Live data from Hacker News

‘Putin’s chef’ admits to interfering in U.S. elections

apnews.com

261–270 of 275 posts

Re: ‘Putin’s chef’ admits to interfering in U.S. elections

#261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It did matter because evil soviet union was a threat to whole world. Thanks to mainly US actions my country is now free of russian torturers.

That's obviously not logically sound, because there's a ton of people in the middle east who would say these exact words about the US and their military actions. The morality of state level actors varies substantially across populations, it's why in countries with higher education, you find lower rates of nationalism

The soviet union was evil by design - genocide is their way of working. They still work this way as we've seen untold amount of times in Ukraine, in Bucha, Izyum and Mariupol.

US fuckups like Iraq were accidents, aka unplanned. Overwhelming majority of civilian victims is work of their opponents, like Iraqi religious insurgents, suicide bombers or ISIS.

Re: ‘Putin’s chef’ admits to interfering in U.S. elections

#262
post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't agree with your take that both parties are equally responsible though, one of them has consistently used political gridlock as a weapon, since Obama years. Is political gridlock the root of the problem? Help me understand how only one party is responsible. Interesting you mention Obama. He ran on an anti-war platform, which was fairly out of line with the media and general American politics at the time. Tha…

> Is political gridlock the root of the problem? Help me understand how only one party is responsible. The GOP doesn't compromise anymore, it's a fact, no? [1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/lets-just-say-it-the... [2] https://www.vox.com/2016/7/18/12210500/diagnosed-dysfunction... > Interesting you mention Obama. He ran on an anti-war platform, which was fairly out of line with the media and general America…

> I don't care and there was nothing in my comment that led to this segue about Obama.

Hold on a second. You’re saying that Republicans have been gridlocking since the Obama years. So clearly, you’re saying one side is at fault. But you don’t want to discuss the merits of Obama’s actual policy. Barack Obama did hypocritical things, but clearly your expectation is that Republicans just go along.

That’s not how a democracy works.

You brought up Obama and Republicans gridlocking, but the minute we dive deep into a more nuanced look, away from your binary/black and white narrative, you say this:

> This is purely soapboxing around an issue that wasn't in discussion, thanks anyway.

Now you’re on a borderline personal attack. I’m not sure you’re here to discuss in good faith.

> That's exactly the point, you are repeating this which is Russian propaganda.

> Why should Russia dictate what Ukraine can or cannot do? NATO didn't expand eastwards, countries to the East asked to join NATO. Should NATO say "no, thanks, Russia doesn't allow us"?

I’m not sure if you understand what “propaganda” means.

Russia doesn’t want NATO at its doorstep, and it sees NATO as an existential threat. You don’t have to agree that this belief is justified. You can say those countries have a right to join NATO. That as sovereign nations, it’s entirely up to them to do as they please.

But that’s not the point here. The Soviets brokered a deal with us. We agreed NATO would not expand eastwards.

Again, Russia is doing what they said they would do, given the present circumstances. Whether you agree with what they’re doing or not, does not make it propaganda.

You could try to argue that the world has changed. That the US and Russia cannot single handedly make decisions in the 1990s and have them enforced on a modern day Europe, that those countries can decide for themselves.

But it’s besides the point. Russia sees NATO at their door step. The real terrifying thing is that our media paints Putin as a dictator, terrorist, a mad man. He probably is all three of those things, but why we’re playing fire with someone sitting on the worlds largest nuclear arsenal is beyond me.

Regarding Russia’s views: It’s the same way we (the US) instilled the Monroe doctrine, and you can bet money that if China gets real cozy with South American countries, we’ll be sending navy carriers down the Pacific.

Two other thoughts:

Your linked “sources” are well known liberal and left of liberal - progressive - organizations. To say this is a GOP specific problem is your ideology yelling out loud. The reality is that both parties are hyper polarized. Neither party has American interests at heart. The biggest ideas any Democrat or Republican has is on how to fan the fear mongering flame and divide people.

Again - the party of forward thinking and liberal ideas literally elected a dinosaur who probably doesn’t even know how to use e-mail.

Re: ‘Putin’s chef’ admits to interfering in U.S. elections

#263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Misinformation and disinformation are just nuanced versions of wrong. The former means unintentional and the latter means intentional. The distinctions are useful here because the latter is a claim that the person spouting the information is corrupt and knowingly trying to propagate lies. This is more universally considered bad. People are wrong all the time, but most people aren't intentionally spreading lies. Malin…

Just labeling true things that you don't like as "malinformation" does not encourage more meaningful and nuanced discussions.

Who said I was encouraging that? I'm saying you have to use nuance to explain how something is malinformation in the first place. I even did this in my example. We need good faith discussions and I do think you need to step up your game here a bit.

Re: ‘Putin’s chef’ admits to interfering in U.S. elections

#264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whatever happened to "wrong"? As in, "that's wrong". Ideally followed by some reasoning. All of these fancier words like whataboutism or misinformation are just attempts to assert authority via the word. They don't convey additional meaning.

"Misinformation" might (sometimes) be a synonym for "wrong".... but "whataboutism", "disinformation", "malinformation" are not. They mean different things.

Disinformation actually does mean wrong. But it also is an accusation of maliciousness. That's the distinguishing feature between misinformation and disinformation: intent and prior knowledge. But with the other two I agree. Whataboutism is non-sequitur arguments. Malinformation is cherry-picking data with intent to deceive.

