Live data from Hacker News

Russia’s ‘slow-motion Chernobyl’ at sea

bbc.com

21–30 of 57 posts

Re: Russia’s ‘slow-motion Chernobyl’ at sea

#21

Russia is required to behave under first world standards when it comes to their commitments, but it's relegated to third world when it comes to participating in global leadership/trade.

> but it's relegated to third world when it comes to participating in global leadership/trade. I assume you're referring to being kicked out of the G7, trade sanctions, etc? They should perhaps consider not invading places all the time, sending people to view the wonderful Salisbury Cathedral, etc. Like, Russia's exclusion isn't something that just happened; there was massive provocation. EDIT: Ah, a timely news arti…

> They should perhaps consider not invading places all the time

We're kicking the US out of G7 next, then? Oh wait ... it's okay when we do it, right?

Re: Russia’s ‘slow-motion Chernobyl’ at sea

#22
post #5
post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe if they were not such a complete kleptocracy run like a mafia state we would have some sympathy, but they aren't so we don't. If they want to participate in global leadership/trade they should spend more time trying to work productively with the rest of the group and less time pissing in everyone else's face.

"pissing in everyone else's face" - isn't it what US is doing?

[flagged]

Re: Russia’s ‘slow-motion Chernobyl’ at sea

#23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but it's relegated to third world when it comes to participating in global leadership/trade. I assume you're referring to being kicked out of the G7, trade sanctions, etc? They should perhaps consider not invading places all the time, sending people to view the wonderful Salisbury Cathedral, etc. Like, Russia's exclusion isn't something that just happened; there was massive provocation. EDIT: Ah, a timely news arti…

> They should perhaps consider not invading places all the time We're kicking the US out of G7 next, then? Oh wait ... it's okay when we do it, right?

What has the US invaded and taken as part of its own country?

Re: Russia’s ‘slow-motion Chernobyl’ at sea

#24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but it's relegated to third world when it comes to participating in global leadership/trade. I assume you're referring to being kicked out of the G7, trade sanctions, etc? They should perhaps consider not invading places all the time, sending people to view the wonderful Salisbury Cathedral, etc. Like, Russia's exclusion isn't something that just happened; there was massive provocation. EDIT: Ah, a timely news arti…

> They should perhaps consider not invading places all the time We're kicking the US out of G7 next, then? Oh wait ... it's okay when we do it, right?

The US has a history of handling territory back after invasions, which makes people less nervous. China’s invasion /annexation of Tibet for example made everyone on it’s borders very concerned.

Re: Russia’s ‘slow-motion Chernobyl’ at sea

#25

Russia is required to behave under first world standards when it comes to their commitments, but it's relegated to third world when it comes to participating in global leadership/trade.

Don't invade other countries which is why they got kicked out of G8. They also need to stop poisoning people in other countries and shooting down civilian aircraft.

Re: Russia’s ‘slow-motion Chernobyl’ at sea

#26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but it's relegated to third world when it comes to participating in global leadership/trade. I assume you're referring to being kicked out of the G7, trade sanctions, etc? They should perhaps consider not invading places all the time, sending people to view the wonderful Salisbury Cathedral, etc. Like, Russia's exclusion isn't something that just happened; there was massive provocation. EDIT: Ah, a timely news arti…

> They should perhaps consider not invading places all the time We're kicking the US out of G7 next, then? Oh wait ... it's okay when we do it, right?

If the US declared Iraq to be part of America, then yes.

Or the next time American claims a chunk of Mexico or Canada for themselves.

Iraq was a huge mistake, but it is not the same as trying to seize land from your neighboring country.

Re: Russia’s ‘slow-motion Chernobyl’ at sea

#27
post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They should perhaps consider not invading places all the time We're kicking the US out of G7 next, then? Oh wait ... it's okay when we do it, right?

The US has a history of handling territory back after invasions, which makes people less nervous. China’s invasion /annexation of Tibet for example made everyone on it’s borders very concerned.

Instead, they just plant military bases in the country and set up a puppet government that supports the US. Amounts to the same thing.

Re: Russia’s ‘slow-motion Chernobyl’ at sea

#28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They should perhaps consider not invading places all the time We're kicking the US out of G7 next, then? Oh wait ... it's okay when we do it, right?

What has the US invaded and taken as part of its own country?

You'll notice that the comment I replied to complained about invasions, not annexations. Something the US does more regularly than electing a new president.

Other than that, the US has been annexing little recently, but in history quite a bit.

Re: Russia’s ‘slow-motion Chernobyl’ at sea

#29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They should perhaps consider not invading places all the time We're kicking the US out of G7 next, then? Oh wait ... it's okay when we do it, right?

What has the US invaded and taken as part of its own country?

Puerto Rico

Texas (invaded by Americans and annexed)

Guam

Hawaii (USMC supported coup by European and American businessmen)

Re: Russia’s ‘slow-motion Chernobyl’ at sea

#30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They should perhaps consider not invading places all the time We're kicking the US out of G7 next, then? Oh wait ... it's okay when we do it, right?

If the US declared Iraq to be part of America, then yes. Or the next time American claims a chunk of Mexico or Canada for themselves. Iraq was a huge mistake, but it is not the same as trying to seize land from your neighboring country.

So killing a fuck ton of people is okay as long as you not going to grab some land (but take some oil or any other resource), right?
Post reply on HN