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

Russian court accidentally confirmed Russian military presence in Ukraine

znak.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 428 posts

Re: Russian court accidentally confirmed Russian military presence in Ukraine

#311

Post by scottLobster »

ericmay wrote: post #307
scottLobster wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The question is less about NATO deployments and more the will of NATO leadership to go to war with Russia over its more minor members. I hate to say it but the Afghanistan withdrawal really showed what happens when Americans stop giving a shit, and they probably don't give that much of a shit about Latvia. Who's going to step into that gap for NATO? Poland recently ran a military exercise simulating a war with Russia…

> hate to say it but the Afghanistan withdrawal really showed what happens when Americans stop giving a shit America as a country never really gave a shit about Afghanistan. Nobody was standing in a ration line or anything. The military was at war, and that should actually give you confidence because if America can sustain a 20-year war in Afghanistan which turned out to be completely pointless while also fighting a…

And Americans will start standing in a ration line to kick Russia out of Estonia? Or Ukraine?

I agree that getting out of Afghanistan was the right call, it was the horribly mismanaged manner of our leaving that I'm pointing out. We left our own citizens and allies in the country behind almost overnight, with the senior leadership rationalizing that the Afghan national army was going to actually fight, despite all the evidence to the contrary. Our leaders just stuck their fingers in their ears and pulled the plug.

I don't see how Eastern Europe ranks any higher in the minds of said leaders, outside of the remnants of the retiring Cold War generation and the dwindling number who still believe in NATO.

Re: Russian court accidentally confirmed Russian military presence in Ukraine

#312

Post by thatguy0900 »

aa-jv wrote: post #121
nradov wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Americans don't hate Russians any longer. They no longer represent a threat to us and most people have no interest in minor eastern European conflicts.

Sure they don't, which is why American media doesn't go a day without beating the war-with-Russia-drums ..

The fact that the media has to try so hard could be a good indicator that they don't, in fairness. Noone I know cares about Russia outside of the Ukrainian invasions, at least.

Re: Russian court accidentally confirmed Russian military presence in Ukraine

#313

Post by terafo »

aurizon wrote: post #135
wongarsu wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Russia has a military budget of 60bn, Germany and France spend 52bn each. Within the EU they are on home turf, with existing rail and road infrastructure. The EU isn't equipped to fight in Russia or to fight a nuclear war (even though France has nukes), but I don't see why the EU shouldn't be able to defend it's own territory in a conventional war.

Russian budgeted costs are far higher in 'cross border equalisation' terms than 60 billion - Russia probably get 2-3 times as much purchasing power. If Ukraine is attacked they will fight to the death - they know what life under Russia was like and the killings. In addition, almost all cross border shipments of all kinds to Russia will stop, as the USA/EU will go to maximum embargo state. China will supply stuff by r…

>`And what if rumors are true and Ukraine secretly hid enough nukes to wipe out over 20 Russian cities by truck bombs`

I don't think it is possible to keep such secret from Russia for 30 years. Ukrainian president deflected to Russia in 2014, and that means that any secret that he might've known is available to Russia.

Re: Russian court accidentally confirmed Russian military presence in Ukraine

#314

Post by scottLobster »

petesergeant wrote: post #279
scottLobster wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The question is less about NATO deployments and more the will of NATO leadership to go to war with Russia over its more minor members. I hate to say it but the Afghanistan withdrawal really showed what happens when Americans stop giving a shit, and they probably don't give that much of a shit about Latvia. Who's going to step into that gap for NATO? Poland recently ran a military exercise simulating a war with Russia…

> The question is less about NATO deployments and more the will of NATO leadership to go to war with Russia over its more minor members This is the point of putting NATO troops in the country: if Chad from Nebraska and Juan from Madrid get shot by Boris it’ll significantly alter public/political opinion much more than if Igor gets shot by Boris. They put these troops in the Baltics so that the Russians would end up s…

And the Russians just need to surround/pin down those troops with minimal casualties while they secure the rest of their objectives. We're talking battalions, not divisions. Their practical ability to fight an invasion is limited.

We didn't re-invade Afghanistan because some US soldiers were killed during the withdrawal.

Re: Russian court accidentally confirmed Russian military presence in Ukraine

#315

Post by b112 »

danlugo92 wrote: post #33
lnsru wrote: post #27

There is only way for country’s protection and it’s Israel’s way where whole country is also an army. Especially for countries near unfriendly countries like Russia in this submission. Because all the treaties and documents signed by politicians are absolutely worthless. Ukraine got rid of all the Soviet nuclear weapons and got lots of promises: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum_on_Secur... Now they…

The only good outcome for the whole world is Putin and allies being ousted out of power and replaced by actual non-warmonger democrats. Imagine a future with Russia in the EU, best timeline. Nobody wants nuclear war, maybe some kind of super-sanctions would be the only recourse for the west, cut them off everything, and I mean everything.

And how do you enforce this? Another Cuba, 1960s style stand off?

