You say it yourself - you should not feel anxious given your situation, but you do. You need to address your baseline anxiety. Anxiety always finds some reason "why" (i.e. current instability, war...) but often the root cause is deeper and personal - I am speaking from a personal experience.
Consider therapy. Other things might help as well. Sleep more. Rest more. Work less. Find time for some physical activity. But at least in my case, finding and addressing the root cause(s) was the key (followed by years of un-learning of some unhealthy mental patterns).
It would be extremely hard (if not impossible) to extract and transfer those resources under constant attacks by Ukrainian resistance. To suppress that resistance would require so much money (and soldiers) that it would probably bankrupt Russia. At the same time, the extraction of natural resources is threatened in Russia itself, because they use western financing and tech to do that, western companies are now leaving and it is not so easy to switch to China.
That is one strategic mistake Russia made. They are economically at the mercy of China, if they somehow manage to circumvent their economy being destroyed with China's help. China will squeeze them hard. China is much more subtle when it comes to taking over, using soft power, letting the money talk. Just take a look at Africa and other places of a new silk road.
> It would be extremely hard (if not impossible) to extract and transfer those resources under constant attacks by Ukrainian resistance
I've always heard a lot of talk about that (even before the war), especially by Western leaders trying to puff up the effectiveness of their support, but is that resistance actually materializing in Russian-controlled areas?
I would estimate that they made even the Russian-controlled areas much less stable. So if their plan was to extract natural resources... they seem to have torpedoed their own plan? I don't know, it does not make any sense to me. But honestly, the whole invasion does not make any sense. I fail to see any "rational" (however immoral) explanation that would seem believable and I tend to view it in terms of ideology gone haywire, perceived grievances, humiliation and revenge... those models seem to fit better than "rational" models like access to natural resources, protection from NATO etc. Just my $0.02.
Most of the fighting is happening in Eastern Ukraine that was until recently fairly pro-Russia. But you can only bomb hospitals and shell cities for so long before the population starts to hate you, even if you speak the same language.
This might sound weird but people sometimes use strange mental tricks to calm themselves down - it helps me think of it as me being a little part of history. My grandmother lived through world war and occupation by Germans, revolution, counter-revolution, invasion and occupation by Russians, another revolution, unusually long stretch of pretty good years and global pandemic. So far I only have one occupation, revolution and global pandemic under my belt. But who knows what the future holds.
Why pull down your pants when the ford is still far away? You being drafted is extremely unlikely... however, if you want to be mentally prepared, consider this the preparation. You feel anxious (me too). In a few days, we will get used to it. And when something even tougher comes, we will get used to it too. You are already a lot tougher than you were two years ago - you just survived global pandemic.
It often helps to do something with others instead of worrying at home. Any chance there is some refugee center close to where you live where you could help Ukrainians or someone?
I see the word "метеорита" in the original source, which is indeed meteorite (+ declension). I do not think it could be mistranslated as artillery or missile, although I am not a native Russian speaker (I had to learn Russian at school for 3 or 4 years and I have forgotten most of it, it was a long time ago). I think the writer was going for a metaphor, a made up example of being tasked with preparing for something considered so improbable that the preparation was de-prioritized.
I did not know about that aspect of nuclear plants and in my non-expert view it would be a major point against nuclear plants in the discussion how to solve climate change (at least until we learn how to secure them in case of a war). Am I wrong?
EDIT: I would also like to ask if you can recommend some source where curious layman with no knowledge of physics could learn a bit more about this.
You are not wrong that it's a major point in the discussion, but even with that it can still be better than the alternatives for baseline production (the part that intermittent sources like solar and wind can't cover). Remember that coal power add insult to injury by continuously releasing radioactive pollution.
The new designs are built with the expectation that power can be cut off. The new design shut themselves off passively without any damage (that we know of) when the power is gone.
Seems to me like it should have been this way from this start. Catastrophic meltdown caused by power loss, no matter how many power backup systems there are should have been a non-starter. Basically requiring a 100% SLA, 6 nines not enough, with catastrophic consequences for failing to adhere to 100% uptime. That is scary as hell.
> I did not know about that aspect of nuclear plants and in my non-expert view it would be a major point against nuclear plants in the discussion how to solve climate change
It's a reasonable criticism to make, but I think it tends to be a bit overblown. Modern reactors have redundant layers of systems to prevent such a disaster from occurring. In the ~60 year history of nuclear reactors Fukashima is the only time this type of failure has happened (Three Mile Island and Chernobyl were very different), and even then it was due to a cascading series of problems:
* In hindsight it was a really poor idea to locate a nuclear plant by the ocean in a region known for strong earthquakes and tsunamis.
* The backup generators flooded because they were located in the basements, another poor decision for an area at risk of tsunamis.
* TEPCO had additional generators and batteries on site within 6 hours of the earthquake, which was in time to prevent a meltdown, but they were unable to connect them to the plant's electrical system (I don't recall the details of why).
It's also worth mentioning that this is only a problem with large reactors. Smaller designs like those used in ships and submarines still have decay heat, but the reactor core is physically smaller so that it doesn't contain enough isotopes to cause a meltdown. Many nuclear advocates believe that we should be building more nuclear plants with smaller reactors for this reason as well as smaller reactors being easier to operate without getting into a dangerous state.
