Ukraine and the Russian invasion, 2022-25

[emanymton]

You could decide which weapons you’d oppose Ukraine using.

Would you make the same rationalisation for chemical weapons?

Why? If I decided cluster bombs or whatever are a step to far what changes other than my sense of moral superiority?

There is a knee-jerk reaction people are having to cluster bombs, but that is based on them being used by the invader. Which of course they have been and no one seemed to make much of fuss about it?

The question of should cluster bombs be used and if so when and where is one for Ukrainians to have. If there are sensible voices in Ukraine giving good reasoned arguments against their used then I will listen to them. But I'm not going to go along with a buch of old UK lefties and reflexively yell bad as soon as I hear the term, then sit there smug in how much better I am than the Ukrainians who want to us them.

 

[Spymaster]

I think there's mild hyperbole and then there's mindless jingoism. And it's treading a very fine line. If I'm going to ignore TC for being over the top, I can at least be consistent about hating excession from the Ukrainian side when it's a statement for international media. I can totally understand it when it's for internal consumption, they are in a war for their very existence, but it does them no favours to be like that when plenty of countries are very hesitant over such things.

Nah; still ain't get worked-up about it. The main criticism I have of using language like that is that it distracts from the substantive issue that arming Ukraine with such weapons, when they are being used against them, is a thoroughly sensible course of action.

 

[The39thStep]

Nah; still ain't get worked-up about it. The main criticism I have of using language like that is that it distracts from the substantive issue that arming Ukraine with such weapons, when they are being used against them, is a thoroughly sensible course of action.

I still can't get over the fact that you didn't advocate such a course of action until the Americans announced it

 

[two sheds]

I'm still quite surprised that Ukraine hasn't really attacked within Russia's borders. I suppose that's a condition of getting the armaments and if they did the threat is that they'd not be supplied with any more but you'd still think with all that's happened it would be bloody tempting for them.

 

[Spymaster]

I still can't get over the fact that you didn't advocate such a course of action until the Americans announced it

What are you on about? I didn't know they were running out of them until the Americans announced that they were sending some.

 

[Spymaster]

Why? If I decided cluster bombs or whatever are a step to far what changes other than my sense of moral superiority?

There is a knee-jerk reaction people are having to cluster bombs, but that is based on them being used by the invader. Which of course they have been and no one seemed to make much of fuss about it?

The question of should cluster bombs be used and if so when and where is one for Ukrainians to have. If there are sensible voices in Ukraine giving good reasoned arguments against their used then I will listen to them. But I'm not going to go along with a buch of old UK lefties and reflexively yell bad as soon as I hear the term, then sit there smug in how much better I am than the Ukrainians who want to us them.

Precisely.

Where was the outrage from this lot when Russia invaded? Where was the outrage when Russia bombed Kharkiv and Mariupol to dust and murdered, raped and tortured their civilian populations?

But, oh wait! The Americans are sending Ukraine cluster bombs to defend themselves.

"EVIL BASTARDS!"

 

[strung out]

What are you on about? I didn't know they were running out of them until the Americans announced that they were sending some.

Also, I'm sure some people like The39thStep keep tabs on these things more closely than others, but plenty of us have no idea what the specific capabilities and quantities of US/Ukrainian stockpiles look like. Why would simple folk like you or me be banging on about them until they start getting talked about as an option by people in the know?

 

[Rob Ray]

I was outraged, and have supported Ukrainian self defence because I'd seen what Russia had been doing not just in Ukraine but everywhere it got the chance (both sides of the borderline).

I'm also against the introduction of more cluster munitions. They're weapons which leave a widespread, permanent threat to life wherever they're deployed. Whether they've been used before is irrelevant to that fact.

 

[Pickman's model]

Also, I'm sure some people like The39thStep keep tabs on these things more closely than others, but plenty of us have no idea what the specific capabilities and quantities of US/Ukrainian stockpiles look like. Why would simple folk like you or me be banging on about them until they start getting talked about as an option by people in the know?

