Actually no. The ONLY thing they DID preserve was their nuclear deterrence. — ssu

Not after the collapse of the USSR.

And Russia has had the ability to cause similar harm to New York and Washington DC since 1949. — ssu

Russia's nuclear capability went into decline after the cold war. Whatever capability they have now is recently aquired.

Appeasement is also dangerous, as I think we'll see as this unfolds.

"Those who deny freedom to others, deserve it not for themselves; and, under a just God, can not long retain it."

--Abraham Lincoln

What can one black woman do in a group of ten white people? — Agent Smith

What ten white people? :chin:

There are no "good guys" in world affairs, or it's very rare. There are good people and groups and acts, and many horrific ones too. — Manuel

I think recognizing that is the best way to see the world clearly.

However, I'm fully aware that I could be called a coward or lacking a spine or convictions. It's a matter of temperament. — Manuel

I think it's more a matter of how much a person wants to reduce to the world to a cartoon. Germany instigated war in the 1940s so Germans are evil. Russia killed 40 million of its own people in the early 20th century so Russians are evil.

On the other hand, pointing out real victims of real crimes: that I can get behind.

I don't know, people differ a lot in politics. I tend to avoid thinking in terms of "good guys" or "our side" vs. "bad guys" or "them". It's just a different set of (very often) elite interests. — Manuel

I agree. The mechanics of world events is fascinating to me. I just thought you were anti-American because you said you agreed with one of the more staunchly anti-American characters on the forum.

I think I misunderstood that.

Putin may be many things, but he isn't stupid, much less suicidal. If he invades Ukraine, it's game over. — Manuel

What do you mean? What do you think will happen?

Nevertheless, if he doesn't put troops in the border, Ukraine may feel it could join NATO without consequence, seeing Russia doesn't seem to mind. — Manuel

So you think he's just going to leave 130,000 troops on the border from now on? To keep Ukraine from joining NATO?

I'm interested in why you and I see such a different world, so thanks for responding.

It's not black or white. We can say things clearly: Ukraine has a right to self-defense, Russia has a right to safe borders, what NATO is doing is extremely dangerous and leaves Russia with little option. — Manuel

What is NATO doing that's extremely dangerous? I honestly don't know.

The US military has had the ability to level Moscow for the last 50 years. They could do it any time day or night. They don't need access to Ukraine for that. Why is Putin suddenly feeling threatened?

If you really want to exercise your anti-America, you should say, "This is just the sort of aggression we've come to expect from America. And just as it's wrong when America does it, it's wrong for Russia now."

You see, if you give Russia a pass for placing an army around Ukraine because they have a right to increase their sphere of influence, you're basically laying that same right on America.

Don't be morally ambiguous, condemn wrong wherever and whoever is doing it.

the appointment of a black woman isn't going to remedy a whole lot of anything. — Hanover

It's encouraging to young black women.

Will Biden seek a second term? Who would win if he ran against Trump again?

May as well. Sooner or later everyone is going to get the Omicron vaccine.

Russia is NOT objecting to Ukraine, it is objecting to Ukraine becoming a member of America's NATO, don't you get it? — Apollodorus

You didn't explain why this justifies an invasion.

Did you see news that sanctions could somehow limit the ability of Russia to pay off debt? The country with the biggest liability is France.

We know that you've got an anti-Russian bias from your own statements and the "discussions" you have started:

Even as a young teen I found it whimsical and totally attached from reality. Soviet propaganda, that is ....
— ssu — Apollodorus

This is not an anti-Russian bias. :roll:

Let's change! — unenlightened

Gotta let them play out their story.

Have you painted yourself into a misanthropic corner? Because non-Christians are no better

The alternative is central planning. That would also be full of woe and dastardly deeds. It's just how we are. Pick your poison.

:up:

Back when it all began we talked about why people of color seemed to be at a higher risk. Now we know at least one factor is the prevalence of vitamin D deficiency among POC.

Vitamin D deficiency is associated with more severe disease. Here.

Yes it is.

The likeliest thing is that this hasn't gone as Putin planned earlier, the moves of the game are still going on. — ssu

You mean about splitting the US off from NATO? Or what?

True.

Gummy bears are also popular.

So it was all a negotiation tactic?

You clearly need to eat more special brownies.

The quasi-conspiracy theory I'm going to lay on you is that gangs are part of a situation that was intentionally fostered: they built projects for black people to live in, allowed those communities to be inundated by drugs (there's more credibility to that than I would have thought : the FBI looked into it.). And refusing to do gun control not only reduces the population of black men, but makes sure a lot of them end up behind bars. For real, black men have the highest mortality rate in the US demographically.

I'm not saying it is all orchestrated. I'm saying the way choices are made is partly influenced by an interest in undermining progress for blacks. Maybe it's a leftover from the late 1960s?

So in line with the idea that stability is not a static state of perfection, but rather the equilibrium of opposing forces (like with Henry's Law), we can hypothesize the character of a culture by noting the obvious and looking for its opposite.

So @Banno notes a society that strikes him as "every man for himself". The opposite of that is selflessness; a sheep like tendency to fall quietly in line (per folklore this is a British trait, and the US culture is an extrapolation of parts of the British culture.)

So a hypervigilance about freedom is not the poor outcome of Augustinianism (who on earth thinks that's how anthropology works?) but rather it comes from fears in the present, in this case fear of one's own tendency to accept tyranny without protest.

@Banno I think you should read this post about five times, because it's very insightful. :grin:

:grin: :up:

Sure. As I said, there is gun crime that just started as a regular old disputes. There weren't necessarily any criminals involved.

The existence of criminal activity is no reason to withhold efforts to help there.

I agree there are factors other than availability, like gang activity. Intuitively, it just doesn't seem likely that availability is of no importance, though.

But by 'availability' I meant how easy it is to get one, not how many are owned.

Stricter gun laws are a feel good way of addressing the problem, and it serves also for the left to piss off the right, but, as a matter of effective policy, it's not terribly effective. — Hanover

I don't know. It's fairly common (in an emergency department) to see gun crime that started as a dispute and then escalated.

Without the ridiculously easy access to firearms, those crimes wouldn't be so bad.

Would it eliminate gun crime altogether? No. Would it save lives (including the lives of so many poor kids who were unlucky enough to have a gun in there hands when they were angry?). Yes.

I did.

Hmm. The article is an invitation to notice, in contrast, that society is overwhelmingly about cooperation. — Banno

Just as you can't have freedom without a context of constraints, you can't have cooperation without a context of opposing interests.

What I'm advocating is second nature for the determinist: put away your condemnations and see the ways that every citizen is compelled by circumstances, culture, and history.

If you can't do that, shut up about free will because it's one of your hinge propositions.

The American concept of freedom is rooted in the need for unity in the face of diversity. The Bill of Rights provides a government divided against itself. A citizen can appeal to the government to be protected from the government. This is civil rights.

You need to think of societies as being made up of opposing forces. Peace and stability are the balancing of forces rather than executing some ideal principle.

some military analysts say that so far it looks like a textbook example of an invasion in the making. — SophistiCat

They also say it's going to be a blood bath. Maybe it will be quick.

So the Ukrainian military is saying that Russia is getting close to invasion-ready.

Looks like it's going to be a blood bath.

Yet Russia has persistently trained it's troops in huge formations not seen in Western military exercises and hence can adapt to the troops being there. — ssu

Odd. Maybe he was reading War and Peace and thought it would be fun to get out there and camp in the mud.