• Aisteru
    link
    fedilink
    English
    4043 months ago

    Now, I’m all for the freedom of defending your country… But am I the only one thinking that this is presented in a bit too much of a good light? Like, what is the title supposed to make me feel? If the nationalities were reversed, would this have been posted here still?

    I genuinely thank you for sharing this info, but I can’t help feeling uncomfortable reading about atrocious killing devices in a technology thread.

    • @return2ozma@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      173
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      I’m right there with you. My first reaction to the video in the article was “well that’s terrifying”.

        • @roofuskit@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          323 months ago

          Even the US uses white phosphorus against infantry in violation of international law. I can’t imagine what we’d resort to with Russian soliders on our soil.

          • @SynopsisTantilize@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            83 months ago

            Oh man…Geneva convention would be out the window and most land based invaders at that point would probably beg to be shipped back. And it’s not because of the military in America. It’s because of its inhabitants. When the banjos start tuning in the Appalachian forests you know Hell is a safer space than anywhere you’re going to reach.

            • ℍ𝕂-𝟞𝟝
              link
              fedilink
              English
              333 months ago

              That’s easy to say without bullet holes in your buildings and bombs being found every few months in your capital.

              IMO the US public is presenting so warlike because they never experienced war directly to a scale of WWII as a populace, especially not in living memory.

              War does not look like “let’s use all our guns and go kick commie ass”, especially resisting an occupation. It looks like your hometown burned and poisoned, never to be rebuilt in your lifetime. It looks like people you know and care about dying, being raped with impunity, or just plain disappearing. If you pick up a rifle, you are going up against trained and experienced and also more importantly, quite desensitized enemies who have been doing what you are planning to do for months if not years. And even if you shoot one, they will hang ten of your townsfolk tomorrow.

              Just look at Mariupol and Gaza and think whether anyone would thrive in that environment.

              • @SynopsisTantilize@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                43 months ago

                Do you understand how many veterans are in America? How many militia there are? How many guns we have?

                There’s a reason America didn’t get land invaded other than the giant ocean and logistical shit storm it would be. It’s our gun per person situation.

                You remember how hard it was for America to fight Afghanistan in the mountains? Imagine another country fighting America in their mountains lol. No infinite ammo to shell mountains, Americans trained with rifles commercially available to fire cleanly 1KM. Every. Single. American. Has one…most that own guns have a decent stock pile of ammo. Shit my 7 year old can shoot a soda cap off at 30 yards with iron sights.

                We readily have explosives we can order from Amazon… 2/3 of our rural population drives what Europeans would consider monster trucks. That’s one hell of a technical.

                This wouldn’t be a “go wolverines” situation. This would be 80+ years of war and gun culture ingrained in Americans through countless years in human lives of video games and television propaganda. Ukraine has a population of 38 million. America has 120 million just on its Eastern coasts. I think if we come to a middle ground here I think we can both agree it wouldn’t be pretty but significant pushback and ultimate failure on an invaders advances purely on the geology and American civilian militarization factor.

                • ℍ𝕂-𝟞𝟝
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  43 months ago

                  I am not talking about whether strategically it would be a good idea to engage in conventional warfare with the US. I am talking about the fact that how you and a lot of Americans are talking about war means that they have never really experienced one, not in living memory at least.

                  War is a nightmare. It’s not a valiant defence with plucky resistance fighters outwitting the enemy in the mountains. It’s seeing your buddy still alive and conscious with half his face missing after being hit by a drone. It’s your wife writing “please, it’s the children here” in front of the school in chalk before they are hit anyway with white phosphorus, burning their flesh off slowly. It’s soldiers raping you for fun, even if you are a man, before they kill you.

                  It’s our gun per person situation.

                  How many of those guns are effective against artillery? Against even 60 year old tanks? Against remote targeting machine guns with thermal sights? Against attack helicopters? Russia had more tanks per person than any country on Earth, they are still getting trounced. Modern warfare does not care about your semi auto at home.

                  You remember how hard it was for America to fight Afghanistan in the mountains? Imagine another country fighting America in their mountains lol.

                  You remember how that war looked? Look at this article. One battle, 18 dead from the occupying side, 1000+ local soldiers killed. Could you bear to read these in the US? Can you imagine how the US would look like after fighting 20 years of this? Let me help you, it would look like Afghanistan.

