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

Hackers post fake stories on real news sites 'to discredit NATO'

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 200 posts

Re: Hackers post fake stories on real news sites 'to discredit NATO'

#41

Post by HenryKissinger »

jialutu wrote: post #28
HenryKissinger wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, there is a level of pettiness at work in this recent decision. What they want to do is shift to a rotational force model and deploy another Armored Brigade Combat Team to Poland every 9 months instead of having an SBCT in Germany. Meaning you have to move 2 ABCTs(~4500 Soldiers and all their equipment) in/out of the theater. The main tactical problem with that is that those forces don't have standoff distance fr…

What about the US blowing up the Middle East, where Germany and much of European countries having to deal with the refugees as a consequence of those wars? I think countries like Germany have been penalised enough by the US for not picking up the slack for the refugee situation.

The flows of refugees from Syria to Turkey and Greece were largely due to the fallout of the Syrian Civil War, which the United States was neither responsible for starting, could not have prevented from starting, and could not have stopped once it began.

Re: Hackers post fake stories on real news sites 'to discredit NATO'

#42

Post by AndrewBissell »

bovermyer wrote: post #24
1123581321 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How will you react if the trained people don’t think an overhaul is needed?

I'll trust their judgment. I don't trust the judgment of the current administration.

Do you mean the judgment of people like Samantha Power, Anne-Marie Slaughter, Henry Kissinger, Susan Rice, and Biden's foreign policy team which is largely inspired by and contiguous with that set?

Re: Hackers post fake stories on real news sites 'to discredit NATO'

#43

Post by jannyfer »

chrisseaton wrote: post #22
ardy42 wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Remember how people used to write N.A.T.O. decades ago but then simplified to NATO? Now they’re simplifying to Nato. I wouldn't call it "simplifying": capitalizing it has the same number of characters and is less ambiguous. I was already somewhat aware of BBC's style, but I still mis-parsed the headline and and thought "Nato" was the name or nickname of a natural person.

I don't understand - do you expect everything that isn't the name of a natural person to be written in all caps? If I write an article about how 'France is having a heatwave' do you get confused and think 'France' must be referring to a natural person?

In the article you linked:

"We retain the middle cap in YouTube and MySpace because we think it prevents readers being confused by a word they are used to seeing in a particular way."

I'm used to seeing NATO, and thought Nato might have been a political figure I hadn't heard of.

Re: Hackers post fake stories on real news sites 'to discredit NATO'

#44

Post by opqpo »

hnarn wrote: post #39
opqpo wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The one this fake story was designed to make you think it is behind it

Wow, how clever. So are you saying Russia never do these types of operations, or do they, but only sometimes? If so, I'd love to know how you can tell the difference.

The truth never matters since you got the downvotes. Of course Russia is behind all attacks. Even all the attacking IPs are coming from near the Kremlin according to many articles in the western MSM!

Re: Hackers post fake stories on real news sites 'to discredit NATO'

#45

Post by newacct583 »

auganov wrote: post #38
bovermyer wrote: post #5

Once the USA has a sane commander-in-chief again, it's going to need to completely overhaul its approach to the Eastern European region, among other things.

This Russian propaganda is obviously targeting President Trump's plans to strengthen the eastern flank of NATO. Something Obama has been extremely weak on. He cancelled Missile Defense after opposition from Russia (famously promising "Vladimir" “more flexibility” on the issue after his "last election"). Eastern European leaders were warning Obama about Ukraine way before it happened but he wouldn't listen. And before…

> Trump's plans to strengthen the eastern flank of NATO. Something Obama has been extremely weak on.

I think you're going to need to start citing that, I'm not aware of any such plans. Certainly nothing that rises to the level of action (e.g. announcing the removal of a third of the US forces in Germany, as happened last week).

This is just a whataboutist response. While there is criticism to be made everywhere about all things, the idea that the Trump administration has NOT been extraordinarily compliant to Russian demands is just ridiculous.

