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

Inside the Soviet Army (1982)

militera.lib.ru

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 116 posts

Re: Inside the Soviet Army (1982)

#101

Post by taway98765 »

rimantas wrote: post #32
korzun wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ukraine is broke. They owe Russia millions of dollars and have been living on pretty much free gas (courtesy of Russia). I assume you live in US? Do you not find it ironic that you blame Russia for taking this seriously (in their own backyard) while US have been staging government coups within other countries (with multiple death tolls) for decades? And in regards to corruption: "People who live in glass houses shoul…

Ah, good old one http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/And_you_are_lynching_Negroes

Well, not quite. I won't waste my time to point out all the atrocities, millions of lives taken, billions of lives that usa destroyed all over the world so a bunch of corporations could get their hands on resources, new markets, so you could strengthen your military and economical grip of the world. All empires commit atrocities, you can be assured that where ever power is concentrated, innocent lives will be destroyed. Regardless of your education, your background, the amount of hours you spend on economic conventions being brainwashed to believe you are entitled, enlightened-enough to do "unpopular" decisions - biologically we all are the same animals we were 100, 200, 500 or even 5000 years ago. if we won't sober up from our overconfidence and ideological world-view of our selves as humanity, all we can hope for are different types of oppressive regimes changing periodically. .. everyone is corruptible - its time to build governments and institutions that take this as a fact(as you might guess I'm advocating measures against power concentration, and - since we're all selfish egocentric pigs who won't care about public matters until we see a direct, clear link to our wallets/environments etc .. OK I went already waaay too far..)

Sorry for the long(slightly off-topic) lead-in, enjoy(Harald Pinters Nobel Prize speech): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=flvLfSSR1d4

Re: Inside the Soviet Army (1982)

#102

Post by x4m »

notastartup wrote: post #98
x4m wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I'd love it if this was available on kindle or a paperback. I can mail you a copy in Russian (: If there is one in a local book store, not sure Rezun is popular currently.

please do, although it will take me forever to read with a Eng-Rus dictionary. Challenge accepted.

Contact me at amborodin around acm.org Tomorrow morning i'll check if is it available, if not another book(aquarium, day m) will be ok for chellange? :) Info from ISA is common knowlege here (this does not imply info is true) and may be not very popular.

Re: Inside the Soviet Army (1982)

#103

Post by dccoolgai »

brc wrote: post #49
alexeisadeski3 wrote: post #26

Quote From Part VIII: Soviet Communists are frequently reproached for having attempted to build a socialist society but having produced something which closely resembles a prison. Such a charge is entirely unjustified. In the Soviet Union some of the inmates have larger cells than others, some eat well, others badly. There is complete confusion-a lot remains to be done to tidy up the situation. True socialism, in whi…

I wish more people understood and accepted this. It seems like every other day I read something which is wistful for a bit more 'enforced equality'. Ther can be no such thing, nor is it desirable. People have different talents and different levels of motivation. As such they produce Inequal results - and that is just life. Trying to prevent inequal results can only be done through force in the end, so a prison is the…

Read Vonnegut's "Harison Bergeron".

Re: Inside the Soviet Army (1982)

#104

Post by valtih1978 »

ceejayoz wrote: post #29
Perdition wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is why it is happening. NATO was set-up to counter the Soviets (dominated by Russia) and it is a slap in the face for Russia to allow NATO right on their border when they are trying to become a real world power again. NATO might have gotten away with limited defence/economic pacts with former Soviet satellites, but full NATO and EU membership was bound to provoke a reaction from Russia. Apparently the US State D…

> Apparently the US State Department didn't learn from its arrogance in Iraq, because such blatant provocation shouldn't have been allowed. Provocation: Letting Ukraine voluntarily choose closer ties with the West Not Provocation: Invading and annexing the Crimea Gotcha. Also, since when is the US State Department in charge of the EU?

