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

Chernobyl power plant captured by Russian forces

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

901–910 of 1001 posts

Re: Chernobyl power plant captured by Russian forces

#901

Post by paganel »

trymas wrote: post #886
paganel wrote: post #866

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be fair Estonia's treatment of its Russian community fed right into Putin's propaganda machine, when you still have this: "7.3% are "persons with undetermined citizenship"" (to quote wikipedia [1]) ~30 years after the break-up of the USSR then you know something was not done right on Estonia's part when it came to really integrating the Russian community. The same partially goes for the condition of the Russian co…

AFAIK like in Latvia - these people (mostly russians) had (and still have) 3 choices: go back to russia, apply for citizenship or be left as "non-citizen". If after ~30 years after break-up of USSR you have not gone back to russia (because quality of life in Estonia or Latvia is probably better), or have not learned the language or do not want to pledge loyalty to the country - then such person is a problem to itself…

> then such person is a problem to itself.

No, that is a statement that I consider false. I do personally live in a country that has a sizeable ethnic minority (Hungarians/Szekely, depending on the particular region of the country where they live [1]), and many of them do not know the local/national language, which is Romanian. Many of my fellow citizens regard that as almost blasphemy, I (and the law itself) actually have the contrary view, those people have the same right to Romanian citizenship as I do, even if they don't/can't speak the Romanian language.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hungarians_in_Romania

Re: Chernobyl power plant captured by Russian forces

#904

Post by rand49an »

grayfaced wrote: post #791
afterburner wrote: post #761

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ukraine had no choice. They were Russian nukes, and not giving them back would have probably triggered a war immediately . But with Ukraine drowning in pro-Russian influence at the time, there is no chance they would have defied Russia.

They were soviet nukes. Ukraine was soviet land and soviet people too. Breakaways by definition take stuff with them. To claim Russia had a right to the nukes is no different then saying they had a right to the land and people. They had a choice, they just chose the one that didn't lead to war.

They didn't have the codes to use the nukes though so it changes the balance of power somewhat.

Re: Chernobyl power plant captured by Russian forces

#905

Post by octoberfranklin »

hef19898 wrote: post #756
ed wrote: post #720

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 2. Develop nuclear weapons. Belarus, Kazakhstan and Ukraine had nuclear weapons but gave them up because Russia agreed not to invade them. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum_on_Secur...

That, along with North Korea, only shows you that it is, within the global game of influence, pretty stupid to give up a nuclear capability once you have it.

This concept, broadened to include "acquisition at all costs" is what the book Eating Grass is about.

The title comes from Pakistani leaders' declaration that they would acquire nuclear weapons capability even if it meant their citizens would have to eat grass. Every government with a viable nuclear weapons program that has abandoned it has come to regret that decision. The nuclear weapons states have utterly failed to make the NPT an attractive bargain for the non-nuclear weapons states, which has completely undermined the goal of non-proliferation.

Re: Chernobyl power plant captured by Russian forces

#906

Post by marttt »

paganel wrote: post #866
marttt wrote: post #781

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Former journalist from Estonia here. Our media republished a 1994 speech given by late president of Estonia Lennart Meri at a banquet in Hamburg, Germany. Vladimir Putin, a then internationally unknown politician from St Petersburg, was also among the listeners -- and demonstratively walked out of the room during Meri's speech, as reported by Deutsche Welle [1]. Quoting DW: "On February 25, 1994, Putin was also in at…

To be fair Estonia's treatment of its Russian community fed right into Putin's propaganda machine, when you still have this: "7.3% are "persons with undetermined citizenship"" (to quote wikipedia [1]) ~30 years after the break-up of the USSR then you know something was not done right on Estonia's part when it came to really integrating the Russian community. The same partially goes for the condition of the Russian co…

True, the integration of the Russian minority has been a three-decade long political struggle in Estonia.

Re: Chernobyl power plant captured by Russian forces

#907

Post by cutemonster »

interfixus wrote: post #567
rob74 wrote: post #434

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or, as Sting once sang, "I hope the Russians love their children too" - in this case, one particular Russian...

If that particular Russian is in fact an all-out psychopath, this concept may not apply.

If you're unsure, you might want to (or not) check out what he's done in Georgia and Syria

Re: Chernobyl power plant captured by Russian forces

#908

Post by stdbrouw »

pydry wrote: post #873
wahern wrote: post #730

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Talk of Ukraine joining NATO may well have been what triggered this war. There was zero chance Ukraine would have ever been admitted to NATO. Everybody understood that, including Putin and his generals. And while NATO and the U.S. maintained the official position (perhaps better characterized as a non-position) that any country, including Ukraine, remained free to apply to NATO, member states like Germany would hav…

>There was zero chance Ukraine would have ever been admitted to NATO. "NATO welcomes Ukraine’s and Georgia’s Euro-Atlantic aspirations for membership in NATO. We agreed today that these countries will become members of NATO." https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/official_texts_8443.htm

... which, as the OP points out, were hollow words and the Membership Action Plan that would have been the first step to joining NATO never got off the ground. Two minutes on Wikipedia!

Re: Chernobyl power plant captured by Russian forces

#909

Post by trashtester »

tsimionescu wrote: post #688
trashtester wrote: post #530

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In terms of number of personell, the "large" countries in the EU, such as Germany, France and Poland have about 200k each. Russia has 3 million, when including reserves. And while the Russian forces are actively trained as one force, European armies would have significant difficulties operating together and would lack shared leadership. Also, while some of the European forces are highly proficient, others are more at…

You're completely ignoring the economic angle. War is costly, especially for an aggressor, and Russia simply doesn't have the economy required to sustain a major offensive war, especially one far from his border.

I think you misunderstand me. I'm not claiming that Russia would enter an all-out-war with EU countries (at least those in Nato). What I'm saying is that in a geographically limited conflict in the area of Belorussia, eastern Poland and the Ukraine, Russia would start with an upper hand. It would be hard for EU countries to gather enough force to stop the attack on the Ukraine, and if they tried, they would suffer bigger losses than Russia.

And after the fall of the Ukraine, I think there is no way public opinion in the EU would support continuing a war aimed at freeing them.

On the other hand, if the EU did have the strength to outmatch Russia even on Ukrainian soil, and mobilized that force as Russia mobilized for attack, I think the attack would never have come.

In other words, I think this attack comes as a result of EU countries being too weak to be able to deter Russia, while the US is currently suffering too much internal conflict to really care.

Re: Chernobyl power plant captured by Russian forces

#910

Post by pastacacioepepe »

thecleaner wrote: post #858
0xy wrote: post #828

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Poverty has declined by more than 50% in the last 20 years in Russia. How does this jive with a "constant state of poverty"? When people use anecdotes like this despite the data, it often just looks to me like bashing of developing economies.

Sure. Where are you stats coming from. ?

World bank is enough for you?

The poverty headcount ratio for Russia went from 24.6% in 2002 to 10.7% in 2012, so it's actually a decrease of more than 50% in less than 20 years, even more than what stated by OP above.

https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SI.POV.DDAY?end=2015&lo...

Post reply on HN