Hacker News .hnnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | kergonath's commentslogin

Does it matter, at this point? If you go and tell someone who’s lost their home and half their family in a strike, "oops, it was just bad intel", do they hate you less?

Oh no, if anything I think bad intel is probably worse

As someone says, don’t interrupt a rival when they are making a mistake. China can gain quite a lot by just waiting on the side lines, contributing as much as they can get away with while still looking reasonable (which is quite easy, when the other protagonists are Putin, Trump, or Khamenei jr).

> suddenly we are more an enemy than China

That’s a straw man. Nobody argued that before you mentioned it.


The situation is massively favourable to Iran, from a strategic point of view. The Gulf is narrow, bordered by Iran all the way and with mountains and rugged terrain nearby, which is very convenient to hide rockets. What a carrier brings is completely irrelevant in this configuration.

> Was this started as a resource war, or as a money-making scheme, or as a distraction from the Epstein files, or just because DJT developed actual old age dementia after purging anyone who might say 'no'?

I don’t think we should look too far for reasons. He got all excited with the adventure in Venezuela and wanted to do it again, but with bombs and his pal Bibi. He’s itching to do the same thing to Cuba, and he’s not subtle about it.


Someone should tell him there is no such thing as Nobel War Price and he was pranked

"The Russians did it as well" is not a fantastic excuse for a war crime… You might want to think this through a bit more.

What's the problem. The Russians do stuff that you say are "war crimes", and what happens to them? Nothing. So why should anyone care if some person on the internet says these are war crimes? There's obviously no penalty against doing them, so they're not really war crimes.

Not being punished for something doesn't mean it isn't a crime, and doesn't mean it isn't wrong.

Children have a more developed sense of ethics than that.


Remember that war crimes were defined to protect civilians. It's usually better for a civilian to be on the losing side in a war with no war crimes, than the winning side of a war with many war crimes.

> So why should anyone care if some person on the internet says these are war crimes?

Attacking civilian infrastructure is defined as a war crime by the Geneva Conventions. It's not something a person on the internet made up.


That's all nice and well, but what exactly is the point if it's not going to be enforced *at all*? So we can feel smug and superior?

> Trump is choosing to get it over with the easy way for America at least if they won't negotiate

That is… not the easy way. That’s how you get a nightmare for decades to come, endless waves of refugees and a limitless supply of terrorists.

Though, to be fair, there is no easy way of doing what Trump claims he wants to do. Which is why it’s spectacularly stupid to do it in the first place. I mean, they did not expect retaliation in the strait of Hormuz. Amateur hour does not even begin to describe it. Spectacularly stupid is probably way too kind.

If you must learn from the Khans, you’ll find that decapitation is not enough. You need people to put in place of the former leadership, and enforcers so that the underlying power structure stays in place to serve the new masters. The reason why is that, as the US learnt in Iraq and Afghanistan, it takes a bloody lot of soldiers to keep a whole population in check. Trump does not want to do the former and does not have the latter.


He could use nukes but it would likely create a fallout.

the firebombings of japan were much more destructive and killed more civilians than the nukes did.

there's no reason to think nuking would do anything more than the existing bombing campaign.

what changed in japan was the soviet army arriving


It’s a defense mechanism. Something we like to tell to convince ourselves that we are not as bad as they are.

No, what makes them war crimes is the intentional targeting of non-combattants. Being lousy at aiming weapons does not absolve of any war crime.

The accuracy helps with showing intent, though, because when your 50% accuracy radius is a couple of meters and you put a couple of missiles on a target that’s a hundred of meters of anything else, it’s hard to argue they were sidetracked.


> A “best mind” should be capable of empathy and have a broad societal view of consequences for their actions

Empathy and introspection are so 20th century. They are a hindrance when your aim is to make as much money and put it on fire as quickly as possible. Because somehow that’s how we decided to measure success.


Another user posted this article earlier https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/2026/03/introspection-andr... which was interesting

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: