War in Ukraine

Expert on interceptor drones: Shahed problem will be solved in few months

Ukraine could solve the problem of Shahed kamikaze drone attacks within a few months, thanks to new Sting interceptor drones, stated aviation expert Anatolii Khrapchynskyi in a comment to RBC-Ukraine's YouTube channel.

According to him, the question of why Russian reconnaissance drones could penetrate deep into Ukrainian territory had been raised before.

"Now we see our strike drones actively intercepting such aerial targets. Therefore, it is clear that in a few months, we will see a solution to the problem of Shahed attack drones by intercepting such weapons," Khrapchynskyi noted. He added that Russia is trying to find new solutions to complicate the work of Ukraine’s air defense forces.

"At the same time, it’s still too early to reveal details about the Sting drones. I belong to those who believe that certain data could expose the technology or tactics of their use," the expert said.

 

Spoken by someone who probably hasn't read a lot of history books, or at least ones that aren't in the Howard Zinn, self-flagellating tradition. Maybe update your views a bit there. You really want to stand by that statement? And even if I was to agree, how large is that "black mark" compared to the myriad "black marks" by more aggressive and cynical empires? As if the CCP or Putin, if given the same power, would behave better. LOL! You can't really believe that.

"Imperialism". Yeah, because making the world safe for free trade between any and all countries is so onerous. Like I said, when we leave (and don't come back), then we can really judge how "black" that mark is or whether it's actually a shade of gray.

 

LOL, Zinn could never find a war that he couldn’t condemn. Except of course the one he fought in.

 

Of course.

What I don’t see is calling a fighting soldier an advisor.

We will know soon enough.

 

Of course.

What I don’t see is calling a fighting soldier an advisor.

We will know soon enough.

 

No, I read academic history books on my way to a MA in history.

 

Not sure I get your point. Are you suggesting we have fighting troops there and are lying about it?

 

If people only thought of economic disruption or cultural costs, Israel and Russia wouldnt be conducting long term wars over security threats that will almost certainly cost them long term. I dont think our worst politicians think much differently than the worst politicians in Russia or Israel.

 

Well, you seem pretty out of date. So, you really see the US as an aggressive, imperial power along the lines of the Ottomans, Mongols, Russians, etc.? You honestly and truly believe that the USA is one of the great malevolent powers in world history?

What was your specialty?

 

But they don't, so you have to be prepared for that. Not start it, but be prepared when it comes.

 

I was a history major at UF and, decades on, I can attest that history is fables believed.

 

I don't really have a rankings system. I said the US and its foreign policy since WWII has been bad for the world, that doesn't meant x and and z are good for the world. I mainly interested in what we can control.

 

I'm guessing American History. Or some form of it.

I'm curious how you come by that given that it's the opposite in every statistic that matters, from economic development to child mortality and mortality rates in general. In addition - and despite what you think - it's also been more peaceful.

Again, when we go away, the rest (including you) will see the US for what it is. Probably a pretty good actor considering that it held exponentially more power than any other nation in human history. Not perfect, but better than most and better than any alternatives on the table at the time.

 

Cool story bro!

 

Yes, I missed that part of your post. Undergrad I took US/European/Latin American. In grad school I concentrated on Southern US post-civil war and minored in African (mostly West African for survival of folk traditions and Atlantic trade).

To your point, I dont think any book made a case why US foreign policy was good or bad, but when you see the US government toppling democratically elected governments when you read Latin American history, you can kind of form your own conclusions. You learn lots of stuff they dont tell you about in HS, that's part of the appeal. Its like forbidden knowledge.

 

I agree with all of that, but here you are, and there Zinn is and we're openly talking about and criticizing that policy. We've even (contrary to popular belief) made some strides in that area, probably because we allow for opposition views and debate. Not to get corny, but those are important things that matter, things that were mostly if not totally absent in anything that would have taken our place post WWII.

But, FWIW, yeah, we should apologize to the Iranian PEOPLE and the Guatemalans for example. This is what I mean - and hope for- regarding an attitude change moving forward. You can own past mistakes without being Anti-American, and it would probably go a long way toward building credibility. IMO, The West's biggest crime is the crime of hypocrisy. We come in preaching one thing, but oftentimes crap on that, and for the worst of reasons, some corporation's profits. This needs to end, or any chance of building something better for the future is going to be highly compromised.

 

I dont know why people have a problem with Zinn (often seems to be the only historian people who like to argue with me can name), but he was literally never assigned in any course I ever took from high school to college to grad school. I think maybe the first time I had heard of him was when he was referenced in Good Will Hunting along with Gordon S. Wood lol. Anyways, I think the most influential book I've read lately on US foreign policy was Bomb Power by Garry Wills, who is a Jesuit humanist, and once wrote for The National Review.

 

Distilleries hit. Oh hell, now the Russian regular folk will get mad about the war.

 

I like Zin. I just think he represents one extreme, contrasted with, say, history books from the early 20th Century (and even later). That message needed to be told. But, as always, revision in history is good and it's probably time to start looking at fresher, less pejorative ways to look at those issues.

BA History and Political Science. We took different paths. I was mostly Antiquity (Rome) in college and have leaned hard into Medieval in recent years and my political interest more geopolitical than domestic.

 

There's nothing really extreme about Howard Zinn, IMO. He has the same politics as like Kurt Vonnegut or Bernie Sanders. People who all generally believe(d) in the idea of America, the liberal tradition, our ideals and that we should live up to them. If Zinn had influence on stuff I read in school, it was more about uncovering voices of people not usually heard from in historical narratives. But I dont think he gets all the credit for that, he just happened to write one popular history using that idea.

If you wanted the real unadulterated uncut shit about imperialism, the thing to read back then was Hardt & Negri's Empire. People dont really talk about it much anymore.