I can confirm, it happened a few times in Kursk, I’ve seen the videos.

However, the drone in question was a reconnaisance drone (those have long flight times). Ideally, you never see a reconnaisance drone - it sees you from beyond visual range well enough.

I believe the situation in Kursk was that Ukrainians deliberately sent a reconnaisance drone to take a close look, and perhaps also dropped a few leaflets. Russians then understood that their coordinates were known, they had no shelter available and a strike might come any second - and made the gestures to indicate surrender.

It also helped that the Russians in question were conscripts - young people undergoing military training. Support for the war is the lowest among this age group.

Yes. The protocol of “how to surrender” would also be useful to add.

Obviously, one cannot surrender to an FPV drone - it doesn’t have enough battery for the pilot to check if one follows through with the promise.

Throwing down all weapons, raising a white cloth and walking towards the opposing side might be a good enough signal for the pilot however - they might go looking for another target before the battery runs out.

For the leaflet to achieve results, it must lay out a good method of how to surrender. And that’s a lot easier with Russians since they have a language which Ukrainians understand.

To Russians, one can write “go to frequency X MHz, drop encryption and negotiate surrender” or “go to Telegram channel X to arrange surrender” but no such hope with North Koreans.

Sadly, they are not proper merceneries. A mercenary fights for money, but those guys probably know their families will be repressed if they surrender.

If I was the developer of the propaganda leaflet, I would add one sentence (after double-checking with a competent social engineer):

• “you get a new identity, at home they will think you died”

To my knowledge, Turkey has also developed laser weapons, and they have seen action in Libya.

As for possibilities of fast development - when need is great, people do things faster.

But I’m skeptical of laser weapons myself. They depend so much on weather. Air defense is expected to be reliable, not “it is snowing, we can’t shoot”. They can be used, but they always need a backup option if weather works against.

The drone “motherships” are a real thing with real benefits, however. They get around line-of-sight issues (single FPVs cannot go beyond obstacles without losing singnal, but with a mothership they can even go beyond the curvature of Earth).

True.

Hunger for power would exist, but a critical feature that currently exists - the means of returning to power - would be absent.

Bribes would be a concern, so good pay and anti-corruption mechanicms would still be required.

• Because propaganda works. If propaganda didn’t work, companies would not advertise products and politicians wouldn’t run campaigns. Rich sponsors fund politicians who promise to look after their interests. Well-funded politicians run better campaigns and win.

• Because politicians are, nearly without exception, above middle class, if not outright rich. They won’t act too radically against their own class interests.

The only solution I know comes from ancient Athens. Sortition -> you hold a lottery to draw representatives. A few extremely stupid people will be drawn into parliament, but idiots are far better than sociopaths, and the current system gives undue representation to sociopaths (willing to climb over bodies if that gets them to power). If one then dislikes the idea of a considerable percentage of bumbling fools (as opposed to cunning predators) in parliament, one must feed everyone well, treat all childhood diseases and educate everyone as well as possible. As if their rational decisions were needed tomorrow.

Smash anything but a windshield. I’ve needed to violently remove a windshield when replacing it (time was running out and tool shops were closed). Wearing protective glasses and pushing with both legs is what it took to somewhat loosen it, but not immediately remove it. Windshields are a multilayer structure of plastic and glass. Side windows are just glass.

True, but there’s some more.

Over here, ice roads are opened on typical winters on several smaller bays. The instruction to drivers is:

• don’t wear a seatbelt
• if ice breaks, open your door swiftly (get out first, then think about calling people)
• if you can’t open the door, lower your window swiftly
• if you can’t lower the window, break it (the side window, not the windshield - a windshield is multilayer laminate, too strong to break quickly)

Typically, if a car sinks on an ice road, people are likely to get out. A crank-operated window is handy in such a case. But regardless of instruction, sometimes folks do die. :(

In general, I would not like to experience any sort of extreme incident in an over-engineered car. I’d prefer something from the 1970-ties, but with airbags.