4 ms·
It's pretty much always better to not get into a war than to win a war.
by empath-nirvana 2y ago
It's pretty much always better to not get into a war than to win a war.
- rasz 2y agoThere is already a war or two, just undeclared. Is it really better to let the aggressor keep attacking and killing while you sit and watch it happen thus sending signal to all others how weak you are?
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- noah_buddy 2y ago> the aggressor Which one are we talking about? I think this sort of discussion is best left off HN.
- rightbyte 2y agoIt is impossible to tell if you are referring to Iran or Israel or maybe both.
- rasz 2y agoNo reaction to Crimea send clear message to Russia. US let Ukraine happen. No reaction to Iranian drones in Ukraine emboldened Iran resulting in 7the and now 14th. Again no response. Who will try next, NKorea or China?
- rasz 2y agoI was of course referring to US. As Ben Hodges put it yesterday: "We've got to muster the political will, industrial capacity, economic leverage, and military capability to defeat Russia first in order to isolate/deter Iran and deter China from making a terrible miscalculation."
- JohnDeHope 2y agoThat's a succinct way to put it. Does anybody have any suggestions for following up on this line of thinking? I wonder what other, maybe technical scenarios, where this might also be true? It's better for an error message to explain what the end user likely needs to know, rather than you heroically debugging it for them.
- int_19h 2y agoHere's a good read that is already very relevant wrt Gaza, and likely will be even more relevant wrt Iran. https://acoup.blog/2022/10/21/collections-strategic-airpower-101/ https://acoup.blog/2022/10/21/collections-strategic-airpower...