Yup. Around the 50 sec mark a missile hits one of them off to the right, before another hits the plane itself a bit later.

There is a gray area: while engaging an enemy, you may not know exactly at what point have they been neutralized, so if you keep shooting and kill them… well, tough luck, should have surrendered sooner.

These videos however, which show a clearly neutralized enemy, then go for a headshot… or the ones desecrating cadavers… or joking about civilian victims… make me think that whoever published them is either quite dim, or works for the other side.

Earlier in the Ukrainian war, there were some much smarter moves, like filming POWs being given a phone to call their families. That’s both morally and strategically far better.

Maybe there was no hope, but that’s for medical personnel to decide. Mercy killings were a Middle Ages thing, nowadays once an enemy is no longer a threat, whether by being wounded, surrendering, getting captured, or in any other way, then it becomes a war crime to kill them.

This kind of videos play straight into Russian propaganda.

What does the Geneva Convention say about killing disabled enemy combatants?

Hm, 550Km operational range… nice.

Couldn’t Russia still move some of its fleet through the deep water system?

Little shipbuilding capacity is no surprise, when taking into account that Ukraine was part of USSR’s capacity, and now Russia is attacking… well, that. Like, all those shipyards are not likely to get any materials from Azovstal for a while.

“Industrial” are both natural rejects, and artificial. “Artificial” are grown perfect (even “too perfect”), but still need cutting and polishing. A piece of plastic is more shiny than any uncut gem.

infrastructure, engineers and knowledge. Germany did not have any of those in sufficient amount

Germany had 17 nuclear power plants in 2011, when they decided to close half of them after Fukushima. Russia invaded Crimea in 2014. Last nuclear power plant closed in April 2023. I find it hard to believe that there was not enough expertise to build some new ones in all this time.

the decision to switch to coal & gas

This is what really rubs me the wrong way: coal should have been phased out before nuclear, not used to replace nuclear.

It all seems like a grift and a knee jerk reaction under the guise of “look how green we are”, while actually doing all the opposite.

does not mean that they will present a fair and balanced spread of ideas

Not fair, and not balanced, just full spread.

The “capitalist class” interest is to earn money, which necessarily makes it fill ALL possible revenue niches: from state sponsored propaganda, through different interest group propaganda, all the way to anti-system, extremist, and a large variety of scams. If nobody else is doing it, someone will, no exceptions.

Assembling a “fair and balanced” set of sources, is left as a task for each voter; that’s where each one’s ability to contrast sources comes into play.

Nuclear was already better than coal 50 years ago… the whole anti-nuclear movement was predicated on the Chernobyl disaster, making “natural gas” and renewables better than nuclear, with a supposed phase-out of natural gas. Coal was always the worst option, both in emissions, and in the impact of open pit mining, when it was already known that deep shaft black coals mines had been getting depleted for decades.

It was highly irresponsible to not renew the nuclear plants before there was at least enough renewables to replace them, and instead increase reliance on natural gas… from Russia from all places. Particularly after Crimea, there should have been a reassessment and a push to fast-track nuclear.

It takes only 5 years to build a nuclear power plant, Crimea was 9 years ago; Germany had plenty of time to prepare itself, instead of investing in increasing NordStream capacity.

Maybe nuclear could’ve been better than coal?

When you try to dismantle capitalism… you get capitalism under a different name, with a dictator on top of it. Better hope the dictator wants to protect the environment, and that he knows how to! (see: Great Chinese Famine)

Under a capitalist democracy with antitrust laws… the “capitalist class” will create all sorts of media sources to earn money from whatever sort of information any voters will eat up. A single group can’t control most sources of information, because it will be eaten alive by all the competing groups at once.

It’s up to each voter to decide whether they want to religiously follow a single source, or contrast it with others, and which ones.

Absolutely recycle metals

You don’t need to; all trash, no matter the bin, goes under a magnet that will pick out anything ferromagnetic, and through an induction trap that will pick out non-ferromagnetic metals. Even if for some reason it gets dumped in a landfill, it’s still possible to mine it out.

Aluminum in particular is more expensive to mine+refine than to recycle. Some places you can even throw it on the ground, and someone will pick it up to sell for recycling. Copper you can get even stolen from you, and don’t start me on Palladium, some people will “recycle” the catalytic converter from your car if you don’t park it in a safe place.

What conspiracy? Sounds like just savage profit maximization.

Header files are optional, they duplicate function declarations to share between multiple files, but otherwise you could write c/c++/c# without headers… the compiler might just run out of memory.