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

Henry Kissinger Has Died

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

511–520 of 673 posts

Re: Henry Kissinger Has Died

#511

Post by bakuninsbart »

kyrra wrote: post #335
breput wrote: post #6

Do yourself a favor and listen to at least one of the six part series that Behind The Bastards podcast[0] did on Kissinger. It will give you a background, with sources, on the "controversial" statesman that you'll read eulogies about over the next few days. [0] https://omny.fm/shows/behind-the-bastards/part-one-kissinger [1] https://omny.fm/shows/behind-the-bastards/part-two-kissinger [2] https://omny.fm/shows/behind…

For some counter programming, here is an obituary written by someone more pro Kissinger: https://www.wsj.com/articles/henry-kissingers-century-01a1a9... It was written by a man who already wrote the book: "Kissinger, 1923-1968: The Idealist."

Americans bombed the people of Laos for sport killing tens of thousands and crippling many more. Kissinger directly enables and supported this. The man was a monster and should have died long ago.

Re: Henry Kissinger Has Died

#512

Post by framapotari »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #78
jandrese wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The level at which Henry Kissinger micromanaged the bombing of innocent civilians can not be overlooked. Even by fairly stringent definitions he is a war criminal.

> level at which Henry Kissinger micromanaged the bombing of innocent civilians can not be overlooked Sure. But legally irrelevant. He didn’t command them. The person receiving the order could—and in many cases, should—have refused. That’s different if e.g. Nixon ordered it directly, because in that case it’s a military command. Again, these terms had meaning. But they’re practically unenforceable even in public opin…

If your argument starts with "Sure, he micromanaged the bombing of innocent civilians but", then I think you've gotten lost in the technicalities of being right on the Internet.

Re: Henry Kissinger Has Died

#513

Post by ReptileMan »

yakshaving_jgt wrote: post #487
ReptileMan wrote: post #478

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> His idea that Ukraine should give up territory to please Russia made it clear that he don't understand modern Russia or Putin. It's not a conflict in which he has no relevant experience or any deep insight, yet he felt the need to use his influence to present his poorly thought out idea. And yet it is exactly this behind the scenes that Ukraine European backers are pushing Zelensky to do. When it is clear that the…

Which ones? You mean russian puppets like Orban and Fico?

From the rumors it's russian puppets like Macron and Sholtz

Re: Henry Kissinger Has Died

#514

Post by JumpCrisscross »

__loam wrote: post #344
estebank wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In February 1969, weeks after taking office, and lasting through April 1970, U.S. warplanes secretly dropped 110,000 tons of bombs on Cambodia. By summer 1969, according to a colonel on the Joint Staff, Kissinger – who had no constitutional role in the military chain of command – was personally selecting bombing targets. “Not only was Henry carefully screening the raids, he was reading the raw intelligence,” Col. R…

People defending him simply don't know what he did.

[flagged]

Re: Henry Kissinger Has Died

#515

Post by JumpCrisscross »

framapotari wrote: post #512
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> level at which Henry Kissinger micromanaged the bombing of innocent civilians can not be overlooked Sure. But legally irrelevant. He didn’t command them. The person receiving the order could—and in many cases, should—have refused. That’s different if e.g. Nixon ordered it directly, because in that case it’s a military command. Again, these terms had meaning. But they’re practically unenforceable even in public opin…

If your argument starts with "Sure, he micromanaged the bombing of innocent civilians but", then I think you've gotten lost in the technicalities of being right on the Internet.

> then I think you've gotten lost in the technicalities of being right on the Internet

Legality is entirely technical. When we lose sight of that, and turn legal terms like war criminal into colloquial ones, we sap the terminology of strength. If everyone horrific is a war criminal, then it’s all just banal evil. Nuremberg attempted to draw a line. This type of rhetoric loses its clarity.

Re: Henry Kissinger Has Died

#516

Post by Fricken »

oh_sigh wrote: post #270
Schiendelman wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, but it was meaningfully stabilizing before we fucked it again.

No, it wasn't. What part are you even talking about? Israel was at war with all of its neighbors 5 years before Kissinger. The clerics were poised to take power in Iran since the 60s. same thing with the baaths in Iraq.

Europe was in chaos for centuries up until the end of WW2. Since WW2 western powers have worked to keep the middle east in chaos.

Re: Henry Kissinger Has Died

#517

Post by JumpCrisscross »

__loam wrote: post #349
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To execute it. Kissinger didn’t execute. He relayed. It’s a subtle, frustrating but—I think—necessary distinction to preserve the sanctity of the term required to prosecute heads of state, a novel concept in its own right.

This is like arguing Eichmann had no part in the holocaust because he just organized the trains. I imagine the Cambodians would make the same distinction the Israelis did, in that both men were clearly evil people.

> Eichmann had no part in the holocaust because he just organized the trains

Eichman was an SS officer! In what way did he lack command authority?

Re: Henry Kissinger Has Died

#518

Post by Hikikomori »

mattnewton wrote: post #334
CalChris wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

After failing in the prosecution of a dumb war, the Paris Peace Conference can’t be seen as any singular accomplishment.

Especially since there is evidence the Nixon campaign prolonged the war by sabotaging Johnson’s peace talks, going directly to the south Vietnamese and promising them a better deal if they would make sure Johnson didn’t get to end the war.

And Kissinger played both sides and leaked information to Nixon. Mostly so he could get a job in either administration.

Re: Henry Kissinger Has Died

#519

Post by JumpCrisscross »

aniforprez wrote: post #505
Aicy wrote: post #475

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This leads to a dangerous path. If you are not willing to engage with or understand the other side of the debate you will have no capacity to understand or debate the modern day Kissingers who are currently in government.

Why is the default response that I haven't "engaged or understood" the "other side of this debate"? What's the "other side" here? That I have sympathy for this man? Where is this whole thing going? Is doing research on what he's done and perpetrated and quotes by his own voice not enough? And how does that lead to me not understanding modern day Kissingers? I refuse to give this any more headspace. This sage-like alm…

> That I have sympathy for this man?

No. That you understand how it happened.

> That I have sympathy for this man?

That’s fine. Stay away from geopolitical decision making. Most people shouldn’t have to weigh moral systems.

Re: Henry Kissinger Has Died

#520

Post by genman »

ilkke wrote: post #445
breput wrote: post #6

Do yourself a favor and listen to at least one of the six part series that Behind The Bastards podcast[0] did on Kissinger. It will give you a background, with sources, on the "controversial" statesman that you'll read eulogies about over the next few days. [0] https://omny.fm/shows/behind-the-bastards/part-one-kissinger [1] https://omny.fm/shows/behind-the-bastards/part-two-kissinger [2] https://omny.fm/shows/behind…

A villain that he was, even he called out the Rambouillet text [1] [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rambouillet_Agreement

I have read critique that the terms presented to Serbs were unreasonable. Maybe, maybe not, but let's keep in mind that Serbs had already committed genocide and kept aiming for it.
Post reply on HN