7 ms·

What's the best thing that can be done to reduce the risk of conflict?

mc32 2y ago
Probably having the three major powers have regular contact with each other rather than pretending they're not there and refusing to take their calls.
- cupcakecommons 2y ago
  Seems like a great idea. What can people in the US do to facilitate this you think?
  - 01HNNWZ0MV43FF 2y ago
    Couldn't hurt to vote for the party who aren't Russian assets
    - mensetmanusman 2y ago
      Bayesian priors need updating
    - Krssst 2y ago
      Seems that a lot of people prefer the approach of "surrender absolutely everything to Putin preemptively". Granted America is at basically zero risk of a Russian invasion, but letting Putin roams free means that Ukraine would only be the first step. I don't really know what Putin's Europe once he gets it all would look like but I don't expect human rights to be a part of it.
      - protomolecule 2y ago
        [flagged]
        aguaviva 2y ago
        Because it's what the aggressor has been saying all along: "That is why it is so important to achieve all the goals of the special military operation. To push back the borders that threaten our country as far as possible, even if they are the borders of Poland," said Medvedev. https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/russias-medvedev-floats-idea-pushing-back-polands-borders-2023-02-24/ https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/russias-medvedev-floats...
        protomolecule 2y ago
        It's a random utterance written in a personal telegram channel by a man with little real power. Using it as a basis for such a far reaching conclusion about Putin's intent to conquer all of Europe is quite strange to put it politely.
        mopsi 2y ago
        That's merely a tactic for making threats with plausible deniability. Message gets transmitted, but in a way that shifts authorship away from its true source. Trump uses "people are saying" in this manner, Putin has an actual lackey in flesh doing the talking.
        aguaviva 2y ago
        The grandparent was mistaken about an intent to conquer "all" of Europe - but similar threats have been made against Poland and the Baltics (as Putin's appetite for direct annexation seems to be limited to territories of the former Russian Empire). Communicating through sockpuppets like Medvedev is exactly how a gaslighter par excellence like Putin operates. And Medvedev isn't just any Kremlin flacky, but was Putin's nominal successor at one point. To pretend to not be aware that his messaging on the subject is ultimately Putin's is quite strange, to put it politely.
        protomolecule 2y ago
        >Communicating through sockpuppets like Medvedev is exactly how a gaslighter par excellence like Putin operates. Quite the opposite, in fact. Putin's Munich speech in 2007 was as direct as it gets. Anyway, your suggestion that Putin telegraphs his true intent (to occupy Poland and Baltics) through sockpuppet doesn't make any sense -- why would anyone do that? Medvedev playing bad cop routine -- that I can imagine, but what you are suggesting is quite strange, to put it politely.
      - cupcakecommons 2y ago
        Which people?
        Krssst 2y ago
        People saying helping Ukraine should be avoided.
        cupcakecommons 2y ago
        The people advocating the "approach of surrender absolutely everything to Putin preemptively" and "people saying helping Ukraine should be avoided" are very different - and are both still pretty strong interpretations. Instead of looking at cartoonish arguments people have - what's the best argument you've come across for not supplying Ukraine with weapons? Have you heard any that seem reasonable at all to you? Which is the most reasonable?
    - ImJamal 2y ago