                  America has 120 million just on its Eastern coasts.

                  China has an army of 2 million at peacetime, and it is not maintaining as many overseas bases as the US. The US currently has around 1 million people in the army one way or another. Of course, if it was real, total war as you imagine, these numbers would go up, fast.

                  During WWII, the Soviet Union had a population of around 200 million. 26 million people died just on their side, of which only 10.5 million were soldiers. 2 million of these people died in a single battle, in Stalingrad. We have gotten much, much better at killing people since then.

                  This would be 80+ years of war and gun culture ingrained in Americans through countless years in human lives of video games and television propaganda.

                  You don’t know war. War is hell on earth. It is tragedy on a mass scale, leaving scars for generations on whole societies. Seeing war movies in TV does not prepare you for shit. The US does not even have conscription.

                  Shit my 7 year old can shoot a soda cap off at 30 yards with iron sights.

                  Great, what will he do against incendiary rocket artillery at 10 km? You know, the kind which bursts in the air and covers him in burning napalm?

          • @acockworkorange@mander.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            23 months ago

            WP isn’t illegal. It’s illegal to torch down civilian structures, with Willy Pete or any other technology. But it’s always been fair game to use incendiaries against combatants. War is hell.

          • @Glitterbomb@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            13 months ago

            Lol Russian soldiers on US soil? The US military would do good to hang back, avert their gaze, and let the US citizens handle things how they see fit. Plausible deniability and all that

            • @SynopsisTantilize@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              13 months ago

              This fucking waffle maker in my comments above yours keeps trying to convince me that America hasnt “experienced” war. And that war is horrible, as if America isn’t the most successful War tribe in all of recorded history.

              • @alcoholicorn@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                English
                23 months ago

                If successful means achieving none of your strategic objectives, but wasting trillions killing a whole bunch of civilians, sure.

                • @SynopsisTantilize@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  1
                  edit-2
                  3 months ago

                  Yea that.

                  But like also WW1, WW2 on two separate fronts…at the same time, Korean war, Kosovo.

                  Honerable mentions: Greek civil war, Afghanistan Russian war, Arabian Israel wars.

                  Oh right…lol. the American civil war, and the American revolution, the war of 1812, the Spanish American war…

                  Well shit Skippy …weve been in some conflicts. How many aircraft carriers does your country have floating around?

      • @tias@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        333 months ago

        Yeah I’m not sure that war crimes work that way. You don’t get a pass because the opponent is doing illegal things.

        • @michaelmrose@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          123 months ago

          You literally get a pass because its not illegal to set an enemy on fire any more than its illegal to blow a hole in their guts with a bullet or fill their torso full of shrapnel. I’m not sure why you think it would be.

        • @Quacksalber@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          123 months ago

          If your enemy makes it very clear that they want to see you dead and your nation destroyed no matter the cost, why should you be beholden to giving them an advantage? Ukraine won’t win with moral superiority.

      • @littlewonder@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        5
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        I see where you’re coming from. It’s like tolerating the intolerant. There is a point where Ukraine needs to choose between total destruction by Russia, or doing whatever it takes to get their land and people back.

        It’s not like Russia is held accountable for war crimes. Why would we be so critical of Ukraine when no one is doing anything to stop the atrocities of Putin?

        I don’t happily endorse the thermite drones, but you won’t find me playing judge on what Ukraine is doing. They didn’t start this war.

      • TwinTusks
        link
        fedilink
        English
        163 months ago

        Can the individual soldiers just give up and leave?

        • @Takios@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          243 months ago

          The russian soldiers are in an awful predicament in this war. But they are still the aggressors and Ukraine has the right (obligation even, seeing what Russia tends to do to civilian population it conquers) to defend itself against them…and as awful as these weapons are, they have not been used in an illegal way here according to international law (something that Russia doesn’t give a flying fuck about, btw.).
          Personally, I don’t see a moral issue here though I of course would prefer if noone had to die of which only happens in the case of Putin withdrawing his troops right now.

          • @alcoholicorn@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            63 months ago

            Maybe, but I’ve seen plenty of videos of Russians attempting to surrender to drones, and getting killed anyway.

