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

UK media fails to disclose defence sector links in nearly 60% of cases

aoav.org.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 242 posts

Re: UK media fails to disclose defence sector links in nearly 60% of cases

#231

Post by f6v »

_djo_ wrote: post #168
f6v wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can't deny Ukrainian military suffers from deep corruption.

Much less than 5-10 years ago, and orders of magnitude less than the Russian military. The pressures of fighting an existential war plus the demands of the public in a democracy have closed off most typical avenues for corruption, forcing a focus on battlefield results and effective supply to the front-line. Nobody in the Ukrainian military is advocating for military spending for corrupt reasons, but for the country…

> Much less than 5-10 years ago, and orders of magnitude less than the Russian military.

Stop with whataboutism, please. My taxes don’t go to the Russian military, so I couldn’t care less.

Re: UK media fails to disclose defence sector links in nearly 60% of cases

#232

Post by _djo_ »

f6v wrote: post #231
_djo_ wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Much less than 5-10 years ago, and orders of magnitude less than the Russian military. The pressures of fighting an existential war plus the demands of the public in a democracy have closed off most typical avenues for corruption, forcing a focus on battlefield results and effective supply to the front-line. Nobody in the Ukrainian military is advocating for military spending for corrupt reasons, but for the country…

> Much less than 5-10 years ago, and orders of magnitude less than the Russian military. Stop with whataboutism, please. My taxes don’t go to the Russian military, so I couldn’t care less.

I didn’t intend it as a whataboutism, but as an indicator of progress. Not all that long ago the Ukrainian and Russian militaries were virtually indistinguishable, with the same doctrine, training, mindsets, and above all levels of corruption. There’s been a ton of work over the past 15-20 years to reform and modernise the Ukrainian military, especially since the war started.

Corruption is intensely damaging, especially in wartime, and shouldn’t be tolerated. That we’re not seeing many cases of corruption despite the intense scrutiny on the Ukrainian armed forces shows that things are both much improved and heading in the right direction.

That said, I’ve now spent enough time countering what was a low-effort throwaway comment from you in the first place, and which felt less like a valid complaint and more like an outdated belief. If you have any substantive evidence of large-scale corruption, worse than comparative forces, and being tolerated and ignored, I’ll re-engage.

Re: UK media fails to disclose defence sector links in nearly 60% of cases

#233

Post by CrzyLngPwd »

_djo_ wrote: post #223
CrzyLngPwd wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Iran quite naturally hit anything of significant use to the US, or that might hurt the US war effort, and some of those civilian objects were housing US forces who fled their bases in those countries. One man's civilian object is another man's barracks. Also, mistakes happen, as demonstrated by the US targeting of a school. Those Gulf states also got involved by shooting down Iranian drones, planes and missiles. Heck…

At this point you’re just making excuses for war crimes, inventing explanations that don’t match the facts. None of the civilian structures and facilities hit by Iran in neighbouring Gulf countries were hosting US forces. Again, that might have been justifiable depending on proportionality and the selectivity of targeting, but it didn’t happen. Nor did Iran disclaim the attacks as mistakes. It only did so in one case…

Is any of that true, or did you hear about it through the BBC?

Re: UK media fails to disclose defence sector links in nearly 60% of cases

#234

Post by thegrimmest »

specproc wrote: post #225
thegrimmest wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think it's fair to compare US foreign policy to actual imperialism as practiced by the Soviets, the British, etc. The US does not maintain colonies, and, as you point out, does not even attempt to exert total control. Pursuing your interests and forcing total political and cultural domination are not equivalent. The US is more than happy for Germans to be German, Japanese to be Japanese, etc, as long as US in…

> I don't think it's fair to compare US foreign policy to actual imperialism as practiced by the Soviets, the British, etc. All empires function differently. The modes of empire were very different between the British and other recent European empires, which were very different to the Soviets, the Ottomans, the Romans. Empires are heterogeneous even within themselves over time and across Geographies. The British empi…

I don't think you addressed my main point about ecosystems.

Following your argument, every major power could be considered imperialistic, which kind of defeats the purpose of the word. Aye the US maintains some minor, vestigial, colonies. However it does not engage in imperial conquest. South Korea, Iraq, and Afghanistan are not part of US territorial holdings, and it was never a US war objectives to make them so.

We have to draw some lines somewhere, otherwise "imperialist" just means "really big". If you disagree, name a non-imperialist world power.

Re: UK media fails to disclose defence sector links in nearly 60% of cases

#235

Post by rigonkulous »

nradov wrote: post #230
rigonkulous wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only ones who can do anything about their war criminals are the citizens, themselves. This is also the reason Western war criminals are currently free to continue their heinous blood-shed. If you want to prosecute their war criminals, you better prosecute yours first, or else the moral cliff upon which you climb is merely a shadow.

Cool. In the meantime though we should do whatever we can to help the Ukrainian military kill as many Russians as possible.

