stop being so naive, when wars happen realpolitik becomes the primary value system of nations.
        gruez 5y ago
        >when wars happen realpolitik becomes the primary value system of nations. And I suppose you're arguing that's a good thing? Everything you said could have been applied to suspected terrorists during the early 2000s, and suspected communists during the McCarthy era. Do you support those actions as well? To be clear, I'm not against punishing the entities listed. I'm against punishing the entities listed without due process.
        verve_rat 5y ago
        There is an element of scale here. The individuals you are talking about have a limited impact. But the oligarchs aren't just individuals, they are billion dollar institutions that are directly tied to the government in question. Or to put it another way, Osama bin Laden didn't get much due process. But that is the difference between (allegedly) committing a crime and being a threat to a government. Alleged criminals get due process, threats get "dealt with", for some given value of "dealt with". Of course then the danger is that governments will see threats that aren't really there and try to turn people into threats rather than criminals to "deal" with them. But to my mind that is an argument for better oversight of the use of the tools that governments have, rather than just removing the "threat" toolkit and leaving only the "criminal" toolkit.
      - scotty79 5y ago
        It's just seizing assets related to state terrorism.
        gruez 5y ago
        And FISA is "just" collecting information related to '"foreign powers" and "agents of foreign powers" suspected of espionage or terrorism', right? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_Intelligence_Surveillance_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_Intelligence_Surveilla...
        scotty79 5y ago
        Sure. So you see we already have estabilished precedent. Finally we can put those overreaching mechanisms to a good use.
      - tastyfreeze 5y ago
        You are not alone in that sentiment. I wrote my representative to tell him that I will absolutely not support seizure of foreign national private assets. I don't care that they are billionaires or that they are wealthy because they bow to Putin. We don't throw our laws out the window for political expediency.
      - stjohnswarts 5y ago
        But it's not, we've known for years they are milking the Russian people both legally and illegally. So you're basically feeling sorry for Russian oligarchs?
        gruez 5y ago
        As mentioned elsewhere, I'm not feeling sorry for the oligarchs. I'm appalled how easily we as a society are willing to skip due process, given a sufficiently evil sounding villain.
        stjohnswarts 5y ago
        They're gonna be okay, even if their fortunes are cut in half they're still billionaires. We all know that if you're a billionaire in Russia you are are criminal beholden to Putin. I'm sure they have bucketloads of documents at the CIA with more details than one person can read in a lifetime.
        spacemanmatt 5y ago
        Thing is, you remind me of every armchair general who pitch a royal racist fit about the BLM protests and that was on behalf of due process for Americans. But a few seized Russian boats gets you all fired up.
- bitL 5y ago
  You are assuming this city will remain in Ukraine. That might be too optimistic as this is the only part of the coast on the land bridge to Crimea that is not yet under Russian control.
gruez 5y ago
>The side by side satellite images really show you the devastating effect of the Russian bombings Where are those? I skimmed the link article and couldn't find any.
- lacksconfidence 5y ago
  One example i saw a few days ago at https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/mar/10/mariupol-bombing-ukraine-before-and-after-satellite-images-map-russian-attack-residential-maternity-childrens-hospital https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/mar/10/mariupol-bombi...
ramesh31 5y ago
>How is this handled after the war, the aggressor should pay for the damages but we can't really force them. Sure we can. Germany was paying WWII reparations into the 90's.
- scotty79 5y ago
  Sure, but the Germany was conquered. And noone is eager to start conquering Russia.
  - stjohnswarts 5y ago
    It's basically impossible unless you're comfortable with your country becoming an apocalyptic wonderland
- MrRiddle 5y ago
  Germany killed 18% of the population of my country. What price would you place on that?
  - SSLy 5y ago
    Well, they certainly like to pay putler for its gas and oil while it repeats certain stuff from WW2.

by tiku 5y ago

tomjen3 5y ago

We should pay them out the siezed Russian assets. That won't be enough, but it will be a start.

