You’re right they should, and that was (eventually) pulling out the missiles they put in Turkey first which lead the USSR to respond in kind putting missiles in Cuba. So in this analogy that would be Russia GTFO of Ukraine.

The Hungarian uprising

The Hungarian Revolution of 1956 (23 October – 4 November 1956; Hungarian: 1956-os forradalom), also known as the Hungarian Uprising, was an attempted countrywide revolution against the government of the Hungarian People’s Republic (1949–1989) and the policies caused by the government’s subordination to the Soviet Union (USSR).[nb 2] The uprising lasted 12 days before being crushed by Soviet tanks and troops on 4 November 1956. Thousands were killed and wounded and nearly a quarter of a million Hungarians fled the country.[5][6]

Consequently, Hungarians organized into revolutionary militias to fight against the ÁVH; local Hungarian communist leaders and ÁVH policemen were captured and summarily executed; and political prisoners were released and armed. To realize their political, economic, and social demands, local soviets (councils of workers) assumed control of municipal government from the Hungarian Working People’s Party (Magyar Dolgozók Pártja). The new government of Imre Nagy disbanded the ÁVH, declared Hungary’s withdrawal from the Warsaw Pact, and pledged to re-establish free elections. By the end of October the intense fighting had subsided.

The term “tankie” was originally used by dissident Marxist–Leninists to describe members of the Communist Party of Great Britain (CPGB) who followed the party line of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU). Specifically, it was used to distinguish party members who spoke out in defense of the Soviet use of tanks to suppress the Hungarian Revolution of 1956 and the 1968 Prague Spring, or who more broadly adhered to pro-Soviet positions.[7][8]

Plummer was further sentenced to three months in jail for interfering with national infrastructure by taking part in a slow march along Earls Court Road in west London in November 2023. Her co-defendants in that case, Chiara Sarti and Daniel Hall, received community orders.

She did exactly what you suggested, except you havent heard about it because it doesnt generate media coverage, this does.

Wishing something to be true doesnt make it so. I havent seen any credible assessments that Russia’s strategic nuclear arsenal is so bad that it would be more that 90% non-functional. That’s an insane level of broken that there is just no reason to assume it.

Put another way, way more than 10% of their tanks, planes, artillery and tactical ballistic missiles work, why would you assume that their strategic nukes are significantly worse?

All of which isnt to say we should cower before Putin’s obviously empty nuclear threat, let Ukraine release the storm shadows! But to go from there to lol dumb Russians cant fire a single ICBM is just not credible.

There is no reason to think Russia’s entire strategic nuclear arsenal is unusable. It’s entirely possible a decent chunk of it is due to corruption and neglect, but even if 10% work that’s still 160 city destroying nukes being detonated across Europe and North America if the world goes full MAD. That probably wouldn’t wipe out humanity but it would lead to hundreds of millions of people dying. Not something to be taken lightly.

fyi, you wrote

comparison between the Ukraine war and Russian attack of Ukraine

where I presume you meant the comparison between Iraq and Ukraine wars. It took me a while to figure out what you were saying there.

India is doing what India has been doing since the early cold war: playing rival power blocks off against each other to try and get the best outcomes for themselves.

We’ve been launching nuclear reactors into space for decades (mostly RTGs) they’re just much smaller. There isnt any chance of them exploding or anything when exposed to radiation, but yes the chance of the rocket failing, exploding and showering radioactive material over the ocean is why this has to be done incredibly carefully if it is done.

But the vast majority of the time they are approved, and the nomination begins with politicians. Contrast this to the way the UK does it where the appointments come from the senior judges with politicians then approving or rejecting the proposed new member.

Thats a problem with political appointments by the president not life terms.

Facebook admits to scraping every Australian adult user’s public photos and posts

Theres also the Russian option: level the entire urban area to rubble with artillary.

You seem very insistent on interpreting millenia of history through the lense of an early 20th century political movement.

Yes there has likely always been an element of theatre and leaders exagerating their role in battles, but to claim that nobility/monarchs never came from warrior castes that were active in fighting flies in the face of huge amounts of scholarship. It hasnt been true in industrialised societies since the 18th century at least but that doesnt mean it never was.

There are, the authors estimate, 150 Russian remote nuclear launch sites and 70 in China, approximately 2,500km (1,550 miles) from the nearest border, all of which could be reached by US air-launched JASSM and Tomahawk cruise missiles in a little more than two hours in an initial attack designed to prevent nuclear weapons being launched.

Emphasis mine, I’m pretty sure even Russia can notice hundreds of cruise missiles are heading directly at their silos and figure out that this looks like an attack on their strategic nuclear arsenal in two whole hours, given that ICBMs take around a quarter of that from launch to impact.

You didnt address my point at all. I was saying that the outcome of Dave’s credibility method does not match up with the stated inputs to his method, showing that the whole thing is far more subjective than he wants to appear. Whether or not that subjective interpretation is reasonable in this case or not doesnt really interest me.

In a lot of cases I would agree with you, but laying fiber optic cable through the Amazon in order to connect remote settlements is not feasible, starlink really does have a good use case there.

Even taking all of this screed as true with no qualifications, does that in itself not show that the whole idea of pulling together a few sources about “credibility” and using an objective method to come up with an answer on how trustworthy something is as impossible? By the inputs MBFC list it should be a reasonable if not stellar source, yet they give it the lowest possible rating. Maybe that rating is justified maybe it isnt (I’ve never read anything of theirs) but given the inputs they have it is clear that the majority of the rating is based on the owner’s opinion not on the inputs they have.

Edit, on actually reading through what you wrote, it seems that the negatives are entirely about being critical of Isreal, is this by itself enough to make something not credible?

This is a perfect example of why MBFC is so bad. Mondoweiss has the same factual reporting status as presumably fine sources (the guardian is also mixed factual) it has transparent funding (far better than plenty of others) and comes from a country with mostly free press freedom (USA) and has medium traffic. Yet some how that comes out of the black box as low credibility, the only reason I can see for that is that Dave Van Zandt considers it too left wing.

deleted by creator

deleted by creator