Re: ‘Putin’s chef’ admits to interfering in U.S. elections

#265
post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Is political gridlock the root of the problem? Help me understand how only one party is responsible. The GOP doesn't compromise anymore, it's a fact, no? [1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/lets-just-say-it-the... [2] https://www.vox.com/2016/7/18/12210500/diagnosed-dysfunction... > Interesting you mention Obama. He ran on an anti-war platform, which was fairly out of line with the media and general America…

> I don't care and there was nothing in my comment that led to this segue about Obama. Hold on a second. You’re saying that Republicans have been gridlocking since the Obama years. So clearly, you’re saying one side is at fault. But you don’t want to discuss the merits of Obama’s actual policy. Barack Obama did hypocritical things, but clearly your expectation is that Republicans just go along. That’s not how a democ…

> The Soviets brokered a deal with us. We agreed NATO would not expand eastwards.

This is simply not true. It is a talking point developed for Putin's speech at 2007 Munich security conference to justify the shift to genocidal wars against its neighbors. It did not exist before 2007 and was not brought up when, for example, Poland joined NATO in 1999. There was an endless stream of whining and unspecified threats from Russian diplomats at the time, but not once do I remember talk about any deals.

It's nothing more than a simple, yet effective hook for catching western self-flagellants into their net, while the truth is that western governments went above and beyond to accommodate Russia and build cooperation, and it still lead to a maniacal dictatorship carrying out genocide in Europe and threatening rest of the world with hunger and nuclear armageddon.

Re: ‘Putin’s chef’ admits to interfering in U.S. elections

#266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It may be "clear", but whether it is true is a very different matter.

It's very well documented: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/02/magazine/russiagate-paul-...

Various opinions on the matter are documented, but that is not the same of documenting what is objectively true in base level reality.

There is an old and sophisticated discipline that studies this phenomenon that unfortunately (but also: conveniently, for some) does not get much attention these days for some reason:

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/epistemology/

There is also things like this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Mockingbird

https://theintercept.com/2022/10/31/social-media-disinformat...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-valued_logic

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Na%C3%AFve_realism_(psychology...

Re: ‘Putin’s chef’ admits to interfering in U.S. elections

#267

> Russian companies were charged in the U.S. with operating a covert social media campaign aimed at fomenting discord and dividing American public opinion This is key here and I think we should all take note because I see comments here that feed into their tactics. Their goal isn't to have a specific election winner, but to divide us as a nation (not just US but all Westerners and even countries like Japan) and creat…

The US needs no external actor to “divide us”, its body politic excels in this task like no other. That’s how the system is built.

Re: ‘Putin’s chef’ admits to interfering in U.S. elections

#268

> Russian companies were charged in the U.S. with operating a covert social media campaign aimed at fomenting discord and dividing American public opinion This is key here and I think we should all take note because I see comments here that feed into their tactics. Their goal isn't to have a specific election winner, but to divide us as a nation (not just US but all Westerners and even countries like Japan) and creat…

Very likely this is a domestic message to underline their political relevance and prowess. Worst thing you can do and have already done in your first paragraph is to put everyone on the suspect list for being potentially influenced. This ironically would align with their goal in the first place.

Re: ‘Putin’s chef’ admits to interfering in U.S. elections

#269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree. But, to be clear, I consider any accusation of "whataboutism" I see to be disinformation by default, until proven otherwise from context, because by far most use of it I saw was as a way to shut down good discussion points. I have a short list of such words/phrases; another notable one is "dog whistle", which I have never seen used in good faith on-line.

My default position is misinformation because I think people being dumb is more likely then them attempting to gaslight others. They get the benefit of the doubt until proven otherwise, but it definitely raises suspicion. The same goes for dog whistling. It is easy to see dog whistling everywhere because that's its entire purpose: to hide within normalized speech. Covert speech is not covert if the only ones using th…

> It is easy to see dog whistling everywhere because that's its entire purpose: to hide within normalized speech.

It is easy to see dog whistling everywhere because that's the phrase's entire purpose: it's a weapon. It's an accusation that's cheap to make, and near-impossible to disprove.

Sure, legitimate cases of dog whistling probably exist. It's impossible to tell for sure, because the "test" has near 100% false-positive rate. Or, put another way, talking about dog whistling being a thing is itself malinformation - technically the phenomenon exists, but bringing attention to it is between confused and malicious.

Re: ‘Putin’s chef’ admits to interfering in U.S. elections

#270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When we see any indication whatsoever of abuse/lost weapons/etc, then we can discuss audits. So far there has been not one single photo anywhere of any US-provided weapons leaking from Ukraine.

That is not entirely true. According to Ukrainian sources (Kiev Independent) there were at least 2 high profile incidents. 1 - US supplied weapons popping up in Finland, 2 - someone tried to ship a helicopter out of Odesa. But this is not what I am saying at all. How would you even know how funds are being used? A manufacturer can hike prices of say ammo 10x, and as result Ukraine would get 10x less of it

Not sure if you’re shilling on purpose but 1) no, Kiev Independent never reported on foreign supplied guns in Finland, “New Voice of Ukraine” did, using a statement by Finnish FBI (NBI) that was mischaracterized and explicitly corrected by NBI about 7 days ago. They say they are watching closely but have no evidence of what you’re alleging. 2) Couldn’t find anything about the helicopter, link?

You can “just ask questions” like that one about any item in any budget on the planet with the net effect of stalling everything we need to accomplish as a society, so I don’t really give that approach much credence. No reason to suspect a particularly bad or particularly important instance here and it’s especially suspect coming from people who’ve already indicated they don’t support US involvement in such conflicts.

Post reply on HN