gruez 5y ago
What "siezed Russian assets" are we talking about here? The russian centeral bank deposits held with the federal reserve? Foreign assets of russian companies? Assets of russian "oligarchs"?
- emteycz 5y ago
  Yes
  - gruez 5y ago
    Really? The last item 'Assets of russian "oligarchs"' seems like a massive violation of due process. It's basically civil forfeiture 2.0.
    - heartofadog 5y ago
      War is, by definition, a "massive violation of due process". I get your point (that ethics and law matter -- including basic principles of law where international law is not codified), and on a certain level this is valid. But historically speaking, once things ratchet up to a certain level and scope of barbarity (as we are seeing unfold in real time) -- it's just not realistic to sit and wait for a "fair" solution to emerge (in the near term or ever). People are going to be hurt (and treated unfairly) one way or another. It's just a question of who is going to take the hit, and in what form. So if it's at least arguably plausible that measures that inconvenience a few individuals in the top .1 percent net-worth-wise might bring this insane situation to a close sooner rather than later -- I can go with that. And there's no reason we can't "rub" a bit of due process into the situation -- by saying "OK sure, you can file an appeal, and have a shot at getting your toys and baubles back -- after Russia returns to its borders, and Putin has been decisively removed from power."
    - ChuckNorris89 5y ago
      >It's basically civil forfeiture 2.0. That's .... the point.
      - gruez 5y ago
        "we're going to violate people's rights, but don't worry because we promise that we'll only be using it against Bad People. You're not a Bad People supporter/sympathizer, are you? Yeah that's what we thought."
    - CamperBob2 5y ago
      - gruez 5y ago
        >(You do realize these aren't US citizens we're talking about, correct? You realize that due process isn't something that's reserved for US citizens, right? > These are Putin's economic hitmen. Fuck them. Note that I objected to the lack of due processes, not to seizing their assets. Until they have been granted due process, they're merely accused of being "Putin's economic hitmen".
        PostOnce 5y ago
        Consider this an arrest, rather than imprisonment. We don't have to prove a man with blood on his hands is the murderer before we arrest him, that comes later. People are dying every day -- obviously lawsuits and criminal trials take years in complex cases. A lot more people would be dead by then. Our goal in the immediate term is to stop the war. One of the strongest non-kinetic tools we have for that is these sanctions. When the war ends, then we can figure out due process... for these guys hundred million dollar yachts. I'm sure they can live without a cruise to a resort island in the mean time while we try to save lives in Mariupol.
        gruez 5y ago
        > Consider this an arrest, rather than imprisonment. We don't have to prove a man with blood on his hands is the murderer before we arrest him, that comes later. OP isn't talking about freezing the funds, OP is literally asking for the funds to be redistributed right now.
    - sorokod 5y ago
      All sorts of things get violated during war time - what due process would you have?
      - gruez 5y ago
        The willingness of people to upend civil rights and due process in times of "emergency" never creases to horrify me. Please remember that the japanese internment camps were basically justified using similar lines of thought.
        sorokod 5y ago
        An interesting use of double quotes around emergency, given the topic. Since it will be governments (maybe) seizing those assets and not members of HN - would that be sufficient to not horrify you?
        gruez 5y ago
        >Since it will be governments (maybe) seizing those assets and not members of HN - would that be sufficient to not horrify you? I'm not arabic/muslim so the chances of me being targeted by anti-terror regulation is probably fairly low. Yet, I'm still against them. This comes to mind: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came_...#Text https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came_...#Text
        ModernMech 5y ago
        I think it's pretty rich to link to that poem given the context. It's a poem about the rise of authoritarianism, a poem Putin could have mistaken for a blueprint rather than a warning. Today as people speak out in Russia they are arrested, and that insulates Putin to believe he has the power and right to invade foreign countries. To use this poem as an argument against measures taken to nonviolently stem the tide of authoritarianism is particularly perverse, especially when what we're talking about here is no more abhorrent than seizing luxury assets like yachts and apartments from billionaires.
    - spacemanmatt 5y ago
      Haha. Personal cronies of a foreign adversary don't get due process.
      - gruez 5y ago
        We literally give accused child rapists and serial killers due process. Are you suggesting that's a mistake, or that people accused "Personal cronies of a foreign adversary" are somehow worse?
        properparity 5y ago
        It's not worse, but then seizing a billionaires boat is also not a huge grievance in the grand scheme of things, so it's not really a thorny ethical problem. I'm OK living in a world where elites might have higher risks of having their property rights violated during crisis times.
        gruez 5y ago