      I'm confused. Surely if one side is a Russian asset it would be less likely we go to war with them?
      - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
        > Surely if one side is a Russian asset it would be less likely we go to war with them? Difficult to estimate because the situation is de-stabilising--the assurances of MAD no longer hold if one side thinks it can prevent the other from launching.
        ImJamal 2y ago
        Why would Russia attack the US if the US was under their thumb? It makes no sense. MAD prevents countries who are opposed to each from attacking each other. The reason the US and the UK don't go to war is not because of MAD.
        cupcakecommons 2y ago
        Not sure it has to make sense. It just has to convince people long enough for people who are driving for war to get their war. Hardly any of it seems to make any sense at all.
  - hedora 2y ago
    Well, Trump fired a bunch of diplomats, and never hired replacements (or replaced them with donors with no relevant experience), which hollowed out US foreign policy. The Biden administration largely turned the lights back on in the parts of the government you are asking about, I think. They tried, at least. The GOP tried to block re-hiring foreign policy experts towards the beginning of his administration. Sources: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/may/30/trump-us-ambassadors-political-appointments https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/may/30/trump-us-amb... https://www.npr.org/2021/11/13/1055575802/lack-of-american-ambassadors-is-hurting-foreign-goals-says-afsa-president https://www.npr.org/2021/11/13/1055575802/lack-of-american-a... https://www.npr.org/2020/08/18/903199848/under-trump-more-big-donors-are-named-ambassadors-and-controversies-have-followe https://www.npr.org/2020/08/18/903199848/under-trump-more-bi...
    - mc32 2y ago
      Every admin gets to set up their State Dept. Biden could have done whatever he wanted with regard to stationing diplomats. Moreover, The Russia and China embassies were not affected And importantly there were not active conflicts, saber rattling and serious instigations as we have now. I mean, who gives a rat's arse about the ambassador to Paraguay. Just the other week, the admin told the USN to prep for war against China in '27.
      - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
        > there were not active conflicts We assassinated an Iranian major general [1]! We were occupying Afghanistan, supporting Riyadh in its war on the Houthis and ramping up troops deployed in Syria and Iraq [2]. > saber rattling and serious instigations as we have now The Trump administration wasn't instigating China [3]? [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassination_of_Qasem_Soleimani https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassination_of_Qasem_Soleima... [2] https://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2017/12/01/566798632/under-trump-u-s-troops-in-war-zones-are-on-the-rise https://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2017/12/01/566798632/... [3] https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-actions-china/ https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/re...
  - datavirtue 2y ago
    About as much as the Russian citizenry. The problem is the system, not people. Our operating system is out of date.
  - mc32 2y ago
    Vote out neocons for whom war is money is happiness as well as their congressional supporters.
- DaoVeles 2y ago
  Thank you for actually advocating for the most rational and realistic response to this situation. While one cannot expect peace from this, it is better to be in open communication than to be left to create images of what they think they are up against.

