This is equivocating in the face of dead children and you should be ashamed.This is a really important question. Fortunately, the answer is relatively clear...
It's obvious from those ratios that the primary purpose of those drone strikes was NOT to inflict civilian casualties. If it was the civilian death toll would be much higher.
Trouble is, where do you draw a line on this. ?
For example, Obama's USA carried out over 1800 drone strikes and depending on what report you read, between 100 and 900 civilians were killed. Trump upped the ante and had carried out over 2000 drone strikes in his first 2 years, Biden's airforce has bombed a wedding. I guess the only positive thing to say there is that at least the US for the most parts owns up.
Bashir has used poison gas, Yemen is being systematically destroyed in a war funded by a country that, amongst other things, part owns Disney. Ethiopia is buying weapons from Turkey to use in the Tigray civil war, the list goes on and on and on.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not underplaying Ukraine and it is more relevant to us since as Europeans, it is on our doorstep. However sadly, it is far from unique.
For me the first place to look, if not draw a line is at the actions of 'our side'. It is easy to see the mote in the eye of the other.Trouble is, where do you draw a line on this. ?
Absolutely not. I doubt if there ever has been a war that didn't result in dead children. That doesn't mean that all wars are equally moral/immoral because they (almost inevitably) kill children. There is a world of difference between the deliberate targeting of civilians that we've seen from Russia in recent weeks, and drone strikes on military targets that may also - as an unintended effect - kill small numbers of civilians.This is equivocating in the face of dead children and you should be ashamed.
The Allies killed 60,000 French civilians during the Second World War. They were not targeting civilians. If they were targeting civilians then the 600,000 tonnes of bombs they dropped would have been dropped on different targets.Absolutely not. I doubt if there ever has been a war that didn't result in dead children. That doesn't mean that all wars are equally moral/immoral because they (almost inevitably) kill children. There is a world of difference between the deliberate targeting of civilians that we've seen from Russia in recent weeks, and drone strikes on military targets that may also - as an unintended effect - kill small numbers of civilians.
One approach seeks to maximize civilian casualties as a deliberate, intimidatory tactic of war. The other seeks to minimize civilian casualties. (Admittedly, perhaps with an eye on PR but still a huge difference.)
They were not bombing civilians. Civilians were killed when they were bombing other primary targets.Calling out the abominations off Russia is easy, but hypocritical from a country that didn't protest when our side was bombing civilians.
For me the first place to look, if not draw a line is at the actions of 'our side'. It is easy to see the mote in the eye of the other.
The attack on Iraq was launched by The US, the UK, Australia and Poland. These are countries with which we have much in common, where our young people travel to live and work. Whose politicians often boast of their Irish Heritage. We allowed US planes to refuel in Shannon on their way to bomb Iraq.
These are 'our side' in a way that Russia is not. Calling out the abominations off Russia is easy, but hypocritical from a country that didn't protest when our side was bombing civilians.
But hey lets join NATO
Surely production can be ramped up rapidly. It must have occurred to both the military, and their suppliers, that a war would deplete stocks and that urgent replacements would be required.The U.S. has given #Ukraine 7,000 Javelin ATGMs in recent months -- which is 1/3 of the entire American stock & will take 1+yr to replace. Also 2,000 Stingers -- 1/4 of the U.S. inventory, which'll take 5yrs to replace. Is this supply sustainable?
Every precision engineering company and PCB manufacturer in the world is extremely busy, raw materials are in short supply and international supply chains are still severely disrupted since Covid. The US can commandeer whatever resources they need internally in times of war but they aren't at war. I'm sure they can ramp up production but it won't be easy or fast.Surely production can be ramped up rapidly. It must have occurred to both the military, and their suppliers, that a war would deplete stocks and that urgent replacements would be required.
Yes but let's hope it doesn't get stuck in bureaucratic \ supply chain limboSurely production can be ramped up rapidly. It must have occurred to both the military, and their suppliers, that a war would deplete stocks and that urgent replacements would be required.
A supplier is not going to drop existing customers with whom they have long term relationship and revenue streams in order to facilitate one-off orders. Not only would it be bad business but it would be unethical.Yes but let's hope it doesn't get stuck in bureaucratic \ supply chain limbo
Pentagon scrambles to replenish weapons stocks sent to Ukraine
Lawmakers want the U.S. to make more missiles, but companies will wait until they have contracts before cranking up production.www.politico.com
and guess where a lot of standard components (such as chips) are made, China !Every precision engineering company and PCB manufacturer in the world is extremely busy, raw materials are in short supply and international supply chains are still severely disrupted since Covid. The US can commandeer whatever resources they need internally in times of war but they aren't at war. I'm sure they can ramp up production but it won't be easy or fast.
All the big US defence contractors manufacture their own components. For 'sensitive' military equipment, suppliers must use accredited foundries, all of which are on-shore in the US.and guess where a lot of standard components (such as chips) are made, China !
I guess we can rely on the good old "military-industrial complex" to be well on top of that! Grist to their mill, and just as well too.All the big US defence contractors manufacture their own components. For 'sensitive' military equipment, suppliers must use accredited foundries, all of which are on-shore in the US.
Unfortunately they rely on a vast web of subcontractors who also supply industrial, medical and consumer customers. As they are currently operating at capacity then it will mean less medical equipment or other products being manufactured.I guess we can rely on the good old "military-industrial complex" to be well on top of that! Grist to their mill, and just as well too.
Without additional weaponry, this war will become an endless bloodbath, spreading misery, suffering, and destruction. Mariupol, Bucha, Kramatorsk – the list will be continued. Nobody will stop Russia except Ukraine with Heavy Weapons.
Yes, but we've taken in a few Ukrainians, just look at all the feel-good "sure aren't we great and sure making tea is just the same as fighting or giving them what they actually need" stories on RTE.
Zelenskyy's tweet today. For a neutrality denier this a hard watch. We have weapons and ammunition expiring. It's like having a neighbour go through a famine and we are watching our food reserve slowly go bad.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?