EADaily, June 3rd, 2026. The troops of the Kiev regime committed another war crime by attacking with drones a regular bus service Moscow — Simferopol in Yenakiyevo of the Donetsk People's Republic.
Let’s try a thought experiment. Imagine yourself as an ethical person with a family that you would protect with your life. Then one night you’re woken up by a noise to find out two men have broken into your house. One is raping your wife and the other is somewhere else in the house and you don’t know if your children are okay. What ethical guidelines would you adhere to while trying to protect your family? Or would ethics even come up in this situation?
How does attacking a city bus help them other than some misguided sense of revenge?
In the context of your thought experiment, it would be like attacking the family of the people attacking your family, when their family was not involved in their crimes. As an outside observer, why should I actively support the person in your thought experiment if the crime against his family turns him into just as much of a monster as those who attacked him first, someone who is willing to the exact same tactics as those he hate? I would just feel bad that they were attacked on the first place, recognise it as the catalyst for them abandoning their own ethics which is a tragedy in itself, and not want to take sides in what is currently happening between them.
If you want me to take the side of one party in any general situation, then I will personally want them to be materially better than the other side. Otherwise I’m defaulting to taking no sides.
When you put it that way I suppose it makes perfect sense that the people of eastern Ukraine would call for Russian assistance against the government-backed Banderite terrorists raping, torturing and murdering 14,000 of them
Surely we should hold Ukraine to higher ethical standards than tHoSe DaMn OrCs if we’re to support them in this conflict.
Let’s try a thought experiment. Imagine yourself as an ethical person with a family that you would protect with your life. Then one night you’re woken up by a noise to find out two men have broken into your house. One is raping your wife and the other is somewhere else in the house and you don’t know if your children are okay. What ethical guidelines would you adhere to while trying to protect your family? Or would ethics even come up in this situation?
How does attacking a city bus help them other than some misguided sense of revenge?
In the context of your thought experiment, it would be like attacking the family of the people attacking your family, when their family was not involved in their crimes. As an outside observer, why should I actively support the person in your thought experiment if the crime against his family turns him into just as much of a monster as those who attacked him first, someone who is willing to the exact same tactics as those he hate? I would just feel bad that they were attacked on the first place, recognise it as the catalyst for them abandoning their own ethics which is a tragedy in itself, and not want to take sides in what is currently happening between them.
If you want me to take the side of one party in any general situation, then I will personally want them to be materially better than the other side. Otherwise I’m defaulting to taking no sides.
This sounds awfully like “misogynist old cracker invents fantasy scenario where he can ‘ethically’ murder undesireables”
Sounds like you’re trying to avoid answering the question. And do you even know what misogynist means?
When you put it that way I suppose it makes perfect sense that the people of eastern Ukraine would call for Russian assistance against the government-backed Banderite terrorists raping, torturing and murdering 14,000 of them
I’d like to know more about this. Can you link to your sources?