8 ms·

> DARPA's Close Combat Lethal Recon drone was a fiber-optic guided loitering munition for urban combat Forbes just really loves pushing lethal "urban" technolo

> DARPA's Close Combat Lethal Recon drone was a fiber-optic guided loitering munition for urban combat Forbes just really loves pushing lethal "urban" technology. I personally find the habit to be disgusting. > “I am already asking Ukrainian specialists to test this control technology so that we do not end up behind the enemy,” It's awesome that after 3 years of this nonsense we're just happily escalating the conflict and imagining new ways to destroy urban areas and the civilian populations that live in them. Forbes, of course, loves this because in our current economic model there's a lot of money to be had in inventing new horrific ways to murder people. Well, that's my "1 of 4 free articles" this month, I guess.

mullingitover 2y ago
> It's awesome that after 3 years of this nonsense we're just happily escalating the conflict Agree, it's unusual and satisfying to see the west backing a justified war of defense against a country that's a full-blown comic book villain.
- akira2501 2y ago
  > a country that's a full-blown comic book villain. Have you examined the logic of this position? You legitimately see an entire country as a "comic book villain?" And this seems rational and is a justified reason to send conscripted civilians to their deaths? So much so that it "satisfies" you? Wow.
  - krisoft 2y ago
    > Have you examined the logic of this position? Yes. > You legitimately see an entire country as a "comic book villain? Not an entire country. The leadership of the country, yes. > And this seems rational and is a justified reason to send conscripted civilians to their deaths? I'm not sending anyone. If the people of Ukraine decides it is time to stop defending themselves I will accept their decision with a sad resignation. > So much so that it "satisfies" you? Yes. It satisfies me that we are on the good side of this conflict. Would satisfy me even more if the conflict were not happening. But spending my tax money to help people protect themselves is much better, much more satisfying than the usual status quo which is to spend my tax money to hurt innocents. Eagerly awaiting your further questions on the topic.
psunavy03 2y ago
> It's awesome that after 3 years of this nonsense we're just happily escalating the conflict and imagining new ways to destroy urban areas and the civilian populations that live in them. So the ethical answer is to what, roll over and let the Russians win? Wars are awful things. But to paraphrase Trotsky, you get to choose whether or not you're interested in war. But you don't get to choose whether or not war is interested in you.
- akira2501 2y ago
  > roll over and let the Russians win? Or negotiate for peace. It is known there was a solid negotiation process in place and the Ukrainians were interested in it. NATO was not and worked to destroy it. > Wars are awful things. ...and _Forbes_ acting as a cheerleader of them is disgusting. > But to paraphrase Trotsky Trotsky was spreading propaganda. In the actual study of war, they rarely break out as described, and they often have months if not years of time where they could have been avoided entirely. It usually turns out there is someone with vested financial interests in war and they always find themselves near the people who generate the conflict. Go figure.
  - psunavy03 2y ago
    I can't tell if this is Russian propaganda or just terminal naïveté. This war is going on because Russia, without justifiable provocation, invaded another sovereign nation. There is nothing for the Ukrainians to "negotiate" about other than Russia leaving their land. If I hypothetically put a gun to your head and told you to give me your wallet and the credentials to your bank accounts, no amount of "negotiation" would make your property legally mine or what I did any less than armed robbery. Same here.
    - ted_dunning 2y ago
      I think the propagandist was trying to make an analogy with the distinguishable outcomes of "dead with no wallet" and "unharmed with no wallet". In the case of Ukraine, Russian state media have often claimed their goal is to exterminate Ukrainians and their culture so that distinction would not exist.
Tarq0n 2y ago
Forbes is just a blogging platform nowadays, not sure there's any editorial intent behind it.

mullingitover 2y ago

> It's awesome that after 3 years of this nonsense we're just happily escalating the conflict Agree, it's unusual and satisfying to see the west backing a justified war of defense against a country that's a full-blown comic book villain.

akira2501 2y ago
> a country that's a full-blown comic book villain. Have you examined the logic of this position? You legitimately see an entire country as a "comic book villain?" And this seems rational and is a justified reason to send conscripted civilians to their deaths? So much so that it "satisfies" you? Wow.
- krisoft 2y ago
  > Have you examined the logic of this position? Yes. > You legitimately see an entire country as a "comic book villain? Not an entire country. The leadership of the country, yes. > And this seems rational and is a justified reason to send conscripted civilians to their deaths? I'm not sending anyone. If the people of Ukraine decides it is time to stop defending themselves I will accept their decision with a sad resignation. > So much so that it "satisfies" you? Yes. It satisfies me that we are on the good side of this conflict. Would satisfy me even more if the conflict were not happening. But spending my tax money to help people protect themselves is much better, much more satisfying than the usual status quo which is to spend my tax money to hurt innocents. Eagerly awaiting your further questions on the topic.

psunavy03 2y ago

> It's awesome that after 3 years of this nonsense we're just happily escalating the conflict and imagining new ways to destroy urban areas and the civilian populations that live in them. So the ethical answer is to what, roll over and let the Russians win? Wars are awful things. But to paraphrase Trotsky, you get to choose whether or not you're interested in war. But you don't get to choose whether or not war is interested in you.

akira2501 2y ago
> roll over and let the Russians win? Or negotiate for peace. It is known there was a solid negotiation process in place and the Ukrainians were interested in it. NATO was not and worked to destroy it. > Wars are awful things. ...and _Forbes_ acting as a cheerleader of them is disgusting. > But to paraphrase Trotsky Trotsky was spreading propaganda. In the actual study of war, they rarely break out as described, and they often have months if not years of time where they could have been avoided entirely. It usually turns out there is someone with vested financial interests in war and they always find themselves near the people who generate the conflict. Go figure.
- psunavy03 2y ago
  I can't tell if this is Russian propaganda or just terminal naïveté. This war is going on because Russia, without justifiable provocation, invaded another sovereign nation. There is nothing for the Ukrainians to "negotiate" about other than Russia leaving their land. If I hypothetically put a gun to your head and told you to give me your wallet and the credentials to your bank accounts, no amount of "negotiation" would make your property legally mine or what I did any less than armed robbery. Same here.
  - ted_dunning 2y ago
    I think the propagandist was trying to make an analogy with the distinguishable outcomes of "dead with no wallet" and "unharmed with no wallet". In the case of Ukraine, Russian state media have often claimed their goal is to exterminate Ukrainians and their culture so that distinction would not exist.

Tarq0n 2y ago

Forbes is just a blogging platform nowadays, not sure there's any editorial intent behind it.