Who cares if it's weird? Why are you saying "weird" as if that were a bad thing? It's just a derogatory synonym for "unusual". A take would have to be weird to be a contribution to the conversation, because if it's not weird, it's a widely held opinion we all already know, and nobody gains anything by reading it.

What matters, given that it meets the minimal bar of weirdness to be potentially worthwhile, is whether it's correct. Which depends on what future combatants will do once weaponry actually is autonomous, not what Ukraine and Russia are doing with remotely-piloted FPV drones.

▲

numpad0 2 days ago | parent [-]

I'd call it delusional than weird. US is clearly controlling Ukrainian churn rate so that Russian military and Ukraine as nation burn down at the same rate into disappearance so that the postwar Ukraine can be rebuilt with more Western leaning meatbags from surrounding nations. And some of people here are framing exactly that as utopian bloodless fights of machines. Calling it weird is itself almost weird.

	▲	scotty79 19 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Never attribute to malice something that which is adequately explained by stupidity. It's true that US restrains Ukrainians and the war drags on but US does this out of fear of nuclear war with russia. It's silly, but you have to understand that US for many decades built up the marketing myth of russia as a scary superpower. Only in opposition to this great and strong evil they could see themselves as the great and strong good. To facilitate this they told everyone that russia is strong boogyman so much that they themselves believed it and can't shake off this belief even though russia repeatedly displays how weak and terrible at everything it is.