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

291–300 of 330 posts

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

#291

Post by kspacewalk2 »

anticodon wrote: post #226
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…

> Otherwise, Russia itself wouldn't have stamped out the Latin script and forced those minority languages, already few in number, to use Cyrillic in the 2000s. What languages are you talking about?

Of the non-moribund ones, Tatar comes to mind.

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

#292

Post by crisdux »

8note wrote: post #272
crisdux wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You should not dismiss these views as just Russian-patriot sounding. These views acknowledge a realpolitik world view. They also acknowledge Russia as a "great power". And of course Russia has interests in the affairs of nations in their immediate periphery. The united states has done the same and would do the same again in a heart beat. I am as American as they come but I think the world would be safer if we were tr…

Russia isn't a great power though. It only wants to be seen as a great power

I disagree. If not Russia, who do you see as a great power? I would put Russia third on my list, after the US and China. Russia certainly has the political might, intellectual depth, land area, nuclear arsenal, etc that gives them more power over other nations. Their position as a "great power" among all dimensions has certainly not been stable, but that doesn't mean it's not true now.

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

#293

Post by janeroe »

NoOn3 wrote: post #53
dandanua wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No no no, it's all the war between US and Russia, people are just dust, they can only be manipulated! /s (this is what every russian bot is saying)

You're right about something. But civil and peaceful protests cannot be so well organized and take place so quickly and occupy so many significant places. It looks too organized and therefore suspicious. Perhaps people are dissatisfied with the authorities and living conditions, but perhaps someone is trying to use the protests to their advantage and manage them.

Civil and peaceful protests work in democracies, not in tyrannies. If you don't believe me ask Belorussians how peace is going for them. Dictator is called that for a reason, you won't impress him with flashlights, songs, and dances even if the whole country is dancing.

TL;DR: do not bring a flashlight or guitar to a gun fight. Drinks (cocktails in particular) on the other hand...

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

#294

Post by janeroe »

sedan_baklazhan wrote: post #137
ilaksh wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe you can help me here. My reading of the situation is that it was an attempted revolution against a dictator after he made a devastating unilateral decision to raise prices for a critical fuel. Am I missing something?

THe prices were still very low. And the decision was almost immediately reversed. Any economical problem can't justify violent uprising with takeover of an airport and decapitating of police officers, etc. etc. Never.

Our only source for "decapitation of police officers" are Russian telegram accounts which, there is no question, are 100% trustworthy (they are not; what happened to that poor "little boy in underwear crucified in Ukraine" that never existed). On the other hand, we've got plenty of evidence of police shooting protesters, including in the head. I'm somehow sure relatives of the murdered are not OK with that. I wouldn't even be surprised if they demanded revenge and acted on it (family means more in that part of the world and it's way bigger, too).

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

#295

Post by 2OEH8eoCRo0 »

sofixa wrote: post #231
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.

That's precisely what Putin is doing now, threatening Ukraine and insisting NATO commit to not admitting Sweden, Finland and Ukraine in.

I understand. Russia is no doubt pressuring Ukraine but I don't know if that's because they they want a buffer or they just don't want a stronger NATO.

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

#296

Post by janeroe »

anonair wrote: post #270
janeroe wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hi user who signed up specifically to leave this comment (which is not suspicious at all). No, they don't. CSTO is for external threats only. To circumvent this limitation the old farts call people taking part in the protest terrorists (this reminds me of something by the way).

They are actually terrorists by definition. I mean those taking over the airport, police stations etc. There are peaceful protesters, but the troops are not after them

You mean that definition that prescribes hoi polloi to be subservient and sing/dance the way Belorussians did while being literally raped/murdered by the monarch's squad? There are no peaceful ways to stop totalitarianism. And there is nothing sacral about public buildings.

The real terrorists are those who are using army against their own population. Neighboring Kyrgyzstan had multiple revolutions, too. And their army did the right thing every time by not getting involved (except the last one when Kremlin played its part).

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

#297

Post by janeroe »

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…

> Russia is sending paratroopers because they don't want another Ukraine situation.

I think Kremlin doesn't want Russians to have an idea that their detestable government can be overthrown. "Do you want it like in Ukraine" and "we need stability"/"lest there is no war in Russia" are the most common takes (and literal quotes) from their TV coverages of protests or any criticism of Putin & his friends.

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

#298

Post by epolanski »

major505 wrote: post #150
fivea wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But why is such a dysfunctional dictatorship so stable? (...) I believe the answer is: it is backed by the West because a stable dictator in Kazakhstan and Azerbaijan guarantees the oil flow. And yet, it's Russia and it's strong-arm tactics that are desperately trying to keep Kazakhstan's regime in power. Think about it: Russia is even sending it's paratroopers to Kazakhstan to stomp out unrest. Not the US. Not the…

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.

Buffer from what? Kazakhstan doesnt border Nato countries.

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

#299

Post by epolanski »

Agoreddah wrote: post #277
radmuzom wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

I stopped to read article after first headline "The NATO Promise", because it's very popular hoax narrative shared by eastern propaganda. Gorbachev personally said it's a fake. Besides, in 1990, Soviet Union had much more troubles to handle than dealing with NATO borders.

There's an abundance of proofs behind the "not one inch eastwards" from multiple sources and different countries.

This article provides some details more: https://mltoday.com/new-document-us-promised-not-to-expand-n...

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

#300

Post by helge9210 »

Jon_Lowtek wrote: post #246
anticodon wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 wi…

> That foreign nations are inciting revolutions is Siloviki rhetoric

Not always.

See for example "US Army Field Manual FM 31-20-3, Foreign Internal Defense Tactics Techniques and Procedures for Special Forces". This one is outdated and was based on US operations in Central/South America.

I'm sure Russians have something similar.

Post reply on HN