        > It's not worse, but then seizing a billionaires boat is also not a huge grievance in the grand scheme of things, so it's not really a thorny ethical problem. If you're approaching this from a consequentialist perspective, would you also be for preemptively seizing billionaire's assets the moment they're accused of kicking a puppy or whatever? After all, it's "also not a huge grievance in the grand scheme of things, so it's not really a thorny ethical problem". >I'm OK living in a world where elites might have higher risks of having their property rights violated during crisis times. Sounds great in theory until one day you're declared an elite[1]. Apparently 16% of peasants were considered kulaks in 1912, although the definition was later changed by the Bolsheviks so I'm not sure how much % actually got persecuted. Regardless I'd say the typical HN reader is at a risk of being considered a kulak. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kulak#Dekulakization https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kulak#Dekulakization
        spacemanmatt 5y ago
        I'd love to have enough money to be realistically called elite. That's a good problem.
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
    - verve_rat 5y ago
      They are quasi-government entities of a hostile power. Stop being so naive, when wars happen realpolitik becomes the primary value system of nations.
      - gruez 5y ago
        >when wars happen realpolitik becomes the primary value system of nations. And I suppose you're arguing that's a good thing? Everything you said could have been applied to suspected terrorists during the early 2000s, and suspected communists during the McCarthy era. Do you support those actions as well? To be clear, I'm not against punishing the entities listed. I'm against punishing the entities listed without due process.
        verve_rat 5y ago
        There is an element of scale here. The individuals you are talking about have a limited impact. But the oligarchs aren't just individuals, they are billion dollar institutions that are directly tied to the government in question. Or to put it another way, Osama bin Laden didn't get much due process. But that is the difference between (allegedly) committing a crime and being a threat to a government. Alleged criminals get due process, threats get "dealt with", for some given value of "dealt with". Of course then the danger is that governments will see threats that aren't really there and try to turn people into threats rather than criminals to "deal" with them. But to my mind that is an argument for better oversight of the use of the tools that governments have, rather than just removing the "threat" toolkit and leaving only the "criminal" toolkit.
    - scotty79 5y ago
      It's just seizing assets related to state terrorism.
      - gruez 5y ago
        And FISA is "just" collecting information related to '"foreign powers" and "agents of foreign powers" suspected of espionage or terrorism', right? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_Intelligence_Surveillance_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_Intelligence_Surveilla...
        scotty79 5y ago
        Sure. So you see we already have estabilished precedent. Finally we can put those overreaching mechanisms to a good use.
    - tastyfreeze 5y ago
      You are not alone in that sentiment. I wrote my representative to tell him that I will absolutely not support seizure of foreign national private assets. I don't care that they are billionaires or that they are wealthy because they bow to Putin. We don't throw our laws out the window for political expediency.
    - stjohnswarts 5y ago
      But it's not, we've known for years they are milking the Russian people both legally and illegally. So you're basically feeling sorry for Russian oligarchs?
      - gruez 5y ago
        As mentioned elsewhere, I'm not feeling sorry for the oligarchs. I'm appalled how easily we as a society are willing to skip due process, given a sufficiently evil sounding villain.
        stjohnswarts 5y ago
        They're gonna be okay, even if their fortunes are cut in half they're still billionaires. We all know that if you're a billionaire in Russia you are are criminal beholden to Putin. I'm sure they have bucketloads of documents at the CIA with more details than one person can read in a lifetime.
        spacemanmatt 5y ago
        Thing is, you remind me of every armchair general who pitch a royal racist fit about the BLM protests and that was on behalf of due process for Americans. But a few seized Russian boats gets you all fired up.
bitL 5y ago
You are assuming this city will remain in Ukraine. That might be too optimistic as this is the only part of the coast on the land bridge to Crimea that is not yet under Russian control.

gruez 5y ago

>The side by side satellite images really show you the devastating effect of the Russian bombings Where are those? I skimmed the link article and couldn't find any.

lacksconfidence 5y ago
One example i saw a few days ago at https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/mar/10/mariupol-bombing-ukraine-before-and-after-satellite-images-map-russian-attack-residential-maternity-childrens-hospital https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/mar/10/mariupol-bombi...

ramesh31 5y ago

>How is this handled after the war, the aggressor should pay for the damages but we can't really force them. Sure we can. Germany was paying WWII reparations into the 90's.

scotty79 5y ago
Sure, but the Germany was conquered. And noone is eager to start conquering Russia.
- stjohnswarts 5y ago
  It's basically impossible unless you're comfortable with your country becoming an apocalyptic wonderland
MrRiddle 5y ago
Germany killed 18% of the population of my country. What price would you place on that?
- SSLy 5y ago
  Well, they certainly like to pay putler for its gas and oil while it repeats certain stuff from WW2.