            • @littlewonder@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              43 months ago

              I have some questions you might ask yourself:

              What is the count of those vs. the number of surrendered Russians being treated well?

              Which one is more likely to be in the news?

              Which one is more likely to be spread around by Russian bots?

              Which will be more likely to be suppressed?

              • @alcoholicorn@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                English
                3
                edit-2
                3 months ago

                What is the count of those vs. the number of surrendered Russians being treated well?

                There is no credible data.

                Which one is more likely to be in the news?

                Neither, I live in America, the news only intentionally covers Russian war crimes. I say intentionally, since I remember a CNN segment near the start of the invasion where armed Ukrainian soldiers jumped out of an ambulance in the background.

                The opposite would probably be true if I lived in Russia.

                Which one is more likely to be spread around by Russian bots?

                I assume it’s not Russian bots posting Ukrainian drone footage to the combat footage sub.

                Which will be more likely to be suppressed?

                Well I haven’t seen any news covering Ukrainian war crimes and I’ve seen plenty of news covering Russian war crimes, and I know it’s not because Ukraine isn’t doing any war crimes.

                The reverse would probably be true for someone living in Russia.

        • @barsoap@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          8
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          The vast majority of them could simply not have volunteered. Also, you can surrender.

            • @YourNetworkIsHaunted
              link
              English
              33 months ago

              Actually one of the few political pressures Putin has had to deal with internally has been preventing conscripts from fighting outside of Russian territory, which has included not sending them into the supposedly-annexed oblasts in the east. They’ve had to make do with massive signing bonuses, prison recruitment, stop loss, and PMCs to make up the manpower shortage. Definitely some high-pressure tactics in use, but no actual use of legal force. Unless this video was taken on the Kursk front then any Russian soldiers who this was targeting had signed contracts that they could have chosen not to.

        • @Dasus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          13 months ago

          Well, they can surrender.

          Not all of them all the time, but a lot of them are smart enough to do something “dumb” like drive to a Ukrainian village to ask for directions and “get taken as pows”.

          So yeah, yes and no, as the answer to your question.

    • DarkThoughts
      link
      fedilink
      803 months ago

      If the nationalities were reversed, would this have been posted here still?

      If Russia was illegally invaded & genocided by Ukraine as a consequence for wanting to become democratic and joining the West, then yes, people would rather root for Russia instead.

      If Russia don’t want their men to get “atrociously killed”, then they can just fuck off back into their own country.

      • @pandapoo@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        13
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        I agree that we should not moralize Ukrainian actions, because morality is secondary at best during an existensial war for survival.

        But upholding the Geneva conventions is not about morality. It’s about trying to prevent the worst and most horrific actions and outcomes that happen during war.

        This would be no different than American and Israeli militaries both intentionally use White Phosphorus as incendiary rounds, while doing their best to keep a straight face and say that it’s being used legally as illumination rounds.

        Is Ukraine using this strictly under the legally defined laws of war? I don’t know.

        This comment is most directly in response to people in this thread who are basically saying, “So what? Who cares if it’s used illegally as an incendiary round?”

        • @deranger@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          7
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          It’s not an incendiary round though, it’s an incendiary weapon. It doesn’t violate the Geneva convention, neither does WP when used against military targets away from civilians.

        • @barsoap@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          73 months ago

          It’s about trying to prevent the worst and most horrific actions and outcomes that happen during war.

          No. It’s about trying to prevent militarily unnecessary worst and most horrific actions and outcomes.

          White Phosphorus as incendiary rounds,

          Perfectly legal. You can’t use them as chemical rounds (they’re shit at that anyways), or, as any other incendiary weapons, close to civilians. By far the most common use is as tracer rounds and in smokescreens, though.

        • DarkThoughts
          link
          fedilink
          53 months ago

          I think you’re confused. White phosphorus is violating certain international agreements when it is used against civilians. Ukraine is using this weapon to choke out Russian positions.

        • @calcopiritus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          13 months ago

          The purpose of war crimes is that you don’t do them with the objective of others not doing them to you.

          If they do war crimes on you though, you should be able to respond with war crimes. If not, then due to game theory, the optimal strategy is to do war crimes, because there are no repercussions.