mc32 2y ago

Probably having the three major powers have regular contact with each other rather than pretending they're not there and refusing to take their calls.

cupcakecommons 2y ago
Seems like a great idea. What can people in the US do to facilitate this you think?
- 01HNNWZ0MV43FF 2y ago
  Couldn't hurt to vote for the party who aren't Russian assets
  - mensetmanusman 2y ago
    Bayesian priors need updating
  - Krssst 2y ago
    Seems that a lot of people prefer the approach of "surrender absolutely everything to Putin preemptively". Granted America is at basically zero risk of a Russian invasion, but letting Putin roams free means that Ukraine would only be the first step. I don't really know what Putin's Europe once he gets it all would look like but I don't expect human rights to be a part of it.
    - protomolecule 2y ago
      [flagged]
      - aguaviva 2y ago
        Because it's what the aggressor has been saying all along: "That is why it is so important to achieve all the goals of the special military operation. To push back the borders that threaten our country as far as possible, even if they are the borders of Poland," said Medvedev. https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/russias-medvedev-floats-idea-pushing-back-polands-borders-2023-02-24/ https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/russias-medvedev-floats...
        protomolecule 2y ago
        It's a random utterance written in a personal telegram channel by a man with little real power. Using it as a basis for such a far reaching conclusion about Putin's intent to conquer all of Europe is quite strange to put it politely.
        mopsi 2y ago
        That's merely a tactic for making threats with plausible deniability. Message gets transmitted, but in a way that shifts authorship away from its true source. Trump uses "people are saying" in this manner, Putin has an actual lackey in flesh doing the talking.
        aguaviva 2y ago
        The grandparent was mistaken about an intent to conquer "all" of Europe - but similar threats have been made against Poland and the Baltics (as Putin's appetite for direct annexation seems to be limited to territories of the former Russian Empire). Communicating through sockpuppets like Medvedev is exactly how a gaslighter par excellence like Putin operates. And Medvedev isn't just any Kremlin flacky, but was Putin's nominal successor at one point. To pretend to not be aware that his messaging on the subject is ultimately Putin's is quite strange, to put it politely.
        protomolecule 2y ago
        >Communicating through sockpuppets like Medvedev is exactly how a gaslighter par excellence like Putin operates. Quite the opposite, in fact. Putin's Munich speech in 2007 was as direct as it gets. Anyway, your suggestion that Putin telegraphs his true intent (to occupy Poland and Baltics) through sockpuppet doesn't make any sense -- why would anyone do that? Medvedev playing bad cop routine -- that I can imagine, but what you are suggesting is quite strange, to put it politely.
    - cupcakecommons 2y ago
      Which people?
      - Krssst 2y ago
        People saying helping Ukraine should be avoided.
        cupcakecommons 2y ago
        The people advocating the "approach of surrender absolutely everything to Putin preemptively" and "people saying helping Ukraine should be avoided" are very different - and are both still pretty strong interpretations. Instead of looking at cartoonish arguments people have - what's the best argument you've come across for not supplying Ukraine with weapons? Have you heard any that seem reasonable at all to you? Which is the most reasonable?
  - ImJamal 2y ago
    I'm confused. Surely if one side is a Russian asset it would be less likely we go to war with them?
    - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
      > Surely if one side is a Russian asset it would be less likely we go to war with them? Difficult to estimate because the situation is de-stabilising--the assurances of MAD no longer hold if one side thinks it can prevent the other from launching.
      - ImJamal 2y ago
        Why would Russia attack the US if the US was under their thumb? It makes no sense. MAD prevents countries who are opposed to each from attacking each other. The reason the US and the UK don't go to war is not because of MAD.
        cupcakecommons 2y ago
        Not sure it has to make sense. It just has to convince people long enough for people who are driving for war to get their war. Hardly any of it seems to make any sense at all.
- hedora 2y ago
  Well, Trump fired a bunch of diplomats, and never hired replacements (or replaced them with donors with no relevant experience), which hollowed out US foreign policy. The Biden administration largely turned the lights back on in the parts of the government you are asking about, I think. They tried, at least. The GOP tried to block re-hiring foreign policy experts towards the beginning of his administration. Sources: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/may/30/trump-us-ambassadors-political-appointments https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/may/30/trump-us-amb... https://www.npr.org/2021/11/13/1055575802/lack-of-american-ambassadors-is-hurting-foreign-goals-says-afsa-president https://www.npr.org/2021/11/13/1055575802/lack-of-american-a... https://www.npr.org/2020/08/18/903199848/under-trump-more-big-donors-are-named-ambassadors-and-controversies-have-followe https://www.npr.org/2020/08/18/903199848/under-trump-more-bi...
  - mc32 2y ago
    Every admin gets to set up their State Dept. Biden could have done whatever he wanted with regard to stationing diplomats. Moreover, The Russia and China embassies were not affected And importantly there were not active conflicts, saber rattling and serious instigations as we have now. I mean, who gives a rat's arse about the ambassador to Paraguay. Just the other week, the admin told the USN to prep for war against China in '27.
    - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
      > there were not active conflicts We assassinated an Iranian major general [1]! We were occupying Afghanistan, supporting Riyadh in its war on the Houthis and ramping up troops deployed in Syria and Iraq [2]. > saber rattling and serious instigations as we have now The Trump administration wasn't instigating China [3]? [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassination_of_Qasem_Soleimani https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassination_of_Qasem_Soleima... [2] https://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2017/12/01/566798632/under-trump-u-s-troops-in-war-zones-are-on-the-rise https://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2017/12/01/566798632/... [3] https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-actions-china/ https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/re...
- datavirtue 2y ago
  About as much as the Russian citizenry. The problem is the system, not people. Our operating system is out of date.
- mc32 2y ago
  Vote out neocons for whom war is money is happiness as well as their congressional supporters.
DaoVeles 2y ago
Thank you for actually advocating for the most rational and realistic response to this situation. While one cannot expect peace from this, it is better to be in open communication than to be left to create images of what they think they are up against.