[api]

I am deeply saddened to say that I agree. Keep the nukes.

Creating a world that results in that conclusion may go down as one of the greatest policy failures in history, and if we do in the end have an atomic war I think that's where the responsibility lay.

Ultimately we have failed as a species to rise morally above "might makes right" and I think we are going to pay for that.

[tilne]

Do you believe our species is capable of that in the collective sense? Isn’t “might makes right” basically the law for all animals? And if you agree with that, doesn’t it follow that to “rise morally above” that would require somehow transcending the limitations imposed by our biological reality?

[api]

> transcending the limitations imposed by our biological reality?

IMHO that's almost the definition of civilization.

[tilne]

I agree somewhat at the collective level. I don’t think that applies as much at the individual level though.

[api]

Why wouldn’t it?

[tilne]

Why would it?

[snapplebobapple]

We havent failed. People who think that is going away have failed to realize how there is a genetic component to personality that means it is functionally never going away. Instead you recognize violence is the basis of all power and make policy to shape that violence into rational, personal freedom and free market supporting institutions. Its what the american project has basically been at its base (partially unconaciously)up until butt hurt marxists started ruining it with what they think reality should be rather than with ways to make the reality that is better.

[rbanffy]

> Ultimately we have failed as a species to rise morally above "might makes right"

We really need to get out of the economy of scarcity. Without that, war and aggression are unavoidable.

[api]

It would help but I don't think that would be enough. Wars and power games would continue out of either boredom or because of ideology.

[rbanffy]

Would ideology have much sway in such a world?

[ponector]

But Ukrainian invasion is not caused by scarcity.

[Jensson]

Some believe it was triggered by lack of water in Crimea after Ukraine blocked the canal that brought water there. So you can argue it was caused by scarcity.

You can see evidence for this as one of the first things Russia did was reopen those canals so water started flowing to Crimea again.

That might not have been the only goal, but it was certainly one of the bigger reasons for the attack.

[jeltz]

The war started before that happened with the invasion of Crimea so that makes little to no sense. There are some people who believe almost any impossible idea. Also if it was a war about water the war would have been won now. Russia managed to achieve their aims a long time ago plus got extra land to bargain with. If that theory was true the war would have been finished a long time ago.

The war in Ukraine is only a war of resources in very minor ways. It is much more about egos, nationalism and the idea that Russia deserves to be an empire.

[Jensson]

> The war started before that happened with the invasion of Crimea

That wasn't a war though, nobody called it a war between Ukraine and Russia at the time. Read news from the time, no mention of war between Ukraine and Russia.

The Ukraine war was very different than Russia other aggressions, the resource scarcity likely triggered this extra aggressive behavior. You can say this resource scarcity was ultimately their fault, but a starving beast will fight very aggressively regardless whose fault it is that its starving.

If the Crimean water crisis didn't happen then likely Russia would just have continued to incite rebellions and annex territory that way, and not declare a full scale war.

https://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/19/world/europe/ukraine.html

[tim333]

Check out:

>The Russo-Ukrainian War began in February 2014. Following Ukraine's Revolution of Dignity, Russia occupied and annexed Crimea from Ukraine. It then supported Russian paramilitaries who began a war in the eastern Donbas region... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russo-Ukrainian_War

It not being in US news doesn't mean it didn't happen.

[gaadd33]

Before Russia invaded Crimea was there a water crisis?

[ponector]

And then they blow up the dam which supply water to Crimea assuring no water will flow through the mentioned canal for decades.

Russians tried to occupy Ukraine and destroy Ukrainian culture and identity for centuries. That is the real goal.

The war was inevitable. Here is from 2014: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-28229785

[rbanffy]

The risk of losing access to Sevastopol was what motivated the invasion of Crimea.

In a scarcity economy we use scarcity to assign value to goods. We also game the system by manufacturing scarcity when needed (blocking export of critical minerals, manipulating supply and availability to avoid price fluctuations, and so on).