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

Russia sends troops to Kazakhstan to put down deadly uprising

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 330 posts

Re: Russia sends troops to Kazakhstan to put down deadly uprising

#241

Post by slapeel »

VictorPath wrote: post #159
slapeel wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're technically correct (AFAIK); genocide denial is not genocide apologia . But boy what a hair to split... To those who aren't aware, Noam Chomsky vehemently denied Pol Pot's mass murder of millions in Cambodia.

The nom de guerre Pol Pot didn't appear in the New York Times until August 1976, which was after things calmed down in Cambodia. Which makes your assertion he was doing so at the time unlikely. Vietnam invaded Cambodia and the US began arming Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge in the late 1970s and 1980s, which again the Times covered, although slightly obliquely. Chomsky condemned the US arming Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge.

Buzz off with your revisionism. Chomsky said the numerous reports of mass murder were a sea of lies. History has proven him dead wrong. He should have known better but was blinded by his ideology; all too eager to believe America was making it all up, and all too eager to believe leftists wouldn't commit such crimes.

Re: Russia sends troops to Kazakhstan to put down deadly uprising

#242

Post by radmuzom »

zenkat wrote: post #170
major505 wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Countries like Kazakhstan, serve russia as a buffer state from the Nato influence. If near countries start to align with the west, Russia will start to feel personally attacked.

Which is exactly what is happening in Ukraine now. Their attempts to align with NATO have Putin freaking out, with much saber-rattling & troop movement.

No post body was provided.

Re: Russia sends troops to Kazakhstan to put down deadly uprising

#243

Post by [deleted] »

torginus wrote: post #162
thejackgoode wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Low, but it’s quite a skill. Referenced here “bald and bankrupt” is an expert in “behaving well”, I am still amazed by his skills to be honest

Other than the accusations that the other poster made (which I've heard as well), I wouldn't consider him a model expat. First, he essentially speaks Cave Russian (Morning! Taxi how much?) despite living there for decades. The other more concerning thing, is this clueless chipper tourist act he does constantly - many times, I've seen him interview desperate, bitter, destitute people who lived in derelict former indus…

[deleted]

Re: Russia sends troops to Kazakhstan to put down deadly uprising

#244

Post by r721 »

radmuzom wrote: post #239
r721 wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I simply choose to read proper sources and be informed of geopolitical events rather than parrot US propaganda And yet in your other comment you linked to "Moon of Alabama", anonymous blogger which always takes a pro-Kremlin position. How is that a "proper source"?

No. Yes, he is generally what I would consider "anti-US" but Media Bias Fact Check reports no failed fact check in last 5 years. Also, before people label him as "left-wing", he was a very strong supporter of Kyle Rittenhouse from the beginning (even supposedly good sources like The Intercept lamented the acquittal). I have linked to his article on the day of the verdict below. https://www.moonofalabama.org/2021/11/k…

>No.

What kind of a reply is that? You can search what he wrote on every topic which is sensitive for Kremlin (Crimea, Donbass, MH17, Navalny, Skripals, Syrian chemical attacks) and in every post he would take a "Russia did nothing wrong" position.

Re: Russia sends troops to Kazakhstan to put down deadly uprising

#245

Post by mint2 »

anticodon wrote: post #232
mint2 wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This line the comment said also is not logical at all > “ What will US do if in case of civil unrest in Mexico, Russia will send troops to Mexico?” This makes no sense, no one is alleging Mexico is under Russia’s thumb so this makes no sense. Replace Mexico with Cuba circa 1970 and it would be relevant. And also yes, if Cuba in 1970, I would not be surprised if Russia sent in troops if Castro asked.

> This makes no sense, no one is alleging Mexico is under Russia’s thumb so this makes no sense. This makes no sense, because no strong independent sovereign country (there're very few of them in the world, about 5-6) will allow foreign troops to land in the neighboring country. If Russia would send troops under any pretext in any situation to Mexico, USA would start a World War III.

That observation doesnt exactly strengthen the original comment on Mexico but okay. Seems we are in accordance about Cuba for lack of objections anyway.

Re: Russia sends troops to Kazakhstan to put down deadly uprising

#246

Post by Jon_Lowtek »

anticodon wrote: post #190
2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is such a cold war mindset that I have trouble believing that it is actually still the case. It seems overly simplistic.