Just to inform your ingonrance. The Eastern and South Ukraine is a Russia. It was attached to the Ukraine be the bloody communist criminals. Look at the map http://13571113.blogspot.com/2014/03/republic-of-novorossiya...

New government of Ukraine is neonazi, installed by the US during this winter. This is done second time. First time it happened in 2004, why american citizen Uschenko has imposed antisoviet propaganda in the school program, the WWII nazi criminal, Stepan Bandera, was made a national hero. It was indoctrinated a neonazi idea that russians are inborn slaves and biogarbage, russian language was banned. Antisoviet/antirussian brainwashing was absolutely successful but economic programme has failed. Therefore Uschenko has lost the office. But, in 2013, US has re-installed its puppet government in the Ukraine again, by force. How do you react?

The new government was much more neonazi (look for "svoboda" party and "far right groups patrolling Kiev"). The first law was to ban the russian language again. They have declared that they will remove the russian fleet (which is located in crimea forever, since Crimea is another Russian land, attached to Ukraine by mistake by Soviet Authority, when ). Now, how do you prove that Russian people (the total population of the Crimea, Doneck, Odessa) should welcome the US-installed russophobic mankurts in Kiev, who chant "slotter the russians" (https://www.google.ee/search?q=москалей+на+ножи) in their fascist marches? You do not bother to prove that. Your propaganda has already put all shit in your head.

1. Russian people in the Ukraine (almost the half of the pouplation) have all the right to run away from your neonazi puppets. 2. They have full right to live with other russians. 3. Russia has all the right to meet the aspirations of frightented people in Ukraine and defend its national interests, which are the Black Sea fleet, russian population united with the rest of the Russia and no NATO in the Ukraine.

You dehumiliate the russian hostages in Ukraine because you want the whole Ukraine to go under Western domination. You want it to separate from the Russia because (as Bzhesinzki puts that) Russia will loose its ability to stand against US Empire only if it looses the Ukraine. You is an imperialist, brainwahsed by the Western propaganda. Crimea has came back home. The "Independent Ukraine" is American, anti-Russia project. The population is russian and feels bad there. It must be ukrainized, turned into ukranians (anti-russians). All russian regions must return back to Russian home, immediately. Start respecting territorial integrity of Sovient Union, not Ukraine. Russia should not let the NATO to expand and install anti-Russian missles in Crimea and Ukraine. Russia did not attach its parts to Ukraine for that. Nato wants the russians to be separated, to live outside the Russia.

Re: Inside the Soviet Army (1982)

#105

Post by alexeisadeski3 »

simonh wrote: post #69
alexeisadeski3 wrote: post #26

Quote From Part VIII: Soviet Communists are frequently reproached for having attempted to build a socialist society but having produced something which closely resembles a prison. Such a charge is entirely unjustified. In the Soviet Union some of the inmates have larger cells than others, some eat well, others badly. There is complete confusion-a lot remains to be done to tidy up the situation. True socialism, in whi…

The basic point is valid regarding communism and forced equality, but e.g. plenty of countries have very efficient, well funded and cost effective nationalized medical services. It's a particularly poor example to choose to try and make the point. The problem with communism isn't that so many of it's services are nationalized, it's that one-party politics leads to an ossified, excessively powerful, corrupt bureaucrac…

Where does he say that socialized medicine can not be efficient, well funded, and cost effective???

He says only that the effect is to place the doctors into a sort of "prison" scenario. Prisons can be efficient and well run. The problem is that they're prisons.

Imagine your own sector being socialized.

Re: Inside the Soviet Army (1982)

#106

Post by ArbitraryLimits »

rdl wrote: post #34

(I think you posted this to hn because I posted it to Facebook again, yes?) The really interesting things to me are: 1) Invisible divisions, and the system to split units 2) Hiding top-tier equipment from the West -- even at the cost of not allowing their own soldiers to know what equipment they're supposed to ultimately use. Vs. the US, where soldiers are expected to be intimately familiar with their assigned weapon…

> In the US system ... everyone else is promoted and then assigned

It's worth pointing out that one of the reasons this system works in the US army is that non-commissioned officers are trusted with a great deal more responsibility than their Soviet counterparts were. The mechanical promotion of junior officers would be impossible without 15 year veteran NCOs taking care of a lot of the grunt work that Soviet officers got stuck with, simply because the system wouldn't trust NCOs with it.