Spymaster is many things but simple is not one of them

 

[Pickman's model]

I still can't get over the fact that you didn't advocate such a course of action until the Americans announced it

Coincidence or conspiracy

 

[Spymaster]

I'm also against the introduction of more cluster munitions. They're weapons which leave a widespread, permanent threat to life wherever they're deployed. Whether they've been used before is irrelevant to that fact.

Then your position is effectively:

"Despite the already widespread use of cluster munitions by both sides, Russia should de facto be allowed the tactical advantage of their continued use, whilst Ukraine should be denied further supplies. This, despite assurances from Ukraine that the weapons will only be used defensively against invading Russian troops on Ukrainian soil; that they will not be deployed in built-up areas; that their deployment will be closely monitored and mapped; that the areas that they are used in will be thoroughly cleansed at the earliest opportunity (hopefully at Russian expense)".

That's a shit position, imo.

This is not Laos. The use of these weapons will be completely different to their use in that and other cases. The main objections that you are raising simply don't apply here.

 

[Rob Ray]

Then your position is effectively:

"Despite the already widespread use of cluster munitions by both sides, Russia should be allowed the tactical advantage of their continued use, whilst Ukraine should be denied further supplies. This, despite assurances from Ukraine that the weapons will only be used defensively against invading Russian troops on Ukrainian soil; that they will not be deployed in built-up areas; that their deployment will be closely monitored and mapped; that the areas that they are used in will be thoroughly cleansed at the earliest opportunity (hopefully at Russian expense)".

That's a shit position, imo.

It's "effectively" that a river isn't improved by adding more shit. I said nothing at all about supplies to Ukraine more generally. Your strategic assessment of where I draw my personal lines is of no interest to me.

 

[Spymaster]

It's "effectively" that a river isn't improved by adding more shit. I said nothing at all about supplies to Ukraine more generally. Your strategic assessment of where I draw my personal lines is of no interest to me.

Worthless.

 

[Rob Ray]

As opposed to one-word insults, which add mightily to any conversation.

Honestly I think one of the most pathetic phenomenons in all of online debate, perhaps worse than incel culture, is the "hard-nosed armchair general" wanging on about how brutality and horror in other countries is good and necessary because "we" (ie. Other people a long way away) gotta be hard-nosed if "we" want to win. And then calling dissent on the subject weak. Fight on the front lines tough guy. Farm the fields and rebuild the towns afterwards.

 

[The39thStep]

Also, I'm sure some people like The39thStep keep tabs on these things more closely than others, but plenty of us have no idea what the specific capabilities and quantities of US/Ukrainian stockpiles look like. Why would simple folk like you or me be banging on about them until they start getting talked about as an option by people in the know?

Last time I kept tabs , simple folk like you were saying that simple folk like Spy should be on a banned list

 

[Spymaster]

As opposed to one-word insults, which add mightily to any conversation.

It's not an insult. Just a comment on the quality and foresight of your argument.

 

[strung out]

Last time I kept tabs , simple folk like you were saying that simple folk like Spy should be on a banned list

An idea still with some merit

 

[Rob Ray]

Which served only to vent. Good job kiddo.

 

[Spymaster]

As opposed to one-word insults, which add mightily to any conversation.

Honestly I think one of the most pathetic phenomenons in all of online debate, perhaps worse than incel culture, is the "hard-nosed armchair general" wanging on about how brutality and horror in other countries is good and necessary because "we" (ie. Other people a long way away) gotta be hard-nosed if "we" want to win. And then calling dissent on the subject weak. Fight on the front lines tough guy. Farm the fields and rebuild the towns afterwards.

Ah, you sneakily edited your dumb post.

Because that's just what's happening here isn't it?

Fucking idiot.

^That was an insult.

 

[ska invita]

I'm not going to go along with a buch of old UK lefties and reflexively yell bad as soon as I hear the term, then sit there smug in how much better I am than the Ukrainians who want to us them.

