The presence of the Chud Tailgate Murder Fantasy is incidental.
Tagline NOW
420stalin69
joined 2 years ago
We're speeding towards WW3
On the contrary I think we’re going in the other direction.
This all started out as a revived Cold War. Then there was the WW2 phase before WW1-style trench warfare set in. Now Macron is bringing back le Grand Armée.
I think we’re speed running back to Hastings.
The qualifier “progressive” is used to describe a liberal who supports progressive social issues.
Supporting gay rights or feminism etc, that’s being a “progressive” (loosely speaking, it can be defined better than that.)
You seem to want to insist all liberals are progressive liberals but they aren’t.
That’s why the qualifiers “classical liberal” or “liberal conservatism” exist.
In some countries the “Liberal” party are the socially conservative faction of society.
You’re wrong to conflate liberalism with progressivism. That’s why they’re different words.
You’re also wrong to imply that progressive stances are “owned” by “liberals”.
You want to say “progressive liberal” is a tautology…. But it isn’t.
Boiling water feels really fucking hot which is why Celsius makes more sense
At the rate this war is going, he might have to.
The rule is you have to post something before you leave
Isn’t assessing the issue on the issue tracker “listening to input” though?
Your options are
- do it yourself and create a pull request
- make a suggestion to the devs on the issue tracker, who have every right to reject it
- start a discussion here if you believe a feature is important enough to have public debate
That seems like a lot of options for listening to input to me.
What exactly is missing that you want to see? How could you add what you see is missing?
Not really. The relevant metric is “combat power”. If the attackers out number the defenders or if the attackers have more big guns and more ammo than the defenders then the casualty ratio can be much worse for the defenders.
Russia likely both outnumbered the Ukrainians in the sector and even the Ukrainian side described Russia as having a 5-10x artillery advantage, with Russia saying 10x.
Under those conditions the actually observed historical casualty exchange ratios in modern battles would suggest significantly worse casualties for the Ukrainians despite being the defenders. Possibly even much worse casualties with some battles from the US experience in WW2 and Korea said that with sufficient “combat power” they documented even a 5:1 advantage for the attackers.
Most battles see defenders and attackers taking roughly equal casualties in fact.
Part of the reason for this is that basically defense isn’t a static thing. Defending a place actually involves going on the attack as well. You don’t just sit there and wait for the enemy to slowly roll you up, you have to hit back to disrupt his plan. Defending in modern war actually involves a lot of attacking.
Also the attacking force has the initiative. They can choose where they want to attack, from where they want to attack, and when. The defender is forced into a more reactive role.
Given Russias large combat power advantage and given that Russia had the initiative and so was able to partially siege and take its time with the attack to maximize strategic advantage, and given in the end it became a disorganized rout, actually you’d expect Ukraines losses to be probably worse and possibly a lot worse.
You’re saying you think the figures are false?
Have you looked into them at all or is it just more comfortable to assume that?
You say that like US car manufacturers would last a week without government subsidies.
Israel is a US colonial project, these days.