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

Mikhail Gorbachev has died

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

891–900 of 971 posts

Re: Mikhail Gorbachev has died

#891

Post by trasz »

avmich wrote: post #593
trasz wrote: post #412

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The other side is Ukraine, not USA. USA is merely providing support. Generally speaking, proxy wars happen between superpowers. In this conflict there is only one, and it’s supporting Ukraine.

Should we admit that world wars don't need to involve superpowers - or at least only superpowers? The term wasn't that much applicable before end of WWII. So here we can argue that in WWIV a non-superpower fights - Ukraine, on its territory, a superpower - USA, merely - but with principal results - supporting Ukraine, and the rest of the West. We may not call it a proxy war - I agree, it's a rather poor comparison -…

World wars don't need to involve superpowers, but they need to involve large part of the world. Russian invasion on Ukraine doesn't, and it's unlikely to escalate - Russia can't, because they have neither people, hardware, or allies, and the defending countries don't have a reason to.

Re: Mikhail Gorbachev has died

#892

Post by _8j50 »

wawjgreen wrote: post #636
_8j50 wrote: post #563

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is easy for you to judge not having experienced the cruelty of the war and communisism and central-planning. He saw a problem and lead people to fix it.

it is easy for you to speak for me, not having experienced war and famine directly. Also, on that Russian score you are wrong: after what he did, the ex-USSR population suffered devastating poverty. And you have the cheek to defend him. Are you a troll?

No, after what he did Russia and the eastern bloc were more prosperous in the 90s than they were in the 80s. I do not recall bread lines and famine in former USSR countries in the 90s. I didn't know he required defending all that money that went into an arms race went back to the people, the greatness and pompous image of the soviet union ended,that's about it. Nostalgia is deceptive, USSR in the 80s was not better off than 90s.

Re: Mikhail Gorbachev has died

#893

Post by simonh »

_vbnz wrote: post #854
simonh wrote: post #833

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fact is we should have intervened in Armenia and Georgia. We should have intervened in Syria, at least to some extent. We should have imposed crushing sanctions on Russia after the annexation of Crimea in 2014. The fact that we did not is a causal direct line to this invasion. Since the gulf war the west has become averse to foreign adventurism. I understand that and why, but it's misconceived. Washing our hands…

Why is it our responsibility? Intervened on which side in Georgia? That Georgian government was absolutely terrible, putting dissidents in prison, firing on protests, etc. - just because they're anti-Russia doesn't make them good. We should just try to live in peace and focus on our own nations and stop making enemies.

I'm sorry my friend, but our enemies are out there. They hate us and they want to kill us or force us to change politics or religion whether we like it or not. If they can't get to you they will get to your friends, or neighbouring countries, or countries you trade with, or that you visit on holiday. They're not going to suddenly decide to be all friendly and nice to us, just because we turn our backs on the people they are already terrorising and assaulting.

I'm in no way supporting or justifying the Georgian government at the time, we shouldn't have been tolerating that either. The point is what happens in these places matters to us. It affects us, whether we like it or not.

>Why is it our responsibility?

Because we are moral beings that live in the world, we benefit from the things that world provides to us, and therefore have responsibility for the state of the world we live in.

Re: Mikhail Gorbachev has died

#894

Post by danbruc »

caskstrength wrote: post #857
danbruc wrote: post #839

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I read the entire thing [1], well I just skimmed the historical section until the 20th century. I do not see how this can be read as Ukraine is part of Russia end must be conquered back. For the current situation the most relevant part is probably the one dealing with the recent history, say the fall of the USSR or maybe even only past 2014. Unfortunately I am in no position to judge what is laid out and reading up o…

In the letter Putin directly states that he considers significant amount of Ukrainian territory as not-really-ukrainian, but a "present" from Bolsheviks or something. He also states that all of these territories now are "subject to discussion". I think it should be quite obvious to anyone (including the author) that Ukraine (like any other country) wouldn't be inclined to willingly discuss giving away its lands, so c…

One can debate whether this is a legitimate point of view, that for example Crimea was given to Ukraine after 1922 and therefore they are not entitled to it after the desolution of the USSR. I do not know and have no opinion at the moment either.

But no matter what, this passage is a far cry from Russia wants to grab land left and right and conquer everyone.

Re: Mikhail Gorbachev has died

#895

Post by caskstrength »

danbruc wrote: post #894
caskstrength wrote: post #857

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the letter Putin directly states that he considers significant amount of Ukrainian territory as not-really-ukrainian, but a "present" from Bolsheviks or something. He also states that all of these territories now are "subject to discussion". I think it should be quite obvious to anyone (including the author) that Ukraine (like any other country) wouldn't be inclined to willingly discuss giving away its lands, so c…

One can debate whether this is a legitimate point of view, that for example Crimea was given to Ukraine after 1922 and therefore they are not entitled to it after the desolution of the USSR. I do not know and have no opinion at the moment either. But no matter what, this passage is a far cry from Russia wants to grab land left and right and conquer everyone.

Okay, so the thread started from your request to provide sources for Putin discussing historical borders of Ukraine:

"I just read the entire address by Putin [1] after the invasion started - it's all about NATO expansion, historical borders or something along that lines make no real appearance in the entire thing.

"I know that he supposedly said things more in line with your point on other occasions but I never came across something that convincingly provided support for this point of view. Can you provide sources?"

