The Sovjetunion was a multi cultural country, but Russia itself is 80% Russian and then you have a 4% Taras and 2.2% Ukranians. The rest are at the 1% mark. Most are well within Russian territory. Basically the only place Russia could really loose land is in the Caucasus. So Russia is not going to fragment unless there is a civil war going on.
Russia collapsing would mean Ukraine and very likely Belarus moving towards the EU and NATO. Russian influence in Central Asia would propably be replaced with China and the West would move left again, as Russia stops supporting far right Kremlin parties.
At the very least, you're not losing a crew every time a vehicle like this gets destroyed. Seems logical to pursue when you need every experienced operator you can get
RC cars seem to work fairly well. Human driven vehicles work fine. People play car driving PC games (Forza etc) Hell Ukraine has already fitted tractors & Combine Harvesters with remote control tech because of mines.
Is that the huge technological advance stage? :) Im quessing there will be lots of wartime proven technology for sale when ukraine gets its borders back and UN and its allies make a new neutral sector between them and russia
all Russians are gonna learn.. you obviously need to accept that.. it's going to be tough for you, because you believe you're exceptional for some reason.. trust me, you will understand something new very soon..
I agree, fuck russia, I despise the murderous Russian soldiers, but calling people of a specific nationality “orcs” feels kinda racist to me, idk
I’ve seen people calling all russians orcs, not just the soldiers, even though I’m sure there are a lot of russians who are opposed to the actions of their government. It feels like it could become another harmful, racist stereotype if we all keep repeating it and defending it.
Like, when the war is over, will Russians still be called orcs?
It’s not good to dehumanize people. Even ones who commit atrocities.
Dehumanization is how we got here, it’s not a good path back, unless we wanna go in circles.
It’s subtle, but important, for us to keep human the worst humans. We need to keep salient that these atrocities are being committed by our own to our own humans. That we are all capable of it.
While I do agree with you, the more information that comes out of this war and what Russian soldiers do to the citizens of Ukraine, the less empathy there is.
And I’m empty. After hearing about the rape and murder of men, women, and children by Russian hands.
The reason you don’t dehumanize people who commit atrocities isn’t (mainly) because they deserve more empathy. It’s because it’s important not to forget that these atrocities are committed by everyday humans. Normal I have a wife and kids, I joined the army as a kid out of high school or after being a warehouse clerk for a few years, I coach soccer in the summers, basic-ass humans.
When we dehumanize people like that it blinds us to the fact normal people can commit atrocities when sufficiently radicalized and trained to dehumanize others. It blinds us to the dangers posed by these ideologies when they’re in their initial stages.
When we dehumanize people like that it also mentally prepares us to accept when atrocities are committed against them, or even to become complicit in doing so.
You don’t humanize them for them. You do it to protect you and everyone you love from the dangers of dehumanizing others.
I agree with you. Furthermore, it’s a step down the path of genocide. If your opponent is not human, why do they deserve human rights? They’re a dangerous animal. You wouldn’t let a dangerous animal live.
Sadly nothing in this is new or surprising. Only thing that baffles me is, that it’s been so many years since russian lies started, and how long they have been doing it in order to get “permission” to fully invade.
Prigozhin himself during his little tantrum towards Moscow even said that the whole pretext (like in 2014 already) was just bs. I feel that is one of those details that got kinda swallowed in the news and didn't got enough attention.
I’m sort of confused by this. Just last week Ukraine announced that they’d start flying F-16s after Orthodox Easter was over…so where are those F-16s coming from?
Sometimes, putting ships out of action if the damage is so bad that is as good as sinking them. It costs valuable resources, time and manpower to repair heavily damaged ships which can take months if not years. Putting these ships out of action is a force multiplier.
Like, ships? Honestly, I’d say probably not that much, because they’d be visible and vulnerable, like Russia’s ships are.
Warships are useful if you want to project power over long distances, which this war doesn’t have a lot of.
Maybe you could do a behind-the-lines landing to avoid having to push through someone’s defensive line, kind of in line with the Battle of Anzio or Battle of Inchon, but that’d take a lot of amphibious assault capabilities.
I mean, Russia hasn’t really had her own warships accomplish a whole lot in the war. They disrupted seaborne trade to Ukraine, but Russia’s got coastal access in many places, so it’s not really practical for Ukraine to blockade Russia.
They fired some cruise missiles at Ukraine, but Russia had the ability to hit the same places with land- or air-based cruise missiles.
With ships, you’ve got an asset that can be sunk, whereas that’s not the case on land. If you can fight a land war, you’re probably going to get more bang for your buck out of land forces than naval.
Also the Black Sea, while massive for Army-standards is fairly small for Navy standards. There isn’t really much space to operate without danger of being attacked by land-based systems. Especially when there’s the chance that US-drones keep surveillance of the entire area and relay that info to Ukraine
euromaidanpress.com
Hot