Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Nobel Peace Prize for 2024 awarded to Nihon Hidankyo

nobelprize.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 389 posts

Re: Nobel Peace Prize for 2024 awarded to Nihon Hidankyo

#131

Post by gus_massa »

thimabi wrote: post #93
gus_massa wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Customary international law" is written by countries that can win a huge wae that are countries that have nuclear weapons, so they will not forbid themself the use of nuclear weapons.

As the name says, customary international law is not written. It arises from international practices that have become so widespread that states begin to recognize they have a legal obligation to continue them (opinio juris). Current literature says that the non-usage of nuclear weapons has become a widespread international practice, but that the resistance of nuclear powers has prevented the formation of an “opinio j…

But the several other states must have nuclear weapons to enforce the custom on a rogue country with nuclear weapons.

Re: Nobel Peace Prize for 2024 awarded to Nihon Hidankyo

#132

Post by fifilura »

cynicalpeace wrote: post #119
fifilura wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not talking about any conflict in particular. I am just pointing out that this is the consequence of that kind of policy. The world is not black and white. And that also gives you the right to choose what part of the grayscale you want to be, good on you!

You have stated you agree that wars between nuclear powers are extremely foolish. It's difficult to say how you can stop such wars if you don't know what the war is.

It was you who said that.

Re: Nobel Peace Prize for 2024 awarded to Nihon Hidankyo

#133

Post by cynicalpeace »

piva00 wrote: post #129
cynicalpeace wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Can we think on the next step then? A nuclear nation invades and annexes territories from a non-nuclear one, given the premise to avoid wars between nuclear powers by proxy it means that a nuclear nation can then invade and annex anything in their surroundings with little repercussion, since we want to avoid any escalation towards nuclear powers at war. They settle for peace, the nuclear power gets what they want, st…

You're claiming a compromised peace in the Donbas could spiral into a nuclear exchange.

I'm claiming that continuing the proxy war between a jingoistic US government and a (probably) jingoistic Russian government could spiral into a nuclear exchange, and that the US government should be less jingoistic. Being jingoistic doesn't reduce the chance of nuclear war.

I doubt we're going to convince each other, so I would challenge readers of the two claims to decide for themselves what makes more sense for preventing nuclear armageddon.

Re: Nobel Peace Prize for 2024 awarded to Nihon Hidankyo

#134

Post by yard2010 »

bbb651 wrote: post #109
kdhusakdjhsadkj wrote: post #74

[flagged]

I have a feeling this will change real soon.

I wish you were wrong because that means shit that is hitting the fan real hard and I'm not up for this.

"I died, I swear, when the ABC said we're going to war, I really believed we wouldn't fight no more" Edge of the World Pt. 3 by Pond

Re: Nobel Peace Prize for 2024 awarded to Nihon Hidankyo

#136

Post by tephra »

dogben wrote: post #121
Metacelsus wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Little Boy didn't have a parachute. Maybe he was mis-remembering that.

There were instruments dropped by parachute.

IIRC those were dropped by a second plane accompanying the Enola Gay.

Re: Nobel Peace Prize for 2024 awarded to Nihon Hidankyo

#137

Post by aguaviva »

cynicalpeace wrote: post #98
fifilura wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes but how? Obviously the invader is not going to stop the war and say "this was foolish". So it is up to all other nations to bow down and let them have their piece of the world.

[flagged]

I don't know if the Russians are just as jingoistic and corrupt,

Short story: current regime in the Russian Federation quite definitely is, may more so in fact, and has fascist, revanchist, genocidal ideology to boot. You may want to look further into its history (and that of the Russian/Soviet empires, which it sees itself as the natural successor to), and into the writings/thinking of the folks the helm of that regime in more detail sometime.

Sabotaging negotiations in Turkey

That's a myth, as you will easy verify for yourself by doing adequate research into the topic.

Forget about Dick Cheney. Instead look into who's been drip-feeding you false narratives like the above, and why.

Re: Nobel Peace Prize for 2024 awarded to Nihon Hidankyo

#138

Post by piva00 »

cynicalpeace wrote: post #133
piva00 wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can we think on the next step then? A nuclear nation invades and annexes territories from a non-nuclear one, given the premise to avoid wars between nuclear powers by proxy it means that a nuclear nation can then invade and annex anything in their surroundings with little repercussion, since we want to avoid any escalation towards nuclear powers at war. They settle for peace, the nuclear power gets what they want, st…

You're claiming a compromised peace in the Donbas could spiral into a nuclear exchange. I'm claiming that continuing the proxy war between a jingoistic US government and a (probably) jingoistic Russian government could spiral into a nuclear exchange, and that the US government should be less jingoistic. Being jingoistic doesn't reduce the chance of nuclear war. I doubt we're going to convince each other, so I would c…

No. I'm claiming that a compromised peace in the Donbas with the annexation of territories of the Donbas and Crimea will further strengthen that if you have nukes you have a massive lever to use against non-nuclear nations. And Russia wants the Donbas, Crimea and the land bridge all the way around the Sea of Azov, that's a massive plot of land.