I provided a source (even though your message was directed to someone else) and you proceeded with moving the goalpost to basically "yes, but did he stated he intends to conquer Ukraine to re-establish those borders?" (even though that wasn't what you asked for in your initial message):

"I read the entire thing [1], well I just skimmed the historical section until the 20th century. I do not see how this can be read as Ukraine is part of Russia end must be conquered back."

I indulged you and provided a specific excerpts that in my opinion reasonably support the notion of re-establishing the borders by force. Now you moved the goalpost again and constructed a stawman by saying something along the lines of "yes, but how does that implies that Russia intends on conquer everyone?!". Well, guess what, no one in this thread said that "Russia wants to grab land left and right and conquer everyone"!

Re: Mikhail Gorbachev has died

#896

Post by B1FF_PSUVM »

lenkite wrote: post #830
vintermann wrote: post #655

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Today they are rich and poweful, but have pretty much abandoned any pretense at worrying about capital exploitation of labour. It's a nationalist, corporatist, authoritarian state, ironically closer to Chiang Kai-shek's ideal state than Mao's, let alone Marx's. That was not the outcome he wanted. People often paper over that he was a true believer in Marxism-Leninism, unlike his predecessors.

The Chinese have successfully uplifted most of their citizenry out of poverty while their neighbour India - despite a head-start - is yet to manage the same. Looks like the corporate nationalist approach works well at overcoming the lower levels of Maslow's hierarchy of needs.

Shh, can't say that.

Re: Mikhail Gorbachev has died

#897

Post by wcarron »

pessimizer wrote: post #163
wcarron wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can lead a horse to water; but you can't make it drink. It wasn't the US' responsibility, it was the Russian peoples'.

You can't make it drink, but you can back a corrupt drunk who will shell the parliament and make sure that the Russian people know that America will never be on their side.

Eh, let them eat Pizza hut

Re: Mikhail Gorbachev has died

#898

Post by KingOfCoders »

dontlaugh wrote: post #873
koheripbal wrote: post #843

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This might be a popular notion in privileged white western high schools, but the transformation in eastern EU countries has been breathtaking. The poverty divide between east and west Germany was so visibly apparent when you walked across that line. Today, both sides of Berlin are vibrant and thriving. The same can be said in every capital city that has joined the EU. Massive prosperity compared to the Soviet poverty…

The West's outwards aggression and effective embargo are gone, sure. That definitely helps. However, the material conditions aren't necessarily better. It used to be that everyone was guaranteed a home, a job, healthcare, education, etc. Homelessness is now a problem in most capitals, many struggle to find a job at all, healthcare has generally been defunded and privatised, etc. So many of us left because we clearly…

Your 80s experience in Eastern Europe is first hand as an adult or hearsay? I visited the GDR in the 80s as an adult and have some first hand experience which differs from yours.

In the GDR "job security" meant they told you what to work, choice was limited, if you always played by the rules, and if you didn't like that, you'd go to jail.

In the GDR no-one was guaranteed education. Today in Germany everyone can study whatever they want, in the GDR The GDR was on the verge of bancrupcy as were many other Eastern block countries at the end of the 80s, with low productivity but unsustainable high subsidies for food and flats. Poland went into bancrupcy and all other Eastern block countries were near that point (often because they took Western credits in the 70s and early 80s to increase consumer good production but couldn't pay back later)

(Anyone interested in Germany I recommend "Das Ende der SED: Die letzten Tage des Zentralkomitees" with protocols from the meetings of the central comitee).

Re: Mikhail Gorbachev has died

#899

Post by onepointsixC »

DubiousPusher wrote: post #399
onepointsixC wrote: post #367

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>If the U.S. had pushed for a system that actually would've held the resources in trust for the people and allowed them to be developed by market capital, that very likely could've happened. No, this is purely wishful thinking. The Soviet System was one fundamentally incentivized and propagated corruption. Those who had previously been in control or had knowledge of the workings of the Soviet Economy were always goin…

You may be right about the lack of ability of the U.S. to have much impact. Though I don't think the outcome of the was so forgone. There was lots of corruption in the Soviet Union. But we're talking about orders of magnitude difference here. Soviet corruption revolved around small bribes for services, lies on official documentation, etc. For 30 years now, Russia's resources have been looted to enrich several dozen p…

>There was lots of corruption in the Soviet Union. But we're talking about orders of magnitude difference here. Soviet corruption revolved around small bribes for services, lies on official documentation, etc. For 30 years now, Russia's resources have been looted to enrich several dozen people. We're talking about one of the largest shifts in wealth inequality in the history of the world.

This is how Russia has been under the communist rule. Everyone was "equal" and yet of course party members were "more equal" enjoy many prestiges which the common proletariat could only dream of. The meta culture was that of corruption and has been for a long time. You were never going to undo that.

Re: Mikhail Gorbachev has died

#900

Post by jorblumesea »

lapcat wrote: post #885
jorblumesea wrote: post #875

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's pretty clear that many people here lack historical and geo political context. "Can you believe Russia would invade to get a warm water port?!" Yes, I would. Btw your analogy of "why isn't germany authoritarian" is off the mark, because the Russians and NATO completely dismantled the existing power structures post ww2 through force. We did not do anything close to that post cold war. In fact the communist…

> I think it's pretty clear that many people here lack historical and geo political context. > "Can you believe Russia would invade to get a warm water port?!" > Yes, I would. You couldn't have a more blatant straw man argument. I'm not going to reply to you anymore. All you're doing here is chest beating.

I think someone needs to read a little more history ;)
Post reply on HN