    • @slickgoat@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      293 months ago

      Exactly, I hate what the Russians are doing, but as a former grunt, I’ll never rejoice in killing.

    • @TheBlue22@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      203 months ago

      Boo fucking hoo. Most of them willingly went into Ukraine to kill, pillage, rape and torture innocent ukranians. They always have an option to desert, yet they still choose to murder. I will never have any sympathy towards them.

    • @Ilovethebomb@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      93 months ago

      I do agree with you that the tone of the article doesn’t really match the nature of what we’re seeing, or that Ukraine is in a war of national survival.

    • @roofuskit@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      8
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      That article reads as entirely neutral. Neither positive or negative. The last lines even read as a bit of a negative to me.

    • @RedditWanderer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      83 months ago

      I was thinking that too. We already have other weapons that are this effective, and we’ve banned them.

      In most cases for the banned weapons, the US got to use them for a while first, which is what’s happening here.

    • @BowtiesAreCool@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      33 months ago

      Yeah I defend Ukraine against Russia, but war is war, and war never changes. It’s been 2 years of full fighting and I can’t pretend to be okay with a continuous war even against Russia and Putin who are awful.

      • @barsoap@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        9
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        So you would rather Ukrainians lay down their weapons and we’ll have 20 years of Bucha and Holodomor, again? I somehow doubt you would prefer that to continued warfare, more likely thinking “war is awful” is taking precedence over “not fighting it would be a hell a lot worse”. But that’s why wars are, by and large, fought: Because people think that not doing it would be worse. Some because they’re nuts, some, like Ukrainians, because they’re spot-on.

        The only party which can lay down their weapons and not get absolutely kicked in the face for it is Russia. Every minute it continues is on them.

    • @BrianTheeBiscuiteer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      33 months ago

      Thermite is no joke. My initial thought was whether or not we’re making the next Taliban right now. They were more fundamentalist and not seeking any kind of role in the UN but this kind of firepower is frightening in anyone’s hands.

    • @Sarmyth@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      3
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      It’s honestly no worse than dropping bombs on them. They don’t have to deal with the explosive shock blowing out their ear drums either. It’s way more escapable than sudden explosions happening all around you.

      Besides… if you invade a country you’re down with death. A bunch of the soldiers use rape and attack civilians as well, so my concern for their well being dried up a long time ago.

  • @ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    235
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    This is what international law has to say about incendiary weapons:

    1. It is prohibited in all circumstances to make the civilian population as such, individual civilians or civilian objects the object of attack by incendiary weapons.
    1. It is prohibited in all circumstances to make any military objective located within a concentration of civilians the object of attack by air-delivered incendiary weapons.
    1. It is further prohibited to make any military objective located within a concentration of civilians the object of attack by means of incendiary weapons other than air-delivered incendiary weapons, except when such military objective is clearly separated from the concentration of civilians and all feasible precautions are taken with a view to limiting the incendiary effects to the military objective and to avoiding, and in any event to minimizing, incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians and damage to civilian objects.
    1. It is prohibited to make forests or other kinds of plant cover the object of attack by incendiary weapons except when such natural elements are used to cover, conceal or camouflage combatants or other military objectives, or are themselves military objectives.

    This treeline is clearly not located within a concentration of civilians and it is concealing (or plausibly believed to be concealing) enemy combatants and therefore the use of incendiary weapons is unambiguously legal.

      • @ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        4
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        What occasions are you referring to? I know people claim that Israeli use of white phosphorous munitions is illegal, but the law is actually quite specific about what an incendiary weapon is. Incendiary effects caused by weapons that were not designed with the specific purpose of causing incendiary effects are not prohibited. (As far as I can tell, even the deliberate use of such weapons in order to cause incendiary effects is allowed.) This is extremely permissive, because no reasonable country would actually agree not to use a weapon that it considered effective. Something like the firebombing of Dresden is banned, but little else.

        Incendiary weapons do not include:

        (i) Munitions which may have incidental incendiary effects, such as illuminants, tracers, smoke or signalling systems;

        (ii) Munitions designed to combine penetration, blast or fragmentation effects with an additional incendiary effect, such as armour-piercing projectiles, fragmentation shells, explosive bombs and similar combined-effects munitions in which the incendiary effect is not specifically designed to cause burn injury to persons, but to be used against military objectives, such as armoured vehicles, aircraft and installations or facilities.

