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

Belarus referendum approves proposal to renounce non-nuclear status

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 165 posts

Re: Belarus referendum approves proposal to renounce non-nuclear status

#91

Post by the-dude »

quonn wrote: post #85
the-dude wrote: post #78

Meanwhile in the EU, specifically in The Netherlands, we had a referendum about the Ukraine EU assoc treaty in 2016. 60% of the voters voted against. Guess what happened? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_Dutch_Ukraine%E2%80%93Eur...

So a single country out of 28 couldn‘t block it. Good. And an addendum was added to address the concerns. And the association treaty is merely a preparation, so that the country that wants to become a member can start to fulfill the requirements.

You sound like our Prime Minister.

I am just pointing out wether your corrupt regime is associated with NATO or not, a referendum is not worth much if anything at all.

Re: Belarus referendum approves proposal to renounce non-nuclear status

#92

Post by vilius »

piokoch wrote: post #52

This is empty gesture, just a symbol of Belarus serfdom. Russian army was already free to enter Belarus using any convenient reason like military exercises so status quo hasn't really changed. Russia might keep nukes in Kaliningrad Oblast so from the security perspective nothing major had changed.

I would not be so quick to dismiss it. Belarus claims that it still is an independent country. If it uses a nuclear weapon then it cannot be treated as if Russians used it directly. At least in Russia it would be easier for propaganda to push the story that Lukashenko did it.

Re: Belarus referendum approves proposal to renounce non-nuclear status

#93

Post by hef19898 »

dane-pgp wrote: post #88
simonh wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have a friend in the UK Military Police, he has soldiers claim their "right to remain silent" and "first amendment rights" all the time. He has to patiently explain to them that they have neither.

> their "right to remain silent" There are limits to this right (as to all rights), but it would be wrong to suggest that a "right to remain silent" does not exist in English law. As Wikipedia states (admittedly without citation): > In England and Wales, the right of suspects to refuse to answer questions during their actual trial (the "right to silence", or the right to remain silent as it is now known) was well est…

Since OP mentioned military police, I'm not sure soldiers on active duty actually have that right, generally speaking.

Re: Belarus referendum approves proposal to renounce non-nuclear status

#94

Post by secondcoming »

the-dude wrote: post #78

Meanwhile in the EU, specifically in The Netherlands, we had a referendum about the Ukraine EU assoc treaty in 2016. 60% of the voters voted against. Guess what happened? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_Dutch_Ukraine%E2%80%93Eur...

What happened? Would Ukraine being a member of the EU prevented Russia from attacking, or would it have accelerated it?

Re: Belarus referendum approves proposal to renounce non-nuclear status

#95

Post by BLKNSLVR »

bigodbiel wrote: post #64
BLKNSLVR wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't help but think there's something else happening in the background, or that this is part of something larger. It feels like a distraction because the "goal" seems ... both unclear and not worth the reputation damage.

A small elite of oligarchs can now completely buy the whole country cheaply using up the dollars they stacked under their mattresses, having all been forewarned of what was to happen.

How much more cheaply, and will they be saving more than the sanctions cost them?

I would have thought that if they could buy it now / soon, then they could probably have bought it at not much a percentage premium prior.

I'm not across the realpolitik of this kind of thing though, but interested to learn.

Re: Belarus referendum approves proposal to renounce non-nuclear status

#96

Post by sharikous »

hef19898 wrote: post #65
bigodbiel wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Disagree. Shock and awe. Remember that this also should have served as showcase of their military tech for arms sales to the world. Only the fact that they used up all their guided missiles in the first two days without achieving anything (resorting to ballistic missiles by the third) shows how in fact it was always smoke and mirrors.

Tell me one war where shock and awe really worked. If used against a foe that wasn't totally outclassed in every imaginable way.

2014 Crimea annexation

Re: Belarus referendum approves proposal to renounce non-nuclear status

#97

Post by hef19898 »

sharikous wrote: post #96
hef19898 wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tell me one war where shock and awe really worked. If used against a foe that wasn't totally outclassed in every imaginable way.

2014 Crimea annexation

And the war exactly ended since then? Because it seems Ukraine and Russia were in low scale war up to, ehat, two days ago?

Re: Belarus referendum approves proposal to renounce non-nuclear status

#98

Post by secondcoming »

javier2 wrote: post #35
sharikous wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's harder to mobilise people behind a corrupt cause once blood starts flowing. I don't know how significant it is. Dictatorships have always been feared and despised. And armies lost motivation many times in history, before the internet. From a military perspective what I think is different this time is how (probably) US intelligence is helping Ukrainians. It seems they know any Russian move in advance in real ti…

Same. While it is still a bit unclear to me at least why Russia sent their seemingly old gear without proper support and young conscripts in first, the terrible parachute attempts still stand out. When you want it to be over quickly, you have to send in the best soldiers with the best gear first to seal the deal? In addition to live NATO intelligence, it is clear to most europeans that US intelligence tried to warn a…

> While it is still a bit unclear to me at least why Russia sent their seemingly old gear without proper support and young conscripts in first

To use them as cannon fodder to see what military capabilites Ukraine has been given by the West?

Re: Belarus referendum approves proposal to renounce non-nuclear status

#99

Post by hdivider »

One positive side effect: this result, in the context of an ongoing land war in Europe will finally help to rattle us Europeans out of our traditional resistance to defense and military investment. (I'm both British and German.)

Stronger Europe -> stronger NATO -> more options for the Alliance, and for the US to prevent conflict in and out of Europe, since Europeans will shoulder more of the local deterrence burden.

Consider also the R&D spinoffs which typically result from military investment. These are dark times -- but longer term, imagine how much civilian technological advancement we can get out of this. This in turn can relieve so many other social and political problems in the West.

Re: Belarus referendum approves proposal to renounce non-nuclear status

#100

Post by the-dude »

secondcoming wrote: post #94
the-dude wrote: post #78

Meanwhile in the EU, specifically in The Netherlands, we had a referendum about the Ukraine EU assoc treaty in 2016. 60% of the voters voted against. Guess what happened? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_Dutch_Ukraine%E2%80%93Eur...

What happened? Would Ukraine being a member of the EU prevented Russia from attacking, or would it have accelerated it?

The referendum was ignored, that is what happened.
Post reply on HN