SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
I have noted before that Zelensky talks too much, demands too much, demonizes the Russians, and canonizes his own forces. Here, we can put to rest the assertion that bombing cities is Russia's preferred tactic, or strategy.
“The Russians fight poorly in the cities,” Mr. Podolyak said. “In the cities, it is possible to maneuver, and find cover, and you minimize losses; you can resist a longer time and inflict significant casualties on the Russians.”
There you have it. The ongoing destruction of Ukrainian cities is a choice that has been made by Ukraine, not Russia.
Let it be noted, that time and again, we have seen cities evacuated after Russian forces have overrun the cities. Ukraine won't evacuate the city a week before expected combat, it seems they prefer to keep their civilian human shields around. How can you demonize Russian artillery, if you don't have mounds of dead civilians to point to?
What we don't see yet, is an open admission that Ukraine sets up it's own rockets, artillery, anti-aircraft and more in apartment complexes.
Further, there is a rumor (remains unverified by myself) that Ukraine hands anti-tank and other weaponry to civilians in those apartment complexes, telling them to fire any appropriate target.
Time and again, we've seen apartment buildings hit, but few people bother to ask, "Why would the Russians be targeting an apartment?"
People, if your own army is setting up artillery, rockets and anti-tank weaponry in your apartment building, then your own army is not on your side.
Ukraine's story is much like Israel's story. Ain't no 'good guys' involved. Ukrainian leadership has made the cold, calculating decision to fight inside the cities.
“The Russians fight poorly in the cities,” Mr. Podolyak said. Geez, I wonder why. And, it seems that Ukrainians are pretty damned good at it! A scorched earth policy is a relatively easy decision for those who don't really care about the people living on that scorched earth!
A generous western media source - https://www.nytimes.com/live/2022/06/14/world/russia-ukraine-war-news
A less generous Russian propaganda source - ttps://www.rt.com/russia/557154-ukraine-presidential-adviser-military-positions-cities/
Here we have a bit of papal milquetoast - https://www.businessinsider.co.za/pope-says-putin-russia-war-ukraine-good-bad-guys-2022-6
It would be nice if the old man were to say, "Russia bad because A, B, and C, Ukraine bad because X, Y, and Z." Instead he just blabbers around the issue, ultimately saying nothing.
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Thursday June 16 2022, @03:50AM (39 children)
You don't have morals, though. You are unable to articulate your system of morality, nor explain its ontological grounding, nor expound on your moral epistemology. You're very clearly a high-functioning psychopath. Which is fine in its own way, just don't pretend knowledge in a sphere you by definition cannot have any knowledge of.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 16 2022, @04:19AM (21 children)
They's some purtysome palaveratin' so as them rubes'll be bowin 'n bendin' at the awful buty of it. Not if'n they's been actual schooled, 'course.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Azuma Hazuki on Thursday June 16 2022, @05:33AM (20 children)
Moral philosophy is *hard.* There is a very good reason most people stop at "well $BOOK says..." and leave it there.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 16 2022, @05:39AM
Betcha that sounded smart on the insides o' your head. Moral...
(Score: -1, Offtopic) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 16 2022, @08:48AM (2 children)
We used to have a philosopher, named aristarchus, who would occasionally post journal articles on ethics. I bet they are still there, if anyone cares to look. As I recall, they did not phase khallow at all, since he is innocent of ethical thought.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 17 2022, @02:13AM (1 child)
And the asylums are full of philosophers.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 17 2022, @05:42AM
Such as it ever was. Just nice that they don't make us all drink Hemlock now! But, since everyone outside of the asylum, especially the Trumpers, appears to be insane, perhaps you might be better off inside?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 16 2022, @10:10PM (15 children)
Oh really? Gimme one single example of the difficulties you have.
Moral philosophy is *dead simple*. Maybe you're conflating it with politics
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 16 2022, @10:43PM (14 children)
Since people have been debating moral philosophy for thousands of years, perhaps you could just cut to the chase and give your metaethical framework, the normative ethic on that, and the resulting applied paradigm. Be sure not to leave anything out and to explain your answers to all the standard questions and solutions to the common dilemmas. I'm sure many would be pleased to finally have it solved.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 16 2022, @11:48PM (13 children)
Two words: Be nice
tl;dr version: Always kill your enemy with a smile
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 17 2022, @07:01PM
Wrong audience.
