3 ms·

I still disagree. My point is not to diminish the brutality of the Russian assault in any material sense, but rather to say that it is far from unique in modern

I still disagree. My point is not to diminish the brutality of the Russian assault in any material sense, but rather to say that it is far from unique in modern warfare. Meaning we should not dismiss opportunities for talks and hopefully a settlement/armistice, because we think we can't bear to deal with a supposedly uniquely evil regime/act*. I think it's quite likely they just have the same coldly calculating logic shared by other conventional armies -- e.g., if they have any kind of "intelligence" that there may be targets in civilian areas, however small and however secondary or tertiary the target is (actual fighters, material support, hideouts), they liberally use overwhelming firepower. I don't doubt their tactics are probably more blunt and brutal than those of the US, for example, but a significant part of that is also a technological difference. As for the US legal and investigative machinery, its effectiveness is massively inflated. Just like the effectiveness of pre-bombing assessments, etc. See this amazing story (but there are also plenty of more direct examples): https://archive.ph/20220122213311/https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/20/us/airstrike-us-isis-dam.html https://archive.ph/20220122213311/https://www.nytimes.com/20... If your army involves itself in more and larger conflicts all over the world than any other force, then putting up easily surmountable administrative hurdles does not a moral military make, even relatively. *However, there's really no point in making my argument since the scuppered talks in April. In practice today, there is no harm from thinking Russia is acting in a uniquely evil way, as there are no talks left to scupper, for various unrelated reasons.

simonh 4y ago
>Meaning we should not dismiss opportunities for talks and hopefully a settlement/armistice, because we think we can't bear to deal with a supposedly uniquely evil regime/act*. I don't see what that's got to do with it, we are put in the position of having to deal with people like this all the time. Just look at North Korea. Unfortunately it's a political reality because ousting these people isn't always feasible, and sometimes we can in some way limit the damage they're doing by making deals with them.
- dundarious 4y ago
  I’ve had numerous debates with people here and elsewhere about whether Putin is the next Hitler, and as such, whether he is too contemptibly evil for peace talks to be tolerable or sensible (“appeasement” gets brought up). Given it will take more than Ukraine and Russia sitting at the table for any meaningful peace to arise (mediation and guarantees from other nations will be key), public opinion on this topic will definitely play a role (already has, somewhat). Just look at Iran, where the nuclear deal was unilaterally torn up by Trump, and the Democrats were so weak and cowed by perceptions of public opinion and the supposed cost in political capital it would take to undo that perception, that they went along with imposing sanctions regardless. So there are real dangers to over-vilification. Arguably the same already happened to NK/DPRK as well — it’s definitely a brutal place now, but the US has been demonizing it even since when it was actually relatively-speaking more free and peaceful than the US supported dictatorship in the South/ROK.

simonh 4y ago

>Meaning we should not dismiss opportunities for talks and hopefully a settlement/armistice, because we think we can't bear to deal with a supposedly uniquely evil regime/act*. I don't see what that's got to do with it, we are put in the position of having to deal with people like this all the time. Just look at North Korea. Unfortunately it's a political reality because ousting these people isn't always feasible, and sometimes we can in some way limit the damage they're doing by making deals with them.

dundarious 4y ago
I’ve had numerous debates with people here and elsewhere about whether Putin is the next Hitler, and as such, whether he is too contemptibly evil for peace talks to be tolerable or sensible (“appeasement” gets brought up). Given it will take more than Ukraine and Russia sitting at the table for any meaningful peace to arise (mediation and guarantees from other nations will be key), public opinion on this topic will definitely play a role (already has, somewhat). Just look at Iran, where the nuclear deal was unilaterally torn up by Trump, and the Democrats were so weak and cowed by perceptions of public opinion and the supposed cost in political capital it would take to undo that perception, that they went along with imposing sanctions regardless. So there are real dangers to over-vilification. Arguably the same already happened to NK/DPRK as well — it’s definitely a brutal place now, but the US has been demonizing it even since when it was actually relatively-speaking more free and peaceful than the US supported dictatorship in the South/ROK.