    • @rottingleaf@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      183 months ago

      Azeri terrorist state bombed Stepanakert with white phosphorus and napalm with no consequences.

      BTW, Russia has already used white phosphorus against civilian targets in this war, if I am not mistaken.

      Israel is, of course, using those in Gaza.

      I’d say legality has long lost its meaning in international relations. Not that it ever had any in this particular regard.

      I’ve read that even not using expansive (those that expand, not those that cost more monies) bullets was not result of any humanism, but of the military logic that a soldier wounded by a conventional bullet stops being a combatant and becomes a logistical burden, while a soldier dead from a gruesome wound just stops being a combatant, possibly helping to motivate his comrades in arms.

        • @rottingleaf@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          63 months ago

          Yes. This also works with epidemics. Die too quickly - less chance to infect others, being one man short makes your community poorer, which means fewer travelers, which also means less chance to infect other communities.

          One reason Black Death led to so much witch hunting and jew burning and talk about divine punishment - many people were immune even when exposed to piles of bodies of infected, while those to get sick would die very fast. That’s one way a highly deadly and quickly developing disease can survive, be deadly only to some part of the population. Well, rats and water too.

    • @A7thStone@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      10
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Prohibited to make forests the target except when they are military objectives. Did they add that exception because they might have to fight the battle at Helm’s Deep?

    • Firestorm Druid
      link
      fedilink
      English
      73 months ago

      Are all of these “laws” in place because incendiary weapons are especially cruel compared to a simple shot to the dome?

      • @alcoholicorn@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        143 months ago

        It’s because of their indiscriminate nature.

        The US use of napalm on cities in Korea contributed to the nearly 20% of their population that was wiped out.

        • @atlas@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          53 months ago

          Not even mentioning the severe lasting impact it had on generations to come. There are still many who are battling birth defects due to the toxins that remained after the napalm attacks.

          • @Machinist@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            23 months ago

            Not that I’m doubting you, but do you have more info on the lasting toxicity of napalm? I hadn’t heard of this.

            I knew that the defoliant Agent Orange had dioxin contamination that led to all those horrible birth defects and cancers. Also, the contaminating nature of depleted uranium is obvious as a heavy metal but I think we still don’t grasp the magnitude of the problem. Iraq and Afghanistan will likely be seeing awful effects in future generations.

        • @CheeseNoodle@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          43 months ago

          Hasn’t the US also repeatedly allegedly accidentally hit targets with white phosphorus that was intended just as a marking flair?

      • JackFrostNCola
        link
        fedilink
        English
        8
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        Preface: I am no expert, this is just my understanding.
        Weapons that are illegal/considered war crimes fall roughly into categories of:

        A. Indiscriminate - kill soldiers and non-combatants/civilians alike (eg. Land mines, incendiary, cluster bombs, etc)

        B. Cruel - especially painful ways to die or designed to cause ongoing suffering and maiming. (Eg: gas/chemical warfare, dirty bombs, etc)
        A lot of weapons tick both of those boxes, and there are possibly more i am unaware of.

      • @addictedtochaos@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        23 months ago

        I assure you one thing: If it happened to you and you survived, you will not wish this on your worst enemy.

        i have a hard time explaining this to people, they simply don’t get it-.

    • @Treczoks@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      23 months ago

      Apart from that, their Russian attacker does not give a flying f-ck about international law from the start either, so after quite some illegal events (rape, torturing/killing POWs, shelling and bombing hospitals and schools), there is no reason to hold back any longer. It would just enable the Russians to maim and kill more Ukrainian civilists.

      • @alcoholicorn@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        53 months ago

        The point of these laws is to protect civilians from weapons that can’t be used to target just military targets. Do you give a shit about the people in Ukraine beyond their use as cannon fodder?

        • @Sterile_Technique@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          68
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          …being in nursing school is giving me a strong hatred for the imperial system.

          The doctor ordered 35mg/kg Watdafuqenol IV QID. Available is a 2’ by 15" section of torn out carpet soaked in spilled Watdafuqenol; when wrung out into the patient’s left shoe, you get 97 chipmunk-mouthfuls diluted to a concentration of 24 Watdafuqenol to 1 toe jam. How many shot glasses full do you administer?