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Saturday June 18 2022, @03:30AM (10 children)
You didn't answer AC's actual question, and you sure as hell didn't answer mine, those being "What is moral?" and "How do you know?" The word we're looking for here is metaethics. Can you describe your metaethical framework, i.e., how you know what is moral?
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 18 2022, @05:21AM
You could start by absorbing the "Be nice" part. After you chew on that for a few years, maybe then somebody might take your bait. And possibly without demeaning you more in the process.
Subplots can be a real botheration.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 18 2022, @05:21AM (8 children)
I answered it perfectly. "Moral" is a human invention, to feed the ego
Oh please! Stop with the silly psychobabble, trying to inflate your ego... metaethical... oh murrrrder!
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 18 2022, @05:34AM (1 child)
Nonsense, morality comes from magic apples; if god didn't want us to be moral he wouldn't have allowed a talking snake to seduce us.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 18 2022, @05:40AM
The ol' country tale goes... it weren't the apple, it were the banana.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 18 2022, @05:38AM
Apparently you aren't aware of the subplot baggage. The whole thing is dark humor.
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Sunday June 19 2022, @05:36PM (4 children)
Okay, so you'd describe yourself as a "moral error theorist" then? This being the position that morality is an accidental (if perhaps inevitable...) feature of sentient or at least human evolution and has no place in a modern, thinking man or woman's mind? :) Go on...
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 19 2022, @06:34PM (2 children)
:-) You are a babbling brook.. "Morality" is a tool of imposition, *might makes right*
(Score: 3, Funny) by Azuma Hazuki on Monday June 20 2022, @05:19AM (1 child)
Moral error theory, yup. Let me guess, you consider yourself a libertarian?
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 21 2022, @06:11AM
I think you are misunderstanding the meaning of The Greater Fool Theory.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 19 2022, @06:37PM
There are more things in heaven and earth, o' king of the pervs, than your nightmare philosophy can explain.
The gall of some delusional, neurotic asshole, lecturing on how to be nice.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 18 2022, @08:42AM
Define "be" and "nice," please.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday June 16 2022, @02:03PM (16 children)
Even if we were to suppose, contrary to reality, that any of that were necessary, there's plenty of articulation, explaining, and expounding for those who wish to pay attention.
I present as counter evidence here [soylentnews.org], here [soylentnews.org], here [soylentnews.org], here [soylentnews.org] (note I checked off all the boxes in this one and still caught shit), and here [soylentnews.org] (another eight examples from yet another time when you've made the same empty accusations you made today).
I don't expect anyone to read everyone of these examples. They're not that interesting. But I have examples going back six years, many in direct reply to you, Azuma. And yet, here you are still singing the same ignorant note. So how many years does it take you to acknowledge reality?
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 16 2022, @02:38PM (5 children)
Your problem seems to be faulty axioms and likely some amount of ASD or sociopathy that makes common senae morality trickier for you to get a handle on. I believe this is because the mority of situations can vary highly with context, and if you're on the spectrum that makes it harder to understand the rules of morality. It would also explain your obsession with capitalism and insistence that any problems are due to government meddling, all dogma you learned as god given facts. When you hold beliefs that applaud the rich while hurting the poor, such as the standard GOP approach, then you are leaning evil. Maybe in the future when the rich are taxed so heavily they can barely afford first class airline tickets, THEN we can entertain whining about rich people problems.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Friday June 17 2022, @02:37AM (4 children)
(Score: 0, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 17 2022, @05:25PM (2 children)
That tired excuse? Do conservatives ever take responsibility? You push anti-human pro-rich ideology, so either you have faulty assumptions making you believe toxicity is good, or you're fine with being a fair but evil. The only reason to think you're on the spectrum, as are many users here, is that you've had things explained but you reject everything that doesn't support old school capitalism, and anything related to climate change. How would you describe someone that rejects reality in favor of rightwing economics? Or the insurrection on 1/6 that finally has proper charges against the main instigators? Please, do give a description of such a type of person!
