4 ms·

ueah bur his reason was that allowing the attack would have triggered a russian response with even more deaths. musk thought the response would be nuclear and t

ueah bur his reason was that allowing the attack would have triggered a russian response with even more deaths. musk thought the response would be nuclear and then ww3 but most likely would have been some rocket attack in a cafe, etc. like few days ago. avoiding escalation seems like a sensible thing at this point as it’s clear neither side can easily win.

rvz 3y ago
Exactly. Pulling out was the correct decision which both of these sides should not benefit from increased escalation rather than the continuation of war which should not have escalated to invasion in the first place.
ChumpGPT 3y ago
Here is an informative article based on reality. It may not be part of the narrative you want to push....but it is accurate. https://snyder.substack.com/p/the-state-of-the-war https://snyder.substack.com/p/the-state-of-the-war >Ukraine did want to press forward last year, before the fortifications were built. It lacked the necessary weapons, and Elon Musk chose to cut Ukraine off from communications. That move likely extended the war. Because Musk’s decision was based on his internalization of Russian propaganda about nuclear war, and was accompanied by his repetition of that propaganda, he made a nuclear war more likely. If powerful men convey the message that just talking about nuclear war is enough to win conventional wars, then we will have more countries with nuclear weapons and more conventional wars that can escalate into nuclear ones. Ukraine has been resistant to this line of Russian fearmongering, fortunately for us all.
- remarkEon 3y ago
  Maybe I missed it, but where in this essay does this professor explain what, exactly, the national interest is for the United States in enabling this war to continue?
  - ChumpGPT 3y ago
    Read it again, you missed it.
    - remarkEon 3y ago
      Okay I read it again. Do you mean this? > The Ukrainians are defending the legal order established after the Second World War. Because this is a fever dream. One has to imagine an entirely different trajectory of post 1990s history for this to be true.
_kbh_ 3y ago
> avoiding escalation seems like a sensible thing at this point as it’s clear neither side can easily win. Im not sure how giving a country being invaded the weapons it need to defend itself is "escalation".

rvz 3y ago

Exactly. Pulling out was the correct decision which both of these sides should not benefit from increased escalation rather than the continuation of war which should not have escalated to invasion in the first place.

ChumpGPT 3y ago

Here is an informative article based on reality. It may not be part of the narrative you want to push....but it is accurate. https://snyder.substack.com/p/the-state-of-the-war https://snyder.substack.com/p/the-state-of-the-war >Ukraine did want to press forward last year, before the fortifications were built. It lacked the necessary weapons, and Elon Musk chose to cut Ukraine off from communications. That move likely extended the war. Because Musk’s decision was based on his internalization of Russian propaganda about nuclear war, and was accompanied by his repetition of that propaganda, he made a nuclear war more likely. If powerful men convey the message that just talking about nuclear war is enough to win conventional wars, then we will have more countries with nuclear weapons and more conventional wars that can escalate into nuclear ones. Ukraine has been resistant to this line of Russian fearmongering, fortunately for us all.

remarkEon 3y ago
Maybe I missed it, but where in this essay does this professor explain what, exactly, the national interest is for the United States in enabling this war to continue?
- ChumpGPT 3y ago
  Read it again, you missed it.
  - remarkEon 3y ago
    Okay I read it again. Do you mean this? > The Ukrainians are defending the legal order established after the Second World War. Because this is a fever dream. One has to imagine an entirely different trajectory of post 1990s history for this to be true.

_kbh_ 3y ago

> avoiding escalation seems like a sensible thing at this point as it’s clear neither side can easily win. Im not sure how giving a country being invaded the weapons it need to defend itself is "escalation".