          • @GiveMemes@jlai.lu
            link
            fedilink
            English
            53 months ago

            You might’ve already seen this, but try using the method of dimensional analysis where you work backwards on a single line and you’ll never get one of those problems wrong again.

            The key is just working backwards by units using the equations you have available. I know somebody that only got one of the questions on his MCAT correct bc he used this method lol.

            • @Sterile_Technique@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              9
              edit-2
              3 months ago

              I use dimensional analysis, but it’s over two lines… and not sure what you mean by working backwards, since the order doesn’t really matter so long as every value is in the correct line.

              Since typing it out would be ugly as sin, example image stolen from google:

              …they like to give us things like pt weight in lbs and oz, and ask for final product of tablespoons or some shit cuz they enjoy wasting our time, lol.

              That the type you mean?

              I know there are a few different ways to crunch the numbers, but DA is my favorite so far cuz it’s so consistent.

              *edit, example pic changed, first one put mcg twice in the same line, which is a weird move. /shrug

              • @oldfart@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                33 months ago

                So USAnian drugs are in metric units? I hope in actual work nurses get to use a phone app or something because this asks for mistakes

                • @Sterile_Technique@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  103 months ago

                  99% of it is metric. I think the biggest outlier is home care, where you go visit some grandma who’s actively offended by metric, so if you tell her to take 7.5mL of something she’ll just do the deer in the headlights thing, then shove the bottle up her ass.

                  Tell her instead that she needs to take 3 Mountain Dew caps full and suddenly she can follow instructions enough to not kill herself.

                • @Treczoks@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  73 months ago

                  Even in the US, science is mostly metric. But most US people are not exactly the scientific kind…

                • @frezik@midwest.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  23 months ago

                  It works fine when everything around you is in those numbers. The scale for medications might be set to mg, or injections in mL. The bottles for both are labeled the same way. Everything works together, and you don’t really have to think about it.

                  Part of the problem with converting everything to metric is it really needs to be everything. You can try talking about driving distances in km, and your gas tank in L/100km, and your speed in km/hr. However, the interstate highway signs will still be in miles, you buy gas in gallons, and the speed limit signs are in mph. This isn’t a case where you can just choose to use the metric system as an individual, because the whole system works against you.

                • @Sterile_Technique@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  13 months ago

                  Gotcha! Yeah same page - some of the other students don’t like that method cuz it can take a bit longer, but building the equation kinda idiot proofs itself against calculating for the wrong unit, and it’s super consistent! Definitely my favorite so far.

            • @GoodEye8@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              83 months ago

              Even dimensional analysis works best with metric because sometimes you need to convert units and almost all conversion in metric are base 10, so something like 1kg/km is 1000g/1000m is 1 gram per meter. But in imperial 1 pound/mile is 16 ounces / 5280 feet is who the fuck knows how many ounces per feet.

          • ✺roguetrick✺
            link
            fedilink
            English
            1
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            You’ll never see dosage questions like that on the NCLEX. If you do it’ll be like one. I breezed through it when I took it, but basic knowledge questions are minimal (as long as you don’t get them wrong).

        • @pivot_root@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          8
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          Metric is excellent until it gets into data units. There shouldn’t be a difference between 4T and 4TB, but it’s actually a (10244-10004) ≈ 92.6G (99.5GB) difference because of the fuckers who decided to make data units metric and rename the base-2 data units to “kibibyte”/“mibi*”/“gibi*” (KiB/MiB/GiB)

          • megane-kun
            link
            fedilink
            English
            153 months ago

            I think the biggest mistake there is using SI prefixes (such as kilo, mega, giga, tera) with bytes (or bits) to refer to the power of two near a power of ten in the first place. Had computer people had used other names for 1024 bytes and the like, this confusion between kibibytes and kilobytes could have been avoided. Computer people back then could have come up with a set of base·16 prefixes and used that for measuring data.

            Maybe something like 65,536 bytes = 1,0000 (base 16) = 1 myri·byte; ‭4,294,967,296 bytes = 1,0000,0000 (base 16) = dyri·byte; and so on in groups of four hex digits instead of three decimal digits (16¹² = tryri·byte, 16¹⁶ = tesri·byte, etc). That’s just one system I pulled out of my ass (based on the myriad, and using Greek numbers to count groups of digits), and surely one can come up with a better system.

