jj4211

We've had quite a recent history of nations thinking they will have a quick, easy offensive and be done with it.

I don't think every terrible Trump decision can be laid at Putin's feet.

There are plenty of other folks pulling the strings too.

But Iran is a Russian supplier, so strategically, the more US can burn through Iran military capability, the less they have to give to Russia.

Also, the longer the strait is blocked, the better Russia can do in the fossil fuel export situation. So Iran suffering military losses and the strait being open as soon as possible are also strategic imperatives for Ukraine.

I have no doubt they happened as random hand gestures, but they were not rock paper scissoring. The only thing that looks exactly like an intentional rock-paper-scissor would be the left picture, but just indicating "two" could look like that.

Well, also, strategically any pain for Iran is good for Ukraine, since Iran supplies Russia.

The point is the endgame.

If it is to strike back to stop the aggression even taking out the leadership.... That's one thing that can end a conflict.

If you say it most go as far against the citizens of Israel as the IDF has gone against the citizens of Gaza, that degree of vengeance back and forth can never be reasonably resolved. Assuming the entire citizenry must be made to pay for the sins of the leadership is a road to ever escalating violence.

Eye for an eye and the world goes blind

At multiple government offices I have seen them bring out someone to match the language spoken when someone has no or poor English.

It is far easier to speak English because practically speaking English is most prevalent, but it's not like inability to speak English is a crime (though with this administration....)

Looks like typed as hyphens, and LLMs tend to produce emdashes.

I think the intro/bullet point/conclusion format is pretty common among humans.

I don't see it, it doesn't seem tonally consistent with the LLMs. Is it just because he put bullet points or something? Because it's slightly longer than normal?

More of an "everyone's shit here" situation

To be fair, the financial market is deeply rewarding the "tell us what we want to hear" approach.

Even if the time should come where the chickens come home to roost, the key players will have gotten billions out of the mania in the meantime.

So on one hand you have someone making a fair pessimistic assessment of current approaches that isn't attractive to investors and his suggestion is very unproven. On the other hand you have someone that agrees with whatever the investors want to believe. The latter is, in this situation, an easy payday.