Is it morally justifiable for us then to encourage our friend to fight, maybe by giving him a knife? — Baden
Perhaps it's flawed, but I'm not so sure if "surrender if threatened with nuclear weapons" would really work better.I see you have no argument against my argument other than "this is how we've been doing it for decades!" Pretty cool of you to assume ignorance instead ofengaging my argument that clearly disagrees with nuclear deterrence as an acceptable policy.
Mutual Assured Destruction, or the idea that after innocents are killed due to the use of a WMD that is totally indiscriminate it then is a great strategic step to kill more innocents, is fundamentally flawed. — Benkei
Mutual Assured Destruction, or the idea that after innocents are killed due to the use of a WMD that is totally indiscriminate it then is a great strategic step to kill more innocents, is fundamentally flawed. — Benkei
One such judgment error is called Mirror Image Bias, where we assess motives underlying the behavior of another person based on our own experiences, beliefs, motivations, and values
Beebe goes on to say that our current strategy of thwarting Russian aims in Ukraine while “asphyxiating” their economy may succeed in humiliating Russia, but that, backed into a corner, Putin’s risk calculus could lead him to conclude that nuclear first strike is his only option.
I would presume that people on a Philosophy Forum would back up those who are against authoritarianism and imperialism. — ssu
I will welcome Russian tanks in my street if it avoids a nuclear war. Nothing, absolutely nothing, is worth a strategic nuclear escalation. Freedom be damned. I prefer to live and find the relative freedom possible even in the most autocratic regimes.
Empires come and go. I'm not willing to die for one. I'm not willing to risk the lives of others for one. — Benkei
variables:
1. Putin doesn't use nukes, no escalation
2. Putin uses nukes, no escalation
3. Putin uses nukes, escalation — Benkei
Could someone please enlighten me on this MAD strategy. — FreeEmotion
The number of Chinese nuclear warheads could increase to 700 within six years, the report said, and may top 1,000 by 2030. The report released on Wednesday did not say how many weapons China has today, but a year ago the Pentagon said the number was in the “low 200s” and was likely to double by the end of this decade.
you morally condemn the the Western hypocrisy (see the case of Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen, etc.) and “warmongering” propaganda at the expenses of the Ukrainians. On the other side, you switch to strategic thinking mode when the subject is Putin, so the point is no longer to condemn the propaganda or the inhumanity of the Russian aggression of Ukraine, but to evaluate costs/benefits of a protracted war between Ukraine and Russia. And expect your interlocutors to do the same. — neomac
You're confusing his anti-Western stance for being pro-Putin.
— baker
No, he's genuinely being pro-Putin. — ssu
If Ukrainians can resist Russia in Ukraine, Europeans can resist America in Europe. It's just a matter of Europeans uniting against foreign powers. — Apollodorus
Did you read through the his quotes that I gave? Likely not.
Yet the fact is the Russian reality is absolutely strange. It's a myriad of strange occurrences and crazy events in the eyes of Westerners. I don't know what would come close to it: a perpetual Trump administration? It's really different from the West.
In a way it's on purpose organized to various different elements, a multitude of intelligence services with their own military forces and to army and national guard, in order that there wouldn't be some strong counterweight to Putin himself. Quite similar to the Third Reich, actually. — ssu
not to mention Russia forever losing its honor as a nation. — FreeEmotion
The British have traditionally been racist towards the Irish too, e.g. the phrase 'That's a bit Irish' means 'That's stupid'. That doesn't amount to a Western Jihad against the Irish. — Baden
And a NATO jihad against NATO members, such as Poles, would be a bit self-defeating wouldn't it?
Oh no, protests are very useful for demonstrating that that Regime allows dissent and democracy. The power structures are safe from any influences from below, and things carry on as usual. They don't jail people for protests, worse, they ignore them.
These people are captives: they are being used to pacify, ironically, those who were against the war: see, we are protesting, we are fighting back, but in the end there is no effect. — FreeEmotion
Yeah, I was trying to convey to Wayfarer earlier this very idea that propaganda is not just lies, but (more so, in my opinion) distraction, misdirection. I fear the point was lost. — Isaac
Not if they use the Poles as cannon fodder. That would be achieving two goals with one blow — baker
You're so hyped up that it clouds your judgment. — baker
That's clearly not pro-Putin or pro-Russia. In some earlier discussion elsewhere, I also saw him commenting negatively on Putin. — baker
The moderators can label that 'propoganda' but as far as I'm concerned it's factual. — Wayfarer
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.