Russia is less terrorist than Azerbaijan, but the latter isn’t even being sanctioned (and there’s been an ICJ decision against them, but everybody ignores it) for starving out a little country of 120k people right now in a medieval siege, and openly stating that they are doing exactly that.
I don’t think Ukraine has lots of problems. At least the aggressor there is recognized for what it is and the victim is recognized for what it is and armed by half the world.
I don’t think Ukraine deserves any attention, in fact, since in Artsakh they support Azerbaijan. Support of now finally actual genocide happening is what makes me think that.
Russian likes to threaten the world with nukes - nuclear war would inevitably lead to a nuclear holocaust that would cause the near extinction of the human species.
I don’t give a flying fuck about Azerbaijan. Russia is terrorizing the entire species of humanity. Until you’re threatening to wipe out the entire planet, you are not a terrorist on the same level as Russia.
nuclear war would inevitably lead to a nuclear holocaust that would cause the near extinction of the human species.
If you use tactical nukes, then it’s not much more significant than using thermobaric ordnance or cassettes or even chemical weapons or anything else kinda nasty and non-conventional.
It won’t lead to a global thermonuclear war and thus a nuclear holocaust any more than use of sarin in Syria did.
However! If you don’t give a flying fuck about a smaller holocaust then I don’t give one about your bigger one even if it involves me, I just don’t care.
Escalation policies tend to become very elastic when implemented by humans.
They really can get to some limited strategic exchange, but after that point some countries are democratic and that demos which supposedly rules them will tear into pieces everybody preventing the cessation of hostilities, and others are authoritarian, and their authority cares about its lives and well-being the most.
I mean, NATO officials have become much more modest with words about “any attack on NATO territory is an attack on NATO” after a few stray missiles have landed on Polish territory, for example.
Escalation policies tend to become very elastic when implemented by humans.
I’m talking about the Rules of Engagement during wartime. Especially when it comes to the release of nuclear weapons. These rules are very un-elastic.
Each use of nuclear force is responded to by an escalated nuclear force reply. This can keep happening until all the missiles are in the air, flying to their destinations.
Russia is a terrorist state. #SlavaUkraini #ArmUkraineForVictory
Russia is less terrorist than Azerbaijan, but the latter isn’t even being sanctioned (and there’s been an ICJ decision against them, but everybody ignores it) for starving out a little country of 120k people right now in a medieval siege, and openly stating that they are doing exactly that.
I don’t think Ukraine has lots of problems. At least the aggressor there is recognized for what it is and the victim is recognized for what it is and armed by half the world.
I don’t think Ukraine deserves any attention, in fact, since in Artsakh they support Azerbaijan. Support of now finally actual genocide happening is what makes me think that.
Russian likes to threaten the world with nukes - nuclear war would inevitably lead to a nuclear holocaust that would cause the near extinction of the human species.
I don’t give a flying fuck about Azerbaijan. Russia is terrorizing the entire species of humanity. Until you’re threatening to wipe out the entire planet, you are not a terrorist on the same level as Russia.
Tactical nukes usually.
If you use tactical nukes, then it’s not much more significant than using thermobaric ordnance or cassettes or even chemical weapons or anything else kinda nasty and non-conventional.
It won’t lead to a global thermonuclear war and thus a nuclear holocaust any more than use of sarin in Syria did.
However! If you don’t give a flying fuck about a smaller holocaust then I don’t give one about your bigger one even if it involves me, I just don’t care.
You didn’t mention the escalation policy of either of those countries during a war event.
Escalation policies tend to become very elastic when implemented by humans.
They really can get to some limited strategic exchange, but after that point some countries are democratic and that demos which supposedly rules them will tear into pieces everybody preventing the cessation of hostilities, and others are authoritarian, and their authority cares about its lives and well-being the most.
I mean, NATO officials have become much more modest with words about “any attack on NATO territory is an attack on NATO” after a few stray missiles have landed on Polish territory, for example.
I’m talking about the Rules of Engagement during wartime. Especially when it comes to the release of nuclear weapons. These rules are very un-elastic.
Each use of nuclear force is responded to by an escalated nuclear force reply. This can keep happening until all the missiles are in the air, flying to their destinations.