(Score: 2, Insightful) by khallow on Saturday June 18 2022, @06:07AM (1 child)
Erm, even if that were true, so what? I'm not the one having trouble with alternate viewpoints. A glaring example of this failure is that you have yet to display any morality in your above post, much less a morality superior to the alleged anti-human, pro-rich ideology.
Similarly, a flat Earther has explained things, but I still reject everything that doesn't support old school round Earthism. I must be on the spectrum!
The act of explanation doesn't make the explanation acceptable. You need more than that. Someone who lies on the rational end of the spectrum will reject irrational, dumbass explanations as standard procedure.
I'd start by first finding someone who does that. I haven't done so it's quite irrelevant to our discussion. First, I'll just note here that my economics is not rightwing economics. It is merely economics. Second, people who attack "old school capitalism" fail economics hard. Nowhere else can something succeed for centuries - building many awesome developed world societies, for example - and still get treated as if it were an utter failure.
I see you're self-signaling that you're an idiot. Wasn't Trump supposed to be THE main instigator in your narrative? And so far, nobody has issued charges against him. "Finally" hasn't happened yet!
I wager this is a situation where a glance in the mirror would reveal that type of person to you. I find it interesting how tu quoque works so well in situations like this. There's just an amazing number of people who brazenly display the flaws they claim in others.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 19 2022, @09:00PM
No u B^)
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Saturday June 18 2022, @03:31AM
AC's not treating you like you're mentally ill, Hallow. That would give you an *excuse.*
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 17 2022, @01:22AM (4 children)
Evidence? Not only is khallow mad, he seems to hold grudges, and an inventory of every time he got spanked on SoylentNews. Pathetic, and mediocre!
(Score: 1) by khallow on Friday June 17 2022, @02:43AM (3 children)
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 17 2022, @06:02AM (2 children)
https://www.slideshare.net/KevinHallow/online-dating-wingman-basic-report [slideshare.net]
Google. Sick.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 17 2022, @03:53PM
LOL
How is that surprising yet expected??
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Saturday June 18 2022, @03:32AM
Oh good Lord, is that really him?
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 17 2022, @09:51PM (3 children)
The fact that you think those posts help your case makes this whole thing even worse. Too long in the trenches, I suppose.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Saturday June 18 2022, @06:16AM (2 children)
I strongly suspect most readers would disagree with that. Instead we're seeing the usual toxicity of narrative thinking - that is, believing something merely because it's an attractive story, not because it has even a slight connection to reality.
My take is that this just reduces your life to a shitty movie.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 19 2022, @09:04PM (1 child)
Amazing projection. You hold a narrative counter to easily observable and verifiable facts then try and pretend you are the ideologically persecuted one. Top kek, very rightwing troll.
Maybe stop being so hysterical? And smiling more wouldn't hurt.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday June 19 2022, @11:41PM
What would that narrative be? In this thread, we started with some babbling accusations against me about "no morals as we recognize them". Azuma weighed in with the usual frothing ranting which added nothing. At that point, I provided in total a dozen links where I demonstrated morals (including checking off some Azuma lines in the sand) as a rational person would recognize them. I grant you probably aren't so capable of recognition, but that's not relevant to my argument.
Now, you're whining about projection and making the usual completely nonsensical statements about "easily observable and verifiable facts" while failing to provide any of those facts - the usual bad faith move I see in these sorts of arguments.
Probably ought to take your own advice here. I'm here in the first place because I care about what happens to the Ukraine. Someone accuses me of silly flaws, I'll correct that.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 15, @02:59AM
It should be clear to anyone reading Azuma's posts that the individual behind that account name is racist, in the worst sense of that word.
That individual practices the "you are racist if you do not think identically to me" form of racism, and reading the posts produced by that individual, it quickly becomes apparent that they are worse than the worst KKK members ever were during the 50's or 60's in the US south.
Further, that individual let leak out their racism when they posted this comment this comment [soylentnews.org].
For those who do not know, Clarence Thomas [wikipedia.org] is an African American.
Azuma Hazuki's writing of "Uncle (Ruckus)" is an allusion to the racial slur "Uncle Tom" [wikipedia.org]. Quoting from Wikipedia:
Usually the individual behind the Azuma account is much more subtle in their Racism, but for that post, they let their true colors be known.