            Anyways, while it’d take me a while to recognize one kilobyte as 1000 bytes and not as 1024 bytes, I think it’s better that ‘kilo’ always means 1000 times something in as many situations as possible.

            • @michaelmrose@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              33 months ago

              There is no reason whatsoever to use base 16 for computer storage it is both unconnected to technology and common usage it is worse than either base 2 or 10

              • megane-kun
                link
                fedilink
                English
                53 months ago

                I guess? I just pulled that example out of my ass earlier, thinking well, hexadecimal is used heavily in computing, so maybe something with powers of 16 would do just fine.

                At any rate, my point is that using a prefix system that is different and easily distinguishable from the metric SI prefixes would have been way better.

                • @michaelmrose@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  13 months ago

                  They could have easily used base 2 which is actually connected to how the hardware works and just called it something else

            • @sep@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              2
              edit-2
              3 months ago

              Everybody knew exactly what kilo mega and giga ment. when drive vendors deliberatly lied on there pdf’s about their drive sizes. Warnings were issued: this drive will not work in a raid as a replacement for same size!!. And everybody was throwing fumes on mailinglists about the bullshit situation.

              But money won, as usual.

              Source: threw fumes!

              • megane-kun
                link
                fedilink
                English
                23 months ago

                Not too sure if they outright lied, but I suppose we can say that they used the change to make their drives seem larger!

                That’s why I wished computer people had used a prefix system distinct from the SI ones. If we’re measuring our storage devices in yeetibytes rather than gigabytes, for example, then I suppose there’s less chance that we’ve ended up in this situation.

        • merde alors
          link
          fedilink
          English
          13 months ago

          how many fingers do you have on your 2 hands?

          feel free to count

  • @Rade0nfighter@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    81
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    For those also wondering (and I’m quoting a comment on Ars so may stand corrected…):

    Isn’t this a violation of the Geneva Conventions?

    Only if used to deliberately target infantry. The videoed operations so far seem to have been intended to burn away protective cover (trees/brush), which is a permitted use even if there’s a risk of inflicting casualties as a side effect of the application of incendiaries.

    • @ilega_dh@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      923 months ago

      There’s a lot of people who seem to have a knee-jerk reaction to this “that’s a war crime!!1!”, but it really is not. Incendiary weapons (like thermite, white phosphorus and napalm) are not illegal to use against legitimate military targets, including enemy combatants. It’s only a war crime when it’s used indiscriminately against civilians or in civilian areas.

      Lot of misinformation out there on this it seems.

    • @Maggoty@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      163 months ago

      Oh God no. Nobody cares what you do to the Infantry. It’s the civilians. Don’t use this around civilians.

      Sincerely, an old infantryman.

  • @RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    643 months ago

    Warfare has always been hell, but now when someone hunts you down with a drone while you’re running away it makes it a particularly terrifying personal hell.

    • @TheReturnOfPEB@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      3
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      If they collect enough real time statistical data from the battlefield i assume that that will be gamified into A.I. “soldier recognition” to deduce which people are the real threats and where and at whom fire should be concentrated.

      HEROISM will be pointed out by A.I. and massacred.

      • adr1an
        link
        fedilink
        English
        43 months ago

        AI (e.g. face recognition) is riddled with false positives. Such a tech already does wrong on civilians without being a weapon (e.g. cameras on subways). What you said is somewhat naïve.

  • @Sarmyth@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    443 months ago

    Eh, that’s pretty metal. What I like about it is that it’s not some chemical weapon that floats on the air to hiteveryone in the vicinity. You will see where you are hitting clearly because it’s like a bright tracer round. And it’ll cause more injuries than deaths.

    You almost have a sporting chance to get away once it’s started compared to the relatively sudden chaos of explosions.

    • @lud@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      273 months ago

      And it’ll cause more injuries than deaths.

      That is the entire problem with chemical weapons. They injure people badly.

      That’s why chemical weapons are banned while bombs aren’t.