Re: Russian court accidentally confirmed Russian military presence in Ukraine

#316

Post by ericmay »

scottLobster wrote: post #311
ericmay wrote: post #307

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> hate to say it but the Afghanistan withdrawal really showed what happens when Americans stop giving a shit America as a country never really gave a shit about Afghanistan. Nobody was standing in a ration line or anything. The military was at war, and that should actually give you confidence because if America can sustain a 20-year war in Afghanistan which turned out to be completely pointless while also fighting a…

And Americans will start standing in a ration line to kick Russia out of Estonia? Or Ukraine? I agree that getting out of Afghanistan was the right call, it was the horribly mismanaged manner of our leaving that I'm pointing out. We left our own citizens and allies in the country behind almost overnight, with the senior leadership rationalizing that the Afghan national army was going to actually fight, despite all th…

> And Americans will start standing in a ration line to kick Russia out of Estonia? Or Ukraine?

Oh yea I doubt it, but if the military goes to war and people start dying who knows how the public will react. If Russia, idk, bombs a US base in Germany that's a totally different ballgame (hence why small contingents of US forces will be deployed to various locations).

> We left our own citizens and allies in the country behind almost overnight, with the senior leadership rationalizing that the Afghan national army was going to actually fight, despite all the evidence to the contrary.

Eh I think people are overreacting to this. We don't know all of the details and I think people probably got lulled into a false sense of security that America would never leave Afghanistan so when you actually do it they're like wait what? When you have Democrats and Republicans criticizing you, you probably did the right thing. Also war is messy. Frankly this could have gone better but could have went much worse.

> I don't see how Eastern Europe ranks any higher in the minds of said leaders, outside of the remnants of the retiring Cold War generation and the dwindling number who still believe in NATO.

Oh yea I think NATO is already gone and nobody told France who is probably the only remaining EU country with any fight left in it. The EU just wouldn't commit to US interests hard enough (China/Russia) so the US has pivoted and it took the EU by surprise, but France prefered to throw its lot in with the EU and Germany instead of the US and UK. With that being said, an invasion of select EU countries won't be tolerated by the US and allies either, so there's a limit to what Russia could invade.

On the US side it's the US, Australia, UK, Canada, Japan, and a few others but I'd say that's the core alliance for the US now. South Korea is committed but I don't know how they'll react to various scenarios. New Zealand is trying to keep the US and co. at arms-length.

Re: Russian court accidentally confirmed Russian military presence in Ukraine

#317

Post by trasz »

torstenvl wrote: post #208
trasz wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s not about morals - nobody in US seems to care about the million people they killed in Middle East - it’s about dead American soldiers looking bad in the TV.

False statements don't help public discussion. It is not true that the U.S. killed a million people in the Middle East. And this is not some sophistic semantic argument either, as it remains not true when you include Afghanistan. The number of civilian casualties is not even close. It is also not true that the U.S. doesn't care about civilian casualties. The U.S., U.K., and Australia are the only countries I know tha…

Some estimates indicate million killed in Iraq alone: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ORB_survey_of_Iraq_War_casualt.... Apart from Afghanistan, you'd also need to add civilian victims of US sanctions.

The fact that US uses lawyers "to ensure the law of armed conflict is followed" does not mean they care about civilians; it means they care about being sued in case they killed someone whose family can afford lawyers.

Re: Russian court accidentally confirmed Russian military presence in Ukraine

#318

Post by chalcolithic »

hdjjhhvvhga wrote: post #106
chalcolithic wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Installing non-warmonger democrats makes sense for non-warmonger nations only.

But is Russia a warmongering nation? I'd say most Russians hate war. Maybe more than anyone else because they were the nation that suffered most casualties in World War II. An emergence of a peaceful leader and friendly reactions with the West would mark the beginning of a completely new era in the history of our civilization. And would help both Russia and the West in the face of increasing Chinese power.

We're lucky to live in time when figuring out what foreigners think is just a few clicks away, thanks to the internet and Google Translate. Please try to do it - even if you won't like what you see at first you can surely find some other sources that will confirm your view.

Re: Russian court accidentally confirmed Russian military presence in Ukraine

#319

Post by ed_balls »

lnsru wrote: post #27

There is only way for country’s protection and it’s Israel’s way where whole country is also an army. Especially for countries near unfriendly countries like Russia in this submission. Because all the treaties and documents signed by politicians are absolutely worthless. Ukraine got rid of all the Soviet nuclear weapons and got lots of promises: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum_on_Secur... Now they…

> Will NATO come for let’s say Latvia or Lithuania? I honestly don’t think so.

Poland may, because they see Russia as a nr 1 threat. USA have to because they(NATO) will lose any credibility. If they won't Germany, Japan, Poland, Ukraine, South Korea and Taiwan will start nuclear programs right away.

Nobody wants nuclear proliferation.

This Russia-Ukraine issue is a negotiation tactic from Russia. There will be no invasion because it's too expensive to occupy a large country.

Short term: Russia would like a land connection to Crimea, cause they have a problem with water. They don't want Ukraine in NATO.

Long term: Russia negotiating position is weakening. They have army and natural resources. As world will be less dependent on carbohydrates, oil and gas in Siberia will be too expensive to extract.

Re: Russian court accidentally confirmed Russian military presence in Ukraine

#320

Post by ghostwriter »

kingcharles wrote: post #174
underscore_ku wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

russia's economy is smaller than Italy's, Russia can't afford long wars. in 10 years Poland alone would be able to take on Russia.

People never realize how broke Russia really is because Russia plays such a good marketing game.

Some other people also never realise that "broke on paper" means nothing when you are an energy-independent state with arms and a nuclear capacity to protect its territory.
Post reply on HN