It is not. If it wouldn't be true, why then US incessantly unleashes "revolutions" in all countries around Russia? Why US invests millions of dollars into rusophobic propaganda in all countries bordering Russia? Why US attempts to build military bases in all the countries that border Russia? If it's all just a "cold war mindset".

That foreign nations are inciting revolutions is Siloviki rhetoric, used by authoritarian regimes to justify surveillance and arrests of their opposition or at least undermine their support by the public.

And this is exactly what we are seeing in Kazakhstan: people riot over increasing cost of living and the president blames it on foreign agitators. Because that is easier and more convenient than actually engaging with the issue.

Re: Russia sends troops to Kazakhstan to put down deadly uprising

#247

Post by publicola1990 »

mint2 wrote: post #220
kspacewalk2 wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>If Russia is so influential over Kazakhstan, why all natural resources and power plants in Kazakhstan belong to Western companies? This is false. Kazakhstan retains most oil revenues and its joint ventures with foreign companies for oil exploration and drilling include not just Western, but also for example Chinese companies. >Why Nazarbaev had replaced Cyrillic alphabet with Latin? Because he saw clearly how Putin…

This line the comment said also is not logical at all > “ What will US do if in case of civil unrest in Mexico, Russia will send troops to Mexico?” This makes no sense, no one is alleging Mexico is under Russia’s thumb so this makes no sense. Replace Mexico with Cuba circa 1970 and it would be relevant. And also yes, if Cuba in 1970, I would not be surprised if Russia sent in troops if Castro asked.

What if there is unrest in Mexico, will US send troops to Mexico to bring order? There are plausible situations in which this may happen.

Re: Russia sends troops to Kazakhstan to put down deadly uprising

#248

Post by poilcn »

siva7 wrote: post #188
poilcn wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They don't ask to bring troops to fight on the streets. The help could be in the form of putting security checkpoints and guarding critical infrastructure, constructions. Which would release military and police forces currently occupied by these tasks to fight the marauders and other criminals. There is no "protest" at this point.

Alright, the civilian protesters are now “criminals” who are getting shot down by government forces. I guess these “terrorists” deserve what they get. Thanks for enlightening me.

If the government is "bad" it doesn't make everyone who stands against it "good". It doesn't make everyone who is against the government unified body with one positive goal.

You don't need all the "protesters" to be thugs. 1% is enough to make cities dangerous place for everyone, including other protesters.

You know nothing about the country or the people who live there or what exactly going on right now, but automatically side with one of the part of the conflict based on your feelings.

Re: Russia sends troops to Kazakhstan to put down deadly uprising

#249

Post by AnimalMuppet »

sedan_baklazhan wrote: post #133
mlindner wrote: post #43

Lots of weird extremely Russian-patriot sounding comments in this thread. Russia is sending paratroopers because they don't want another Ukraine situation. They don't want Kazakhstan to break away from Russia because of a popular uprising like Ukraine did. And it's a lot easier for them to prevent it than it was for Ukraine because Ukraine doesn't border Europe so the west won't protest it as much. I expect a whole l…

One government has a complete soverreign right to ask another government to assist in a terrorist attack situation. That is as simple as it goes.

Sure. And that applies here, if you regard your own people as terrorists for being mad at the failures of the government. But if you buy that premise, you're excusing a tyrant who has figured out a new buzzword to justify his tyranny.

Re: Russia sends troops to Kazakhstan to put down deadly uprising

#250

Post by radmuzom »

r721 wrote: post #244
radmuzom wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. Yes, he is generally what I would consider "anti-US" but Media Bias Fact Check reports no failed fact check in last 5 years. Also, before people label him as "left-wing", he was a very strong supporter of Kyle Rittenhouse from the beginning (even supposedly good sources like The Intercept lamented the acquittal). I have linked to his article on the day of the verdict below. https://www.moonofalabama.org/2021/11/k…

>No. What kind of a reply is that? You can search what he wrote on every topic which is sensitive for Kremlin (Crimea, Donbass, MH17, Navalny, Skripals, Syrian chemical attacks) and in every post he would take a "Russia did nothing wrong" position.

I would say that if all facts point to the fact that Russia did nothing wrong, perhaps Russia did nothing wrong. And junk articles in NYT, WSJ, Guardian or BBC are not "evidence" that they did something wrong.

Another relatively neutral source on reporting on Central Asia is https://www.indianpunchline.com/about-me/ if you are interested.

Post reply on HN