You are only considering a narrow point in time, think ahead in terms of 20-50 years the repercussions of allowing an annexation to happen uncontested.

Right now it's Ukraine, let's say next is Iran acquiring nuclear weapons over the next 20 years and moving towards Basra in Iraq + Kuwait for their oil fields, in this scenario they are a nuclear power, arming themselves for 20 years (and they already have ballistic missiles), to avoid a nuclear escalation between Iran and USA + Israel a negotiated peace happens. The Saudis see that happening and now they feel the need to arm themselves with a nuclear weapon, just in case Iran thinks of continuing this campaign.

Multiply this across many other nations under similar low-level confrontations, African nations fighting for water sources, one of them arms themselves with a nuclear weapon (let's say Sudan) to have leverage to control a massively important water source, what's going to stop others around it to not arm themselves (like Eritrea) to not get invaded?

It's a spiral, the moment you allow a nuclear power to use that status to force the hand of an opposing nation at war you open a can of worms. Since 1945 the world has been trying to control proliferation through other means, wars of annexation have been shunned, you really don't want that to come back into a world armed with nuclear weapons.

I don't have an answer, I don't think anyone does. Putin has changed the world with this invasion, you are choosing to vote for Trump on a flimsy argument, you don't even know what the fuck he will do since he's a massive liar. On top of that you're jeopardising your country's democracy based on wishful thinking of what you project Trump will do, it's all from your head, not from his words.

Re: Nobel Peace Prize for 2024 awarded to Nihon Hidankyo

#139

Post by bryanlarsen »

cynicalpeace wrote: post #133
piva00 wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can we think on the next step then? A nuclear nation invades and annexes territories from a non-nuclear one, given the premise to avoid wars between nuclear powers by proxy it means that a nuclear nation can then invade and annex anything in their surroundings with little repercussion, since we want to avoid any escalation towards nuclear powers at war. They settle for peace, the nuclear power gets what they want, st…

You're claiming a compromised peace in the Donbas could spiral into a nuclear exchange. I'm claiming that continuing the proxy war between a jingoistic US government and a (probably) jingoistic Russian government could spiral into a nuclear exchange, and that the US government should be less jingoistic. Being jingoistic doesn't reduce the chance of nuclear war. I doubt we're going to convince each other, so I would c…

It's a classic short-term vs long-term tradeoff. Letting Russia get away with an invasion of Ukraine decreases the risk of a nuclear war in the next couple of years but increases it in the following decades. I personally believe the long-term thinkers have the better argument

Re: Nobel Peace Prize for 2024 awarded to Nihon Hidankyo

#140

Post by myrmidon »

krisoft wrote: post #94
Dalewyn wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Japan's national security policy is hypocritical given that it relies solely on the US nuclear umbrella for security despite disavowing anything to do with nuclear weapons, but unfortunately reality is not ideality. Ukraine is the perfect example of what actually happens when a country discards its nuclear arsenal. So yes, Japan is absolutely hypocritical and the Nobel Peace Prize has been the most vapid of all the N…

> Ukraine is the perfect example of what actually happens when a country discards its nuclear arsenal. That's silly. Ukraine never had a nuclear arsenal. Ukraine had nuclear weapons on their soil, but they were managed, and controlled by forces loyal to Moscow. Had forces loyal to Kyiv tried to force their way into the silos they would have been repelled and a war would have broken out there and then. Ukraine had a n…

I agree that Ukraine was not a nuclear power even while they had warheads on their territory after the USSR fell apart, but I believe it was very feasible for them to become one.

Posession is nine tenths of the law, after all-- it would've been quite possible to just lock down a few silos and refuse to hand the weapons over. Russia as a state was highly disrupted at that point, and would've had a hard time opposing this effectively.

I'm not disputing that this would've been a very costly move for an already poor nation (in potential economical sanctions and also maintenance of the arsenal itself). Maybe the external political/economical pressure resulting from this would've ripped Ukraine apart some other way.

But I'm highly confident that Russia would not have risked annexing territory from an country with a few nuclear ICBM silos. No need even to have full control/launch capability, as long as there is sufficient doubt (on Russias side).

Post reply on HN