No. This is a disgusting attitude.

Make peace, assholes.

Re: UK media fails to disclose defence sector links in nearly 60% of cases

#237

Post by specproc »

thegrimmest wrote: post #234
specproc wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't think it's fair to compare US foreign policy to actual imperialism as practiced by the Soviets, the British, etc. All empires function differently. The modes of empire were very different between the British and other recent European empires, which were very different to the Soviets, the Ottomans, the Romans. Empires are heterogeneous even within themselves over time and across Geographies. The British empi…

I don't think you addressed my main point about ecosystems. Following your argument, every major power could be considered imperialistic, which kind of defeats the purpose of the word. Aye the US maintains some minor, vestigial, colonies. However it does not engage in imperial conquest. South Korea, Iraq, and Afghanistan are not part of US territorial holdings, and it was never a US war objectives to make them so. We…

At no point in this thread have I claimed there are no other countries with imperialist characteristics, I'm just highlighting the fact that the US is very much an empire, an empire which runs my country and many more besides, and is very much the biggest and baddest of them all today.

Territorial conquest here is very much a legal, not a practical distinction. To return to my previous point, different empires function differently. I don't think absorption into one's de-jure territory is is necessarily a defining characteristic here. Much of India under the British, for example, was run through vassals.

To address your question directly, I'd say India is a major world power, with about four times the population of the US, and you'd be hard pressed to describe them as an empire.

China, for its part, maintains three overseas bases, only one of which in a country it has sent troops into during a conflict (Cambodia). This is in comparison to over fifty US bases, the largest of which are all very much the result of invasions.

In the 21st century, China has had a few border skirmishes with India. In the 21st century alone, the US has fought in Afghanistan, Yemen, the Philippines, Iraq, Somalia, Pakistan, Libya, Uganda, DRC, CAR, South Sudan, Niger, Syria, Iran, Ukraine, Palestine, Lebanon, Venezuala, and Nigeria.

If you want to pin me down on a definition, I'd say an empire is a network of countries, controlled by and for the benefit of a central country, predominantly taken by force and maintained at least to some extent through the threat of force.

How would you define one?

Re: UK media fails to disclose defence sector links in nearly 60% of cases

#239

Post by thegrimmest »

specproc wrote: post #237
thegrimmest wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think you addressed my main point about ecosystems. Following your argument, every major power could be considered imperialistic, which kind of defeats the purpose of the word. Aye the US maintains some minor, vestigial, colonies. However it does not engage in imperial conquest. South Korea, Iraq, and Afghanistan are not part of US territorial holdings, and it was never a US war objectives to make them so. We…

At no point in this thread have I claimed there are no other countries with imperialist characteristics, I'm just highlighting the fact that the US is very much an empire, an empire which runs my country and many more besides, and is very much the biggest and baddest of them all today. Territorial conquest here is very much a legal, not a practical distinction. To return to my previous point, different empires functi…

> An empire is a network of countries, controlled by and for the benefit of a central country, predominantly taken by force and maintained at least to some extent through the threat of force.

I tend to agree. The keyword is "control". The US does not control, it influences. The distinction is of kind, not of degree.

As a contrast I offer the former-Soviet empire, which was very much controlled from Moscow in a way Berlin is simply not controlled from Washington today. Much in the same way that Russia is attempting to control eastern Ukraine.

We need different words for these very different modes of existence. The Soviets controlled so they were an empire. The US influences so, despite being very large and powerful, and using that power to further its interests, it is not.

Empire is not defined by number of wars. China/Beijing exercises control over several nations that would otherwise be independent of it (Tibet, Xinjiang, Hong Kong, nominally Taiwan). Modern India is not an empire (though Mughal India very much was), neither is it exactly a major world power.

Re: UK media fails to disclose defence sector links in nearly 60% of cases

#240

Post by f6v »

_djo_ wrote: post #232
f6v wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Much less than 5-10 years ago, and orders of magnitude less than the Russian military. Stop with whataboutism, please. My taxes don’t go to the Russian military, so I couldn’t care less.

I didn’t intend it as a whataboutism, but as an indicator of progress. Not all that long ago the Ukrainian and Russian militaries were virtually indistinguishable, with the same doctrine, training, mindsets, and above all levels of corruption. There’s been a ton of work over the past 15-20 years to reform and modernise the Ukrainian military, especially since the war started. Corruption is intensely damaging, especia…

> Not all that long ago the Ukrainian and Russian militaries were virtually indistinguishable, with the same doctrine, training, mindsets, and above all levels of corruption.

This just shows you're not frequent in Ukrainian Telegram scene. The situation members of UAF report there is totally different.

> If you have any substantive evidence of large-scale corruption

The political corpse of Yermak is still warm. Umerov has been named in Mindichgate, as well as Firepoint. It's all very fresh and there has been no resolution. I don't know much more evidence of large-scale corruption you want.

Post reply on HN