Re: Inside the Soviet Army (1982)

#107

Post by AnimalMuppet »

ceejayoz wrote: post #29
Perdition wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is why it is happening. NATO was set-up to counter the Soviets (dominated by Russia) and it is a slap in the face for Russia to allow NATO right on their border when they are trying to become a real world power again. NATO might have gotten away with limited defence/economic pacts with former Soviet satellites, but full NATO and EU membership was bound to provoke a reaction from Russia. Apparently the US State D…

> Apparently the US State Department didn't learn from its arrogance in Iraq, because such blatant provocation shouldn't have been allowed. Provocation: Letting Ukraine voluntarily choose closer ties with the West Not Provocation: Invading and annexing the Crimea Gotcha. Also, since when is the US State Department in charge of the EU?

Well said. But...

Putin probably remembers his history. In World War II, Germany nearly overran Russia, and it started from the middle of Poland. If it had been able to start from the eastern border of Ukraine, Russia might well have not survived.

So Putin may feel, historically, that Russia's survival is at stake if Ukraine joins NATO. (I am not saying that Putin's desire to control Ukraine is moral or ethical. I am merely saying that it is understandable.)

Re: Inside the Soviet Army (1982)

#108

Post by AnimalMuppet »

ajuc wrote: post #44
Perdition wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is why it is happening. NATO was set-up to counter the Soviets (dominated by Russia) and it is a slap in the face for Russia to allow NATO right on their border when they are trying to become a real world power again. NATO might have gotten away with limited defence/economic pacts with former Soviet satellites, but full NATO and EU membership was bound to provoke a reaction from Russia. Apparently the US State D…

Why should people in states bordering Russia care what Russia thinks of their independence and alliances?

Morally/ethically: They shouldn't.

Practically: Because that is the way the world actually works. If you've got a big power like Russia, with a leader that is willing to use that power, then your choices have consequences. You'd better think about those consequences when you're making your choices.

[Edit: If you're a neighbor to a big power like Russia, then your choices have consequences. The point was not that Russia's choices have consequences, but that Ukraine's do.)

Re: Inside the Soviet Army (1982)

#109

Post by korzun »

rimantas wrote: post #32
korzun wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ukraine is broke. They owe Russia millions of dollars and have been living on pretty much free gas (courtesy of Russia). I assume you live in US? Do you not find it ironic that you blame Russia for taking this seriously (in their own backyard) while US have been staging government coups within other countries (with multiple death tolls) for decades? And in regards to corruption: "People who live in glass houses shoul…

Ah, good old one http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/And_you_are_lynching_Negroes

I never stated that Russia was wrong. Let's make that very clear.

I'm simply amused at ignorance of people who have very little understanding of the situation but try to give their 2 cents.

If government of South Korea was overthrown by anti-US activists; US would be dispatching troops to protect their military basis and citizens within a split second.

And I will bet you that the death toll would be in hundreds within first few days.

Re: Inside the Soviet Army (1982)

#110

Post by kumarski »

rdl wrote: post #34

(I think you posted this to hn because I posted it to Facebook again, yes?) The really interesting things to me are: 1) Invisible divisions, and the system to split units 2) Hiding top-tier equipment from the West -- even at the cost of not allowing their own soldiers to know what equipment they're supposed to ultimately use. Vs. the US, where soldiers are expected to be intimately familiar with their assigned weapon…

Yep. You'll note below, I wrote "courtesy of RDL"

I just found the post fascinating. Reminded me of this for some reason: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NnJbtbh4tDE

Post reply on HN