4 ms·

> a low-yield device over the Black Sea or the North Sea How is it different? What "panic reactions"? What "panic reaction" can connect a low-yield explosion o

> a low-yield device over the Black Sea or the North Sea How is it different? What "panic reactions"? What "panic reaction" can connect a low-yield explosion over Black Sea and a suicidal strategic strike on the continental US? > I'm just advocating that we observe the cautionary principle here "The cautionary principle" is only applicable if you disregard hundreds of thousands of killed and maimed Ukrainians, millions of refugees, unknown number of abducted children, and entire cities raised to the ground. Letting a genocide continue for years is not a default safe option. Again, I invite you to reflect on this exchange: you'd "rather not delve into scenarios", but when weighing what's basically just vibes against very material, prolonged, ongoing suffering of the second largest country in Europe you decide to advocate for vibes. Putin's bullshit has already won and his deterrence succeeded, because you give it enough credibility (whilst refusing to outline a credible scenario) to talk about "WW3" as a real risk worth more than dead and maimed Ukrainians.

aguaviva 2y ago
> a low-yield device over the Black Sea or the North Sea How is it different? From a detonation deep inside their own territory? You tell me. a suicidal strategic strike on the continental US? I never suggested that would be the next step. In fact my words said something entirely different. For some time now I've been noticing a consistent tendency in your posts to employ straw man techniques. Then we have this: Letting a genocide continue for years is not a default safe option. you decide to advocate for vibes you give it enough credibility (whilst refusing to outline a credible scenario) to talk about "WW3" as a real risk worth more than dead and maimed Ukrainians. I'm doing absolutely none of those things. Unfortunately the conversation has definitely into unproductive territory, and you seem to be confusing me with other people you're unhappy with. I'm not those people and my energy resources are quite limited. Let's wrap up here and give the topic a rest, please.

aguaviva 2y ago

> a low-yield device over the Black Sea or the North Sea How is it different? From a detonation deep inside their own territory? You tell me. a suicidal strategic strike on the continental US? I never suggested that would be the next step. In fact my words said something entirely different. For some time now I've been noticing a consistent tendency in your posts to employ straw man techniques. Then we have this: Letting a genocide continue for years is not a default safe option. you decide to advocate for vibes you give it enough credibility (whilst refusing to outline a credible scenario) to talk about "WW3" as a real risk worth more than dead and maimed Ukrainians. I'm doing absolutely none of those things. Unfortunately the conversation has definitely into unproductive territory, and you seem to be confusing me with other people you're unhappy with. I'm not those people and my energy resources are quite limited. Let's wrap up here and give the topic a rest, please.