      • @Sarmyth@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        393 months ago

        That’s actually not the problem with chemical weapons. Chemical weapons are banned due to their indiscriminate nature (being blown by the wind) and really the fact that it causes slow deaths over years. It’s that it’s tantamount to torture (which is also banned).

        Blowing people’s limbs off is considered A-OK as long as it’s not done with land mines.

    • @lightstream@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      223 months ago

      Eh, that’s pretty metal.

      It’s definitely pretty, and as thermite is a mixture of metal powder and metal oxide, your statement is entirely correct.

    • @werefreeatlast@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      53 months ago

      Yeah you can choose to just give up before getting suddenly delivered to the 360 degrees surrounding you in every direction.

  • @T00l_shed@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    373 months ago

    Maybe, if putin doesn’t want his soldiers crispied. He should withdraw all of them, and stop bombing schools and hospitals and shopping malls.

  • @Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    223 months ago

    Good. As long as it doesn’t target civilian areas.

    Soldiers can always defect or surrender. Don’t want to face Ukraine’s army? Don’t be in Russia’s army. It’s that simple.

    I consider every Russian soldier complicit in this invasion of Ukraine. Otherwise they wouldn’t be there.

  • @DrunkenPirate@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    20
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    Muss ich mir merken Thermit-Reaktion. Wenn dann bald die humanoiden Roboter in Kriegen eingesetzt werden (und sie endlich wissen wie Türen zu öffnen sind), dann werde ich die Terminator therminieren.

    https://www.chemie-schule.de/KnowHow/Thermitreaktion

    Oh, I see it’s an English thread. So, actually that will be my way of fighting the Terminator in the coming wars with Humanoid Robots (once they figured out how to handle door handles). I will thermitinate the Terminator. As a note to my future self.

  • Ellia Plissken
    link
    fedilink
    English
    193 months ago

    this is interesting and whatnot, but during WW2, US research indicated that jellied gasoline (napalm) was a far more effective incendiary than thermite when it comes to burning wood.

      • @Podunk@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        123 months ago

        Thermite is considered less lethal than napalm and phosphorus. Its fairly direct too. It only lights up what it is dropped on. It can burn up cover and leave the troops under it fairly unharmed. Another example of Ukraine fighting with one hand tied behind their back, but still making due with what works.

        On top of that, its super easy to make. Its just rust iron oxide and powdered aluminum. You can make it at home with a file and some old pipes.

  • @irotsoma@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    123 months ago

    Better than the gas that Russia is using illegally that causes serious pain and often takes a long time to die painfully from.

  • @slacktoid@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    103 months ago

    Yes more war and more destruction to sate the gods of war! Paint the ground red with the blood of our enemies and the sky black with their burnt homes!

    Is that bloodthirsty enough?

      • @slacktoid@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        3
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        there’s a line between defense and offense. this is offensive. just cause someone hits you doesnt mean you kill them. you defend yourself and leave (preferably with the other person still alive)

        thermite is pretty fucked.

        • Zyratoxx
          link
          fedilink
          English
          73 months ago

          Try to defend yourself and leave when your opponent is a fucking yandere that is armed with two rifles one of which you gave to them because in exchange they promised they would never hurt you or take anything from you by force.

          Well you are indeed lucky enough the yandere only threatens to shoot you or your friends and for the moment only fights with a long sword whilst all you have is a kitchen knife and a dagger your friends gave you.

          • @slacktoid@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            2
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            But the so called yandere is sitting in the Kremlin sending his unwilling minions to you.

            Also if you wanna be bloodthirsty use a neutron bomb or something instead of thermite. It’s nice and quick and clean and gets things done.

          • @slacktoid@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            23 months ago

            Then you’re destroying your own country using thermite on it not theirs. Why not shoot yourself in the foot while you’re at it.

            • @suchwin@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              13 months ago

              I’m not gonna let the intruder in my home (who keeps hitting me) stay there because I refuse to break my lamp over his head.

              Russians in Ukraine is a much larger threat than less shrubbery.

              • @slacktoid@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                English
                1
                edit-2
                3 months ago

                You also ruin your soil. And your water and other resources. It’s not just shrubbery.

                Also call the cops if you have an intruder why are you letting them stay?

                Also the person responsible for the invasion is completely unaffected. Soldiers are just cogs in the machine.