how? do nothing and your inaction has killed more people. Pulling the lever effectively means saving three people, i can’t see an angle from where that is a controversial position to hold

off topic but i never fuken understood this problem. Like literally. your action can save 4 people, what’s the reasoning behind not pulling the lever being a morally valid choice as much as pulling it?

might just be me, but i feel like administering the punishment in a more sensible way sounds like a better option than making it so the possession of CP only gets you a slap on the wrist

whole Kharkov front is crumbling under the action of a few DRG’s. The numbers are also exxagerated, more sensible bloggers talk about 2 to 4k russian soldiers. It’s becoming clear that the AFU can somewhat hold pre-prepared position in hot areas, but has no capability to redeploy reserves to new fronts.

The poor 47th fire brigade must be spending more times sitting on cars and trains than actually fighting

iirc John Oliver talked about a particular missile silo which is so old the computers still use punched cards, and there is no soldier who is actually trained on those systems. The door of that same silo is also always open, because it broke and they don’t know how to fix it

they make it look so easy, it’s frustrating

tbh this is already the case when it comes to the air/sea war. Recent wargames show that in the moment of an attack, the US fleet and airforce in the pacific get missile’d to hell before even being able to operate effectively

“i don’t want my words miscontrued” bro no one cares about you or your words

same thing you say to people who had relatives killed by Stalin

“there is a good chance they deserved it”

by the way i see it, voluntarily settling in a land that’s being colonized and ethnically cleansed comes with accepting the idea that you and your family are at risk of suffering retaliation

For real, western nations really need to get a grip and realize that no one is scared of them anymore. Russia has shown the world that you can fight back against NATO and win. Yet countries like France still seem to think that they can terrorize modern independent nations like they terrorized african tribal communities.

The biggest issue is that the French army, much like any other western army, has no experience in fighting peers. The only two countries in the world which have that are Russia and Ukraine. French officers themselves admitted that the russian army is not the main (arguably only) reference when it comes to peer-to-peer combat operations.

French troops would not fare any better than the élite, nato-equipped ukrainian brigades that smashed their heads against the Surovikin line.

I will say this tho - i never thought i would live to see german tanks burn on russian soil again, and i am sort of excited to see the french being beaten out of russia again

i mean this is like the americans entering vietnam. You expect to fight a ragtag militia, and instead you find a competent fighting force forged in generations upon generations of hardship.

I’m no longer a soldier but if i were, Gaza is literally the last place i would want to enter. Urban hellscape, the bombings created makeshift shelters everywhere, and you have an enemy who’s been preparing to fight you for decades and has a literal network of underground tunnels. There is literally no way to win this, the only way is to flatten the place from the air. Which is what israel is doing.

please let them try, PLEASE

y’all living with someone?

I think this is the case because the west isn’t used to fighting an enemy that can match their might.

Think Iraq. Why bother with a narrative? There is a certainty of victory, no damage will come to the west, and iraqi media sure as hell isn’t reaching our audiences. So just make up an excuse, invade, and let people forget it until the next current thing.

But russia? It can fight back, it has political and economic leverage, it forces europe to suffer economically, it can inflict losses and shatter the image of nato equipment being unbeatable.

So the media has to scramble to find reasons why we should keep fighting the russians, because our collective subconscious knows that fighting russia is a bad idea in general. The result of this scrambling is a lot of contrasting narratives that keep contradicting each other. Specially because russia itself has the power to counter western narratives and highlight the falsehoods.

Remember Soledar for example? “the situation is difficult but we are holding” until russians started posting selfies from inside the town and it became clear that the UAF had been routed from there days ago.

Or also when they kept claiming that reddit truesim that “attackers suffer 7 times more casualties” during the battle of Bakhmut an excuse to support the “we are grinding them down by losing” narrative. Now ukraine is attacking and people are asking “wait a second, we were told attackers take 7 times more losses, how is ukraine affording this?”

In short, much like they are not used to fighting competent enemies on the ground, they are not used to fighting competent enemies in the media/internet arena. The result is a clusterfuck of lies covered by other lies as soon as they get found out.

Remember that most of them actually believe ua pravda when it says that russians fight with shovels

14 newer ones and 88 previous model i think

Totally casual numbers btw

Oh no! Anyway

Trump at least knew of to look like he knew what he was saying. He was a decent orator and could at least entertain a crowd. Biden is seriously less articulated and coherent than some people i work with, and i am an educator specialized in polyhandicap

i mean, if you look at the footage of diplomatic meetings you can see very obviously by Xi’s body language that he takes the presidents of nations like Barbados or Zambia much more seriously than people like Biden or Trudeau