Russia and Ukraine

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

Yeah, so that does give me some pause. Shouldn't we be worried about nuclear war if nuclear bombs have happened before?

Hundreds of thousands of people have been killed with longbows. Should I be worried about that, since ‘it happened before’?

I’m less concerned about nuclear war than I am about fissile materials falling into the hands of idealistic freedom fighters.

Boru

[The Grand Nudger]

I guess there's a sense in which we should worry about that. The sense in which, like imperial japan, contemporary russia is too far gone, too lost in the sauce, and could only be stopped by dropping bombs on moscow and st petersburg.

....or...are we being asked to worry that incompetent nuts in russia might do crazy shit? Because..if so...is that an argument for not dropping bombs on them, or dropping them quicker..before they fuck up?

On a scale of 1-preemptive nuclear strike how much should we worry about russians nuking ukraine?

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

I guess there's a sense in which we should worry about that.  The sense in which, like imperial japan, contemporary russia is too far gone, too lost in the sauce, and could only be stopped by dropping bombs on moscow and st petersburg.

....or...are we being asked to worry that incompetent nuts in russia might do crazy shit?  Because..if so...is that an argument for not dropping bombs on them, or dropping them quicker..before they fuck up?

On a scale of 1-preemptive nuclear strike how much should we worry about russians nuking ukraine?

For reasons already given, not more than a 2. 

Boru

[Thumpalumpacus]

On a scale of 1-preemptive nuclear strike how much should we worry about russians nuking ukraine?

Given the blatant and public exposure of their conventional forces as worthless, I doubt they want to expose their nuclear forces as being equally flawed, especially on a target which (if those nukes do work) will irradiate the land they want to seize and destroy infrastructure they desperately need to make this invasion break even, at best.

[A. Secular Human]

Yeah, so that does give me some pause. Shouldn't we be worried about nuclear war if nuclear bombs have happened before?

We were taught to hide under our desks at school.  Maybe you can find a desk to crawl under so you will be safe.

Maybe you can find a desk to crawl under so you will *feel* safe.

There, fixed it for you.

[Thumpalumpacus]

We were taught to hide under our desks at school.  Maybe you can find a desk to crawl under so you will be safe.

Maybe you can find a desk to crawl under so you will *feel* safe.

There, fixed it for you.

I had "duck and cover" drills in my first year of school, in 1973/74. I had no idea what it was to defend against except there was a big cloud in the cartoon they showed us.

By the time I returned to America in late 1978, that shit was gone ... just as good, because by then I knew how useless it would have been.

[Fake Messiah]

Russia wants to confront NATO but dares not fight it on the battlefield – so it’s waging a hybrid war instead

When someone tried – and failed – to burn down a bus garage in Prague earlier this month, the unsuccessful arson attack didn’t draw much attention. Until, that is, Czech Prime Minister Petr Fiala revealed it was “very likely” that Moscow was behind it.

The accusation prompted alarm among security officials and governments because several similar incidents have occurred across Europe in recent months. The Museum of Occupation in Riga was targeted in an arson attack in February. A London warehouse burnt down in March and a shopping center in Warsaw went up in flames in May. Police in Germany arrested several people suspected of planning explosions and arson attacks in April, and French authorities launched an anti-terror investigation after detaining a suspected bomb-maker who was injured in a botched explosion earlier this month.

Multiple hacking attacks and spying incidents have been reported in different European countries. As the same time, the European Union has accused Russia and Belarus of weaponizing migration by pushing asylum seekers from third countries to its borders. There have also been several suspicious attacks against individuals: a Russian defector was found shot dead in Spain and an opposition figure exiled in Lithuania was brutally attacked with a hammer.

The seemingly random attacks have one thing in common: according to local officials, they are all linked to Russia. And while they might look minor in isolation, taken together these incidents amount to what security experts say is Russia’s hybrid war on the West.

Russian President Vladimir Putin has made it clear he sees the war in Ukraine as part of a broader conflict with NATO and that his regime views the government in Kyiv as a mere proxy of the West.

https://edition.cnn.com/2024/06/30/europ...index.html

[Disagreeable]

It seems that it's never gonna be rational to start a nuclear war. But maybe we should worry about irrationality.

[pocaracas]

It seems that it's never gonna be rational to start a nuclear war. But maybe we should worry about irrationality.

Or maybe non-rational*

---

That's actually very helpful. I don't really disagree with most of that (of course I come to a different conclusion). One critical thing however that you and many others in the thread are not being precise on:

Beliefs are either rational, irrational, or non-rational (or nonrational).

Rational Beliefs
A belief is considered rational if it is based on reason, logic, and evidence. Rational beliefs are formed through a process that aligns with principles of logical reasoning and critical thinking. They are typically supported by empirical data, coherent arguments, and a systematic approach to understanding the world.

Irrational Beliefs
A belief is deemed irrational if it goes against reason, logic, or established evidence. Irrational beliefs are characterized by a lack of coherence, logical fallacies, or an outright contradiction of known facts. These beliefs are often formed through emotional bias, wishful thinking, or misinformation.

Non-Rational Beliefs
A belief that is not rationally based is not necessarily irrational. This category of beliefs can be referred to as non-rational. Non-rational beliefs may not stem from logical reasoning or empirical evidence, but they do not necessarily contradict reason or evidence either. Here are some key points about non-rational beliefs:

Faith and Intuition: Many religious or spiritual beliefs fall into the non-rational category. These beliefs are often based on faith, tradition, or intuition rather than empirical evidence or logical deduction. For example, belief in the existence of God may be based on personal faith or spiritual experiences, which are not empirically verifiable but are also not inherently contradictory to reason.

Cultural and Personal Values: Beliefs based on cultural norms, personal values, or ethical principles may also be non-rational. These beliefs are often shaped by upbringing, societal influences, and personal experiences. For example, valuing human rights and equality may not be strictly rational in an empirical sense but is deeply rooted in cultural and ethical contexts.

Practical Rationality: Some beliefs are adopted because they are pragmatically useful or beneficial, even if they lack strong rational foundations. For example, believing in the effectiveness of a placebo treatment might not be rationally justified by the treatment's actual efficacy but can still produce real, positive effects due to the placebo effect.

Why Non-Rational Beliefs Are Not Irrational
Non-rational beliefs are not irrational because they do not necessarily involve contradictions, logical fallacies, or a disregard for evidence. Instead, they operate in domains where empirical evidence and logical reasoning may not fully apply or be relevant. These beliefs can coexist with rational beliefs and can be meaningful and coherent within their own contexts.

Example
Consider the belief in the afterlife. This belief is not supported by empirical evidence and cannot be proven or disproven through scientific means. However, it is not irrational because it does not inherently contradict known facts or logic. It is a non-rational belief rooted in faith, tradition, and personal or cultural significance.

---

[Thumpalumpacus]

It seems that it's never gonna be rational to start a nuclear war. But maybe we should worry about irrationality.

While you're wringing your hands, Ukrainians are dying. I don't think Russia's attacking anyone else. Why spread their talking points?