For a long time Facebook counted an angry react as equal to five likes for measuring engagement. It’s very much intentional.

I assume people decided it had the vibe of accusing Ukraine of being underhanded (it’s not, but internet gonna internet)

Ukrainian nuclear weapons aren’t a credible threat to Russia, for the same reason Russia’s aren’t to Ukraine: It isn’t under an immediate threat of being wiped out, just losing territory. I think this is aimed more at the United States, trying to pressure them into keeping up or increasing aid with the threat of nuclear proliferation (as Japan, Taiwan and Saudi Arabia have done). There is also the possibility that in a Trump administration, loss of US aid could turn the war back into an existential threat where nuclear weapons could be used.

There’s actually a very good reason why Russia operates like that - mutinies. If you give junior officers authority, in a political system like Russia’s where the leadership’s legitimacy is purely based on power and self-interest, they might decide they’d rather be the ones in charge. This was perfectly demonstrated when they gave a military unit autonomy, and that resulted in the Wagner mutiny.

Couldn’t find it

Relevant smbc

Is there any country that doesn’t suck?

AES?

Edit: Found it, “Actually existing socialism”

A grad is being sent to your location

It’s been well reported on that Russia doesn’t work like that, with junior officers unable to use initiative and the whole system being very slow to respond to changing events. The reason it operates like this was shown when they did try having a more independent unit, which resulted in the Wagner Group mutinying.

That’s standard in Western militaries. It means units aren’t paralyzed by unexpected circumstances while they wait for communication to go up and down the chain of command, and it improves resilience if communications or senior officers are incapacitated.

More often dictators take control of the church and use it for propaganda.

People talk a lot about the genericisation of brand names, but the branding of generic terms like this really annoys me.

I’ll use the example I first noticed. A few years ago, the Conservative government was under criticism for the minimum wage being well under a living wage. In response, they brought in the National Living Wage, which was an increase to the minimum wage, but still under the actual living wage. However, because of the branding, it makes criticising it for not meeting the actual living wage more difficult, as you have to explain the difference between the two, and as the saying goes, “if you’re explaining, you’re losing”.

Crimea and Sevastopol both had majority votes for independence in 1991.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1991_Ukrainian_independence_referendum

The submarine dock was in Sevastopol, which is Russian-occupied Ukraine rather than Russia.

Heard an interview a while ago with a founder of Just Stop Oil who clearly said he doesn’t care whether they even stop climate change (around 40:00-43:00).

What does Vincent van Gogh have to do with the current state of the petrol industry?

It’s famous, so attacking it gets attention.

They’re both problems.

It’s in the last line of their comment:

But I also get worried that sometimes communies attack their closest allies for being imperfect harder than enemies actively working against their interests.

Relevant smbc

I bet no one remembers even a quarter of this list: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racial_views_of_Donald_Trump