Da Techguy's (no longer backup) Blog

It would be superfluous in me to point out to your Lordship that this is war 

US Minister Charles Francis Adams to British Foreign Minister Lord John Russell on the construction of Confederate Ships in England 1863

This story leaped out at me:

💥 It is reported that there were 2 explosions in the Kremlin that night.

Russian media writes: « Tonight, the Kyiv regime attempted to strike with UAVs on the Kremlin presidential residence.

The Kremlin called these actions a planned terrorist act, an attempt on the life of… pic.twitter.com/QHcurfyd6X

— ✙ Albina Fella ✙ 🇺🇦🇬🇧🇫🇷🇩🇪🇵🇱🇺🇸🇨🇦🇦🇺 (@albafella1) May 3, 2023

The Kremlin is saying this was a drone strike to hit Putin and are apparently yelling “Terrorism”. If this was a drone strike by the Ukraine there are plenty of important implications that should scare the hell out of everyone:

1. While 200 years ago this might have been considered bad form when two countries are at war it is a legitimate target so the cry of “terrorism” is BS.
2. If the Kremlin in general and Putin in particular are legitimate targets of war then by definition if the Russians launch drones vs the Ukrainian parliament in general and Volodymyr Zelenskyy in particular those would also be considered legitimate attacks on legitimate targets of war.
3. Given that both Europe and the US are supplying Ukraine with arms any of those shipments would become legitimate targets of Drone or any other type of strikes by Russia as soon as they enter the war zone, that is Ukraine.
4. This suggests that any US or European pol who enters Ukraine does so at their own risk and may in fact be considered legitimate targets of a drone strike by Russia if they are from a country supplying arms to Ukraine.
5. What is to stop Russia from “outsourcing” such attacks by commissioning individuals to conduct such attacks in the name of Russia basically “privateering”.

And if that doesn’t scare you let’s take the next logical step:

1. What is to stop Russia from declaring a “blockade” of Ukraine and thus making shipments of war materials legitimate targets of war?
2. If a ship is transporting arms to the Ukraine, what is to stop Russia from claiming the contents of that ship contraband of war and either seizing it on the high seas or sinking it as a legitimate target of war?
3. What is to stop Russia from either directly or using the “Privateering” example to target
   • arms shipments to Ukraine
   • infastructure used to transport arms shipments to Ukraine
   • leaders or parliaments of nations that vote to provide arms shipments to Ukraine

Nobody seems to be considering these possibilities all of which have the potential to not just drag us into war with Russia but to begin World War 3.

And for those fools who have not bothered to study history let’s remind everyone of what was going on for months before Japan Bombed Pearl Harbor.

All of this is not only very possible but becomes more so by the day and if it does come then no amount of clever remarks or tut tuts by folks on Twitter are going to stop it.

Given that our nation is bleeding recruits faster than Bud Light is bleeding customers the only logical and sensible move is for us to do all we can to stop this war and broker a peace because the longer it goes on the more likely those who are making a buck off the fighting will end up dragging us into a shooting war that we are not equipped nor motivated to win and against a nuclear power no less and believe me this administration and those who are getting their 10% will continue to move in that direction as long as they see cash coming their way without worrying about the cost.