Re: Hackers post fake stories on real news sites 'to discredit NATO'

#46

Post by vngzs »

jhrmnn wrote: post #10
vngzs wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/academy/en/articles/art201307021121335... > Use the abbreviated form of a title without explanation only if there is no chance of any misunderstanding (eg UN, Nato, IRA, BBC). Otherwise, spell it out in full at first reference, or introduce a label (eg the public sector union Unite). > > Where you would normally say the abbreviation as a string of letters - an initialism - use all capitals with…

Interesting. Is this really not confusing? I haven't seen it done elsewhere. I find it confusing just because of that. Their reasoning for why they do it seems actually reasonable. EDIT: Actually the fact that their rule is followed by a list of exceptions, because NICE -> Nice, SAD -> Sad would be confusing shows why this style might be not so good after all. Also, whereas N.A.T.O. -> NATO is really just a style cha…

Perhaps it's confusing to Americans, but it's common among the UK press:

> Use all capitals if an abbreviation is pronounced as the individual letters (an initialism): BBC, CEO, US, VAT, etc; if it is an acronym (pronounced as a word) spell out with initial capital, eg Nasa, Nato, Unicef, unless it can be considered to have entered the language as an everyday word, such as awol, laser and, more recently, asbo, pin number and sim card. Note that pdf and plc are lowercase.

https://www.theguardian.com/guardian-observer-style-guide-a

It appears they are doing the equivalent of considering pronounced acronyms to be proper nouns. Despite the style ambiguity, it makes a bit of sense if you read the text aloud, as the style gives some indication of how to say the word.

Re: Hackers post fake stories on real news sites 'to discredit NATO'

#47

Post by sarbaz »

chrisseaton wrote: post #22
ardy42 wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Remember how people used to write N.A.T.O. decades ago but then simplified to NATO? Now they’re simplifying to Nato. I wouldn't call it "simplifying": capitalizing it has the same number of characters and is less ambiguous. I was already somewhat aware of BBC's style, but I still mis-parsed the headline and and thought "Nato" was the name or nickname of a natural person.

I don't understand - do you expect everything that isn't the name of a natural person to be written in all caps? If I write an article about how 'France is having a heatwave' do you get confused and think 'France' must be referring to a natural person?

It's just that a name is a case-sensitive string. If you said 'france is having a heatwave', 'FrAnCE is having a heatwave', or 'FRANCE is having a heatwave', I would be confused.

Re: Hackers post fake stories on real news sites 'to discredit NATO'

#48

Post by _jal »

HenryKissinger wrote: post #31
_jal wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are serious constraints on what can be done. Among others, why would any other country make an agreement with the US where the payoff is more than 4 years out? It has repeatedly demonstrated an inability to keep promises.

I think this concern is overblown. It certainly hasn't stopped Canada and Mexico from negotiating the USMCA trade agreement, for example. The JCPOA (more commonly known as the Iran deal) constrained Iran's nuclear program, and it was with great disappointment that I watched the administration withdraw. But there were anecdotal reports of transgressions on Iran's part, and the JCPOA was never submitted to the US Senat…

The incentives and risks look very different in a local free trade agreement than, say, multilateral talks about What To Do About Syria.

Please name some relevant countries who might be willing to bet their internal security that a hypothetical 5 year security promise from the US would definitely be operative after year 4.

But I do hope I'm wrong. I guess we'll see.

Re: Hackers post fake stories on real news sites 'to discredit NATO'

#50

Post by AndrewBissell »

HenryKissinger wrote: post #7
bovermyer wrote: post #5

Once the USA has a sane commander-in-chief again, it's going to need to completely overhaul its approach to the Eastern European region, among other things.

US policy toward NATO has been remarkably consistent, despite the confusing rhetoric from the commander-in-chief. The United States still refuses to recognize the Russian government's claim over Crimea, the Trump administration has continued selling arms, including lethal arms and armored vehicles, to the government of Ukraine, the United States conducted a cyberattack against Russia prior to the 2018 midterm electio…

I wonder what you're being downvoted for here exactly. As much as the DC foreign policy consensus likes to portray anything short of complete encirclement and expanding NATO right up to Russia's borders as "appeasement," everything you point out is true and a major counterpoint to the idea the Trump administration just gives Russia whatever it wants.
Post reply on HN