5 ms·

A Full List of Mysterious Fires in Russia

31 points by pyinstallwoes 4y ago

acidioxide 4y ago
A large number of enlistment offices set on fire means that there is some resistance against war, even on the province
- trasz 4y ago
  We should be helping them, eg by pointing them at improvised munitions manuals (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/TM_31-210_Improvised_Munitions_Handbook https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/TM_31-210_Improvised_Munitio...) and the like. EDIT: And of course https://armypubs.army.mil/epubs/DR_pubs/DR_a/pdf/web/fm3_24.pdf https://armypubs.army.mil/epubs/DR_pubs/DR_a/pdf/web/fm3_24....
  - goatsneez 4y ago
    While those are interesting links, I do not comprehend the morals and principle behind such a "call" of "support" by "us". And, if there is such a general principle you belief (and can explain/outline to me here), why not applying this general principle to all situations around the world. Especially, I would be interested, for instance, how you would grapple and apply such views in the case of (without changing the goal posts) Palestine-Israeli conflict? [and at least half-a-dozen other current world conflicts]
    - trasz 4y ago
      Yes. I believe it’s a fundamental right of a society to choose its government, and to overthrow a government that doesn’t properly represent them. Using whatever means necessary. Whether that’s Ukraine, Taiwan, Catalonia, Scotland, or Śląsk.
      - goatsneez 4y ago
        I think if you really gave more thought to your latest statement you would immediately retract it. More importantly, this is not the core issue of your comment to which I replied. By which principle can an outsider call for violence and in support of any faction/separatists? How general is such principle and by which method to apply it in practice? And, what if the separatists movement you decided to support as an outsider are being crushed by the said government's army? (What then?) Just leave it be or intervene? I hope you see where this is going.... and I doubt you would support the end result of this very logic. [for a principle applies to both sides, not just one, otherwise it is not a principle but a rule-by-mob]. (And it is not that the very issue you are addressing is invalid, I just point out that it is not a trivial one and no one-liner phrase will do here. Especially a blind call for violence as a principle method of solving disagreement).
        trasz 4y ago
        Why would I want to retract it? As for principles: there are two aspects here. One is that people have the fundamental right to decide; usually there are peaceful ways of achieving this, like voting, but when they fail or don’t exist - like in Russia - then there are more violent options. And no, of course it doesn’t apply to both sides: it only applies to people side, not governments’. The second is that there is a war going on, and every option that hurts Russian army means fewer people getting killed. Insurgency would be a really convenient method of ending this war.
        goatsneez 4y ago
        "People are the more honest when they suppose their own moral superiority" is how I would summarize that logic there. Sure, we can decide to hate Russia and then anything goes. However, that is not a principle or method by which to form governance or social policies (especially as an outsiders to a country). That is a mob rule. You have not done the homework of following your own argument to its logical conclusion, which is what I was trying to induce. If you were to answer some of my questions following your logic you would arrive at a contradiction, in kind and degree. (In fact, your logic would vindicate RU attack on UA due to their inability to solve separatists movement in Donbas and Luhansk with diplomacy). (also the way you cite "fundamental rights" are very vague in your usage, but they are not so foggy as you suppose, but we would then veer off).
  - kwatsonafter 4y ago
    Vividly irresponsible.
- rdtsc 4y ago
  It seems to be people from smaller towns and villages doing it. They typically form the core of Putin support. If they are throwing Molotov cocktails, things are not going well for Putin.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
mrlonglong 4y ago
This is interesting. This means the people aren't at all deceived by what they hear on the news, I think we'll hear more tactics like this put in use to protest against the Kremlin. Begining of the end for Putin? Who knows but this is quite significant.
- pyinstallwoes 4y ago
  Yeah, agreed. I'm also curious and surprised that it took so long for something like this to arise on hackernews or any social network. I wonder if it was suppressed? I don't even know how I randomly came across it lol.

31 points by pyinstallwoes 4y ago

acidioxide 4y ago

A large number of enlistment offices set on fire means that there is some resistance against war, even on the province

trasz 4y ago
We should be helping them, eg by pointing them at improvised munitions manuals (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/TM_31-210_Improvised_Munitions_Handbook https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/TM_31-210_Improvised_Munitio...) and the like. EDIT: And of course https://armypubs.army.mil/epubs/DR_pubs/DR_a/pdf/web/fm3_24.pdf https://armypubs.army.mil/epubs/DR_pubs/DR_a/pdf/web/fm3_24....
- goatsneez 4y ago
  While those are interesting links, I do not comprehend the morals and principle behind such a "call" of "support" by "us". And, if there is such a general principle you belief (and can explain/outline to me here), why not applying this general principle to all situations around the world. Especially, I would be interested, for instance, how you would grapple and apply such views in the case of (without changing the goal posts) Palestine-Israeli conflict? [and at least half-a-dozen other current world conflicts]
  - trasz 4y ago
    Yes. I believe it’s a fundamental right of a society to choose its government, and to overthrow a government that doesn’t properly represent them. Using whatever means necessary. Whether that’s Ukraine, Taiwan, Catalonia, Scotland, or Śląsk.
    - goatsneez 4y ago
      I think if you really gave more thought to your latest statement you would immediately retract it. More importantly, this is not the core issue of your comment to which I replied. By which principle can an outsider call for violence and in support of any faction/separatists? How general is such principle and by which method to apply it in practice? And, what if the separatists movement you decided to support as an outsider are being crushed by the said government's army? (What then?) Just leave it be or intervene? I hope you see where this is going.... and I doubt you would support the end result of this very logic. [for a principle applies to both sides, not just one, otherwise it is not a principle but a rule-by-mob]. (And it is not that the very issue you are addressing is invalid, I just point out that it is not a trivial one and no one-liner phrase will do here. Especially a blind call for violence as a principle method of solving disagreement).
      - trasz 4y ago
        Why would I want to retract it? As for principles: there are two aspects here. One is that people have the fundamental right to decide; usually there are peaceful ways of achieving this, like voting, but when they fail or don’t exist - like in Russia - then there are more violent options. And no, of course it doesn’t apply to both sides: it only applies to people side, not governments’. The second is that there is a war going on, and every option that hurts Russian army means fewer people getting killed. Insurgency would be a really convenient method of ending this war.
        goatsneez 4y ago
        "People are the more honest when they suppose their own moral superiority" is how I would summarize that logic there. Sure, we can decide to hate Russia and then anything goes. However, that is not a principle or method by which to form governance or social policies (especially as an outsiders to a country). That is a mob rule. You have not done the homework of following your own argument to its logical conclusion, which is what I was trying to induce. If you were to answer some of my questions following your logic you would arrive at a contradiction, in kind and degree. (In fact, your logic would vindicate RU attack on UA due to their inability to solve separatists movement in Donbas and Luhansk with diplomacy). (also the way you cite "fundamental rights" are very vague in your usage, but they are not so foggy as you suppose, but we would then veer off).
- kwatsonafter 4y ago
  Vividly irresponsible.
rdtsc 4y ago
It seems to be people from smaller towns and villages doing it. They typically form the core of Putin support. If they are throwing Molotov cocktails, things are not going well for Putin.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]

mrlonglong 4y ago

This is interesting. This means the people aren't at all deceived by what they hear on the news, I think we'll hear more tactics like this put in use to protest against the Kremlin. Begining of the end for Putin? Who knows but this is quite significant.

pyinstallwoes 4y ago
Yeah, agreed. I'm also curious and surprised that it took so long for something like this to arise on hackernews or any social network. I wonder if it was suppressed? I don't even know how I randomly came across it lol.