Pinning the use of a banned bomb on "smug" "UK lefties" is pathetic. The weapons are banned by 125 countries. Theres a reason why they are banned and this below appears to be why:

Just read this:
"Worldwide, civilians represented 97% of all cluster munition casualties, according to a report in August by the Landmine and Cluster Munition Monitor, a campaign group that works to eradicate their use. Children accounted for 66% of all casualties where the age group was known, the report said."
If correct that seems a pretty sound reason that these bombs are nominally banned by most states

Brushing this away as moaning smug lefties is something Id expect from the far right media not Urban, but thats where we are now I guess

 

[Spymaster]

Pinning the use of a banned bomb on "smug" "UK lefties" is pathetic. The weapons are banned by 125 countries. Theres a reason why they are banned and this below appears to be why:

Do you accept that the proposed use of the weapons in Ukraine, negates most of the concerns regarding children in your post that you quote above?

 

[maomao]

Do you accept that the proposed use of the weapons in Ukraine, negates most of the concerns regarding children in your post that you quote above?

Are the Ukrainians planning to not have children in future or something? These things will kill kids after the war whatever the justification for their use.

 

[Spymaster]

Are the Ukrainians planning to not have children in future or something? These things will kill kids after the war whatever the justification for their use.

No. They won't. Battlefields can be cleared of unexploded ordnance. The reason that these weapons have killed people long after they've been deployed elsewhere is because often they haven't been. The Ukrainians are saying that they will target Russian troops in the open with them, not built-up areas. They will later clear the sites where they have been used. This is the Ukranians using the weapons on their own land. Why would anyone doubt that they would thoroughly clean-up afterwards?

 

[Pickman's model]

No. They won't. Battlefields can be cleared of unexploded ordnance. The reason that these weapons have killed people long after they've been deployed elsewhere is because often they haven't been. The Ukrainians are saying that they will target Russian troops in the open with them, not built-up areas. They will later clear the sites where they have been used. This is the Ukranians using the weapons on their own land. Why would anyone doubt that they would thoroughly clean-up afterwards?

Even when you clear something up you can miss a thing or two.

 

[Rob Ray]

Ah, you sneakily edited your dumb post.

Because that's just what's happening here isn't it?

Fucking idiot.

^That was an insult.

I often add notes after a moment's additional thought, it's not some sort of competitive strategy . And yes, obviously a good part of your approach, as is often the case for you, is directly in the armchair general genre. You do love to think of yourself as the clear-headed guy who can take hard decisions that lefties won't, which, as you experience no effect or consequence, is exactly the posturing you accuse others of, just in the other direction.

 

[kabbes]

I often add notes after a moment's additional thought, it's not some sort of competitive strategy . And yes, obviously a good part of your approach, as is often the case for you, is directly in the armchair general genre. You do love to think of yourself as the clear-headed guy who can take hard decisions that lefties won't, which, as you experience no effect or consequence, is exactly the posturing you accuse others of, just in the other direction.

He’s got you there Spy, to be fair

 

[The39thStep]

Even when you clear something up you can miss a thing or two.

How effective are these clear ups after cluster bombs have been used? Have we anything that we can put in a good practise guide for those who support their use ?

 

[Spymaster]

Even when you clear something up you can miss a thing or two.

Of course. But that goes for any type of explosives. When this is over there's going to be an enormous clean up operation, hopefully at Russian expense. In the meantime they're weighing-up the consequences of not using them.

 

[ska invita]

From now on lets just do what military generals want and if that sounds wrong/illegal/murderous remember you are being smug.
They know best.

 

[maomao]

No. They won't. Battlefields can be cleared of unexploded ordnance. The reason that these weapons have killed people long after they've been deployed elsewhere is because often they haven't been. The Ukrainians are saying that they will target Russian troops in the open with them, not built-up areas. They will later clear the sites where they have been used. This is the Ukranians using the weapons on their own land. Why would anyone doubt that they would thoroughly clean-up afterwards?

Cluster bombs are less of a problem in built up areas. They're a problem when spread over arrable land. Which is most of Ukraine. How will the Ukrainians manage to clear these up easily when much of South-East Asia is still suffering from ones half a century old?