As far as reading, I highly recommend Atomic Accidents by James Mahaffey [0]. It's very well written, aimed at a total layman, and covers basically everything that has gone wrong since we as a species started seriously messing with nuclear materials in the 19th century.
Well, since we are talking about Karel Čapek, what about his book "The White disease", where a ruthless dictator of a big well armed country is preparing the attack on a small country during the pandemic of a new disease? A really good movie (in my opinion) based on that book is for free on YouTube (if you are not deterred by black and white movie with subtitles): https://youtu.be/HJMUIBEzYnI
> I can't help but think Putin's guise of "denazifying Ukraine" was a poorly understood attempt to gain some favor with those in Western societies that see themselves as fighting fascism and right-wing extremism.
> As a westerner, I've definitely noticed my more left leaning friends agree with actions that seemingly contradict classical liberal ideals (free speech, free association) as long as such actions seem to be in service of fighting fascism...
Nah, this is targeted at Russians. I think that as a westerner you underestimate the power of the myth of Russians saving the world from fascism. This is the very core of their identity. You can find some interesting details here: https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1497306746330697738.html
Personal experience: I grew up during cold war in one of east-european satelites of the Soviet union. That myth was probably weaker here than in the Soviet union itself, yet it felt ever-present; kind of representation of the mythical struggle of good versus evil. When me and my friends were playing "soldiers" as kids, we were always Russians shooting at fascists. And I remember loving books for kids where some Russian paratrooper befriends local boy and together fight fascism... This was during the latest stages of the communist regime, when almost everyone here hated communists and especially Russians. The idealized memory of their heroic struggle against fascism was the only positive thing that survived in the minds of people.
Obviously, no mention of Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact etc. in history books.
There is one thing I do not understand and I was hoping you (or any other person who knows a lot of Russians) can explain: I hear that Russia and Ukraine have many personal connections from the past. I happen to be from the Czech Republic and I imagined that it is probably similar to our relation to Slovakia - we used to be one state, many people having friends or relatives in the other country, mutually intelligible languages, mixed marriages... I always assumed that personal ties are stronger than propaganda (if I know that my Slovak brother in law and all of his friends are not fascists, I would hardly believe the propaganda claiming that they are). My view was obviously incorrect, but how? Did I overestimate the connectedness between Russia and Ukraine? Or underestimate the influence of propaganda? Or something else?
> There are obviously now messages coming through condemning US and EU for their actions in various conflicts in Iraq, Syria, Palestine, Kosovo etc.
However strongly I am angered and scared by the current attack on Ukraine, I am also deeply shaken by questioning my own views. If one nation can be brainwashed into thinking that they are saving Ukraine from fascists, and they do not know they are brainwashed and think the other side is brainwashed... what am I brainwashed into? I already know I was also deceived big time (I totally believed that lie about WMDs in Iraq), what else is there? And I know that it can be argued that "western media" is more open and pluralistic, but don't Russians think the same about their media?
After seeing Brexit, Donald Trump, Covid, now Ukraine... we humans really need to figure out how to improve our ability to converge on models of reality closer to what really happens.
Anyway, thank you for shedding some light on the views from someone closer to Russia.
Western media has nowhere near the same amount of propaganda. It is diverse and not controlled by the state. The west has many problems, and protecting democracy is a full time job.
With Ukraine, hundreds of countries are all seeing the same thing, independent journalists are watching.
There is no justification for escalating to a war which is what Putin has done. If he had sent troops into the regions already contested you could maybe argue that (even then it would be tenuous).
Western media people fall into groupthink though. On the eve of the 2016 elections the liberal media were all certain that Hillary was going to take it, because all the liberal journalists only had liberal friends and they all hated Trump, so in their echo chamber, Trump was toast. On the reverse, in November 2012 Romney's loss came to a shock to his inner circle, because they were listening to their own echo chamber. Although to be honest, I don't remember now what Fox News was predicting in 2016.
We all have our biases, I wonder if journalists are so diligent to be thorough and re-evaluate things they assume to be X to make sure it's really X, but I doubt it.
I remember. I was in the US, in Mountain View, on election night for work. I went to get dinner as the election was being counted. Between that and the next day, there was just shock.
I haven't read that book and will add it to my reading list.
I'm not naive (but far from an expert). There are all kinds of problems with western democracy, capitalism and the media (in no particular order).
There is a vast difference between the 'western media problems' and the propaganda coming out of Russia though.
The narratives around refugees in Australia are a very good example at least one of the problems with western media. Referring to refugees as 'Illegal' has led to them being locked up off-shore for extended periods of time (6+ years in some cases).
> we humans really need to figure out how to improve our ability to converge on models of reality closer to what really happens.
It's a good idea, but people with power and money have an agenda, and their agenda is often not in sync with current reality. They want their agenda to be future reality, and suppress current reality to get there. Just my opinion.
Consider therapy. Other things might help as well. Sleep more. Rest more. Work less. Find time for some physical activity. But at least in my case, finding and addressing the root cause(s) was the key (followed by years of un-learning of some unhealthy mental patterns).