Live data from Hacker News

Russia approves use of military in Ukraine

hosted.ap.org

191–200 of 255 posts

Re: Russia approves use of military in Ukraine

#191
post #24

The scariest part of all of this is the 6000 mystery troops that showed up without any logos on their uniforms or carriers or tanks. They took over the border, airport, etc. without any identification, simply guns to insist "do as we say". They even blocked the coast guard from leaving their ports. Which means they had this kind of force all prepared. Can you imagine if US troops showed up somewhere in huge numbers w…

The Russians have this kind of force prepared because of their naval base at Sevastopol. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Sea_Fleet

Without logos on uniforms, carriers or tanks?

Did they think people would not know?

Re: Russia approves use of military in Ukraine

#192
post #54
post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Same thing happened in Georgia in 2008. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgia_(country)#The_South_Oss...

Same thing happened in Serbia in 1999. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kosovo Only in this case it was NATO who invaded, and it is viewed quite differently from the western media then what parents have cited. The worst thing in world today is to become the rope on which the imperial forces tug to prove their strength.

Seriously? Leaving out some details there, aren't you? Like Srebrenica?

Re: Russia approves use of military in Ukraine

#193
post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Victoria Nuland, the woman who was caught on the leaked tape saying "F*ck the EU", essentially because the EU was not quite as enthusiastic about supporting further action, was the principal deputy foreign policy adviser to Vice President Dick Cheney. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victoria_Nuland Obama has a lot of stuff he has to deal with on a daily basis - listening to the audio, it would make sense that she is cal…

So, you're left with one lowly ranking woman who you think is some mastermind of an evil cabal. "Her brother-in-law came up with Bush's "surge" strategy in 2007" TOTALLY irrelevant here. Logical fallacy violated. Non sequitor. EDIT: Seriously, you think Victoria Nuland, by herself, is pulling the strings of the American foreign policy?

How is Victoria Nuland "low ranking"? You realize the title "secretary" does not mean they answer phones and schedule appointments?

Here's the state department org chart.

http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/rls/dos/99494.htm

The assistant secretary position she holds is responsible for that area, and two links below the secretary of state.

Re: Russia approves use of military in Ukraine

#194
post #189
post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This dude never knows what to do. That's the problem. With Bush as a President Putin just wouldn't dare.

So he should start a war with a nuclear power?

Oh no, definitely not. Now it's too late. For years this weakling (Obama) have been porting an image of a weakling and that's the problem. There are plenty of examples: Syria and the red-line with chemical weapons usage. That was a red-line, we were supposed to do something once it's crossed. So it was crossed and what Obama did? Listened to Putin who said don't invade!!! He listened to Putin! So Syria is lost because he is weak. He'd rather listen to Russian President than to keep his word to the international community. Another example: Bush was in the process of building anti-missile shield in Poland and Czech Republic. The shield would render the countries untouchable by the Ruskies. And what happened next? Obama won election and to "improve relations with Russia" sold our allies in Eastern Europe, scrapped the already signed deal regarding building the shield on the territory of our NATO allies, just not to worry Putin. These are just 2 examples I have no time to spend here to make up for your lack of interest in reading international news in the past few years. The point is this: if you promote such image of such a weakling to a bully like Putin, you will get hit.

But, again it's too late now. We'd need to have McCain to fix that. None of that (shield in Eastern Europe, Syria) would ever happen with McCain or Bush leading the country.

Re: Russia approves use of military in Ukraine

#195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He is a tough guy. He just invaded a country by force and effectively told Obama to shutup up and sit down. It's Obama's move now. If he does nothing now, will he also do nothing when North Korea rolls into the South? The thugs are watching and learning.

Except...Ukraine is in no way comparable to Korea. Maybe there are 30000 American troops in Ukraine that I didn't hear about?

Try Taiwan then.

Re: Russia approves use of military in Ukraine

#196
post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, but many people in Moldova call the language they speak 'Moldovan', even if it's only subtly different from Romanian. When given the option in a 2004 census, 60% of the population chose 'Moldovan' as their native language, compared to 16.5% who chose 'Romanian'. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moldovan_language

In 2004 the Communists were in power in Republic of Moldova. But in December 2013 Moldovan court rules official language is 'Romanian,' replacing Soviet-flavored 'Moldovan': http://www.foxnews.com/world/2013/12/05/moldovan-court-rules... Just as there is no 'Austrian language', is German only. Or 'Switzerland language', is German, French and Italian. Edit: Of course there is heavy dialect or accent of the language in…

Swiss German is a real thing and quite different from high German.

Re: Russia approves use of military in Ukraine

#197
post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"We set up riots over there": Who? How? I don't know much about this conflict, but neither Russia nor the Ukraine are democracies in the Western sense of the word. I've been to Ukraine once. It felt like the Wild West only without the code of honor you see in the movies.

Why are they supposed to adhere to gold standard of western democracy? America seriously needs a reality check. Why such supreme belief in american(western) way of liberty. Rest of the world doesnt kill innocents in drones, guantanamo, libya, iraq ...

No, they kill them with paramilitary snipers firing into crowds of demonstrators.

Re: Russia approves use of military in Ukraine

#198
post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So he should start a war with a nuclear power?

Oh no, definitely not. Now it's too late. For years this weakling (Obama) have been porting an image of a weakling and that's the problem. There are plenty of examples: Syria and the red-line with chemical weapons usage. That was a red-line, we were supposed to do something once it's crossed. So it was crossed and what Obama did? Listened to Putin who said don't invade!!! He listened to Putin! So Syria is lost becaus…

"None of that (shield in Eastern Europe, Syria) would ever happen with McCain or Bush leading the country."

How are you so certain? =\

Re: Russia approves use of military in Ukraine

#199
post #25
post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Russia just cannot lose Crimea. It was silly for EU and especially US pols to think Ukraine could be snatched from Putin wholesale (and using neonazis, no less).

neonazis I guess that's the talking point of the day. Ironically, Hitler invaded Czechoslovakia under the pretense that it was to protect its ethnic Germans.

It's not a talking point: Svoboda and Pravyi Sektor are right-wing extremist groups with racist tendencies, just look them up on Wikipedia. The first act from their new government was to revoke a law granting language rights to Russian and Hungarian minorities.

Just because Putin is a bad actor, it doesn't mean his enemies are good actors.

Re: Russia approves use of military in Ukraine

#200
post #169
post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"We set up riots over there": Who? How? I don't know much about this conflict, but neither Russia nor the Ukraine are democracies in the Western sense of the word. I've been to Ukraine once. It felt like the Wild West only without the code of honor you see in the movies.

The "we" would be the CIA. Has their signature all over it.

If so, they haven't shown this much competence in a long while. Successfully toppling a foreign government? I'm impressed. Although I'm not sure this level of success is the CIA's signature...
Post reply on HN