War

Budzbuddha

Budzbuddha

Well-Known Member
Fogdog said:
The story I read aligned with what Roger said (see the above post). So I'm just riffing. Darya Durgina was a rising star in Russian Nationalist TV and had a large following. Her father is old school and although his books were widely read, he was not in the spotlight. Her father was a philosopher who wrote books. She was the face of a Russian imperialist movement. I think she was more of a threat than her father.

Echoing her father, Ms. Dugina’s public commentary provided an ideological framework for Mr. Putin’s aggressive foreign policy.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/08/21/world/europe/daria-dugina-russia-politics.html
Click to expand...
I guess it was the thought that counts ….. *ignition click - BOOM
 
DIY-HP-LED

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
Fogdog said:
The story I read aligned with what Roger said (see the above post). So I'm just riffing. Darya Durgina was a rising star in Russian Nationalist TV and had a large following. Her father is old school and although his books were widely read, he was not in the spotlight. Her father was a philosopher who wrote books. She was the face of a Russian imperialist movement. I think she was more of a threat than her father.

Echoing her father, Ms. Dugina’s public commentary provided an ideological framework for Mr. Putin’s aggressive foreign policy.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/08/21/world/europe/daria-dugina-russia-politics.html
Click to expand...
I don't think it was a good idea to attack someone like that inside Russia, she wasn't a direct threat. Likewise, I don't think attacking Russian cities would be a good idea for several reasons. I do think attacking the 10 railway points of entry from Russia up to 100 km inside Russia and vital rail bridges would be the logical targets. I think this would lead to the fastest most humane end to this war and the point has been made. Trap the Russians already in Ukraine and cut off their supply and also it would trap the conscripts in Russia, they are utterly dependent on the railways to project military power. Uncle Sam and the Ukrainians are discussing a target list for bigger missiles and promise not to hit anything not on it. Most of these bridges are in the middle of nowhere with little possibility of collateral damage and are difficult to replace and repair.
 
Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
DIY-HP-LED said:
I don't think it was a good idea to attack someone like that inside Russia, she wasn't a direct threat. Likewise, I don't think attacking Russian cities would be a good idea for several reasons. I do think attacking the 10 railway points of entry from Russia up to 100 km inside Russia and vital rail bridges would be the logical targets. I think this would lead to the fastest most humane end to this war and the point has been made. Trap the Russians already in Ukraine and cut off their supply and also it would trap the conscripts in Russia, they are utterly dependent on the railways to project military power. Uncle Sam and the Ukrainians are discussing a target list for bigger missiles and promise not to hit anything not on it. Most of these bridges are in the middle of nowhere with little possibility of collateral damage and are difficult to replace and repair.
Click to expand...
You are right, JJ. Killing civilians who have no responsibility for conducting the war should not be sanctioned. I don't know why that hit job happened and was speculating without thinking of the larger picture.
 
DIY-HP-LED

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
Fogdog said:
You mean like yourself?
Click to expand...
War is Hell, but there are "civilized" ways of conducting it and barbaric too, all war is evil, but unfortunately it is a reality that must be dealt with. If you are gonna fight one, make sure it's for a very good reason and make sure ya win.
 
DIY-HP-LED

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
If this armed mob shows up in Ukraine, they will be slaughtered, ATACMs for Ukraine to stop them at the borders, no tracks or bridges over the rivers, no train to Ukraine. Maybe all those armed guys trapped in the Moscow region could do something about Vlad, or when they get hungry, they will do something with those guns. Before they get to Ukraine, they could be starved to death FFS, relatives are throwing food over the fences of military depots to them. It's a complete shit show. So give the Ukrainians ATACM's to deal with the hoard inside Russia or give them something to mow them down when they hit Ukraine.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1577737194541924354
 
cannabineer

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
DIY-HP-LED said:
War is Hell, but there are "civilized" ways of conducting it and barbaric too, all war is evil, but unfortunately it is a reality that must be dealt with. If you are gonna fight one, make sure it's for a very good reason and make sure ya win.
Click to expand...
I would add to this: make sure that if you win, history will not condemn the means.

The rationale for nuking imperial Japan was unique and extraordinary. There no longer is even one defensible scenario for using nukes, let alone starting with their use.

Consider: a large strategic nuclear attack will seriously harm the ecosphere, and bring global prosperity to its knees.
Is a counterstrike useful or moral?

This is the grim calculus of deterrence: the enemy must believe that should we be struck, we can and will hit back harder. Should deterrence fail, what measure of retaliation is the least wrong one? The basic premise of deterrence has already been ruined.

This is a thorny issue in my opinion. I cannot figure out an answer. But the question has been put before us for the first time in a long time.
 
DIY-HP-LED

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
cannabineer said:
I would add to this: make sure that if you win, history will not condemn the means.

The rationale for nuking imperial Japan was unique and extraordinary. There no longer is even one defensible scenario for using nukes, let alone starting with their use.

Consider: a large strategic nuclear attack will seriously harm the ecosphere, and bring global prosperity to its knees.
Is a counterstrike useful or moral?

This is the grim calculus of deterrence: the enemy must believe that should we be struck, we can and will hit back harder. Should deterrence fail, what measure of retaliation is the least wrong one? The basic premise of deterrence has already been ruined.

This is a thorny issue in my opinion. I cannot figure out an answer. But the question has been put before us for the first time in a long time.
Click to expand...
Not a call I'd want to make if I swore an oath and meant it, however unless Vlad thinks it's a possibility, it won't be effective. As I said before, they should develop the capability of taking out nuclear targets where they can by conventional precision means using stealth cruise missiles developed for the purpose. Anti ABM systems can hopefully deal with any that get through. It's another option to full Armageddon and not a good one, but better than the alternative and global winter. Nuclear war is too horrible to contemplate, I had my power off for a few days with a Hurricane, try it for a year or more North America wide, most of the population would be dead in a year, and not from being nuked either.
 
DIY-HP-LED

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member

Ukrainian describes how Russian forces ‘ran’ from town
14,335 views Oct 5, 2022 CNN's Nick Paton Walsh reports from southern Ukraine in a newly liberated town littered with Russia's military relics and bodies of Putin's soldiers.
 
DIY-HP-LED

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member

War in Ukraine: Zelenskyy advisor rejects Kremlin's call for talks | Conflict Zone

503,848 views Oct 5, 2022 A senior advisor to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy says nuclear threats from Vladimir Putin need to be taken seriously, but told DW's Tim Sebastian that this is not the first time the Kremlin has sought to blackmail the world.

Ihor Zhovkva, who works in the president's office in Kyiv, said the world's nuclear powers needed to convince Putin to step back from nuclear threats as Russian forces continue to suffer setbacks in Ukraine — but that for now the only talks that will take place with the Kremlin are on the battlefield.

Zhovkva said that if Russia was serious about negotiations, it would not have conducted sham "referendums" in occupied Ukrainian regions and illegally annexed the territories. Zhovkva also underlined that Ukraine would continue to seek the prosecution of war criminals and the assistance of international organizations and partners to collect evidence. He said those Ukrainians who willingly collaborated with Russian occupiers would face punishment.

Please let us know what you think in the comments below.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top