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

Russia sends troops to Kazakhstan to put down deadly uprising

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 330 posts

Re: Russia sends troops to Kazakhstan to put down deadly uprising

#151

Post by SXX »

cookieswumchorr wrote: post #141
jcfrei wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's certainly not "backed by the west". These dictatorships exists because they allow the elites to exchange the profits from the sale of natural resources in exchange for dollars and euros. That money then flows into western equities, bonds and real estate. It's the (western) dependence on these natural resources that enables the regimes not the backing by the governments.

it's tolerated by the west. The most effective way to punish regimes would be to: - take away (arrest, freeze, whatever) the elite's real estate in the west - same thing with other assets, banc accounts etc - ban them from living in the west or going to the west on vacation, for medical treatment. - ban their families from living in the west, their kids from studying there. this is not my idea, you will find similar…

This. So much of this. Most of the money that disctatorship regimes steal out of their countries are actually invested into western countries by their family members, friends and their pet oligarchs.

US, EU and UK profit from oppressive regimes and don't have any interest of actually hurting them. And why should they? They have their own people to think of.

Re: Russia sends troops to Kazakhstan to put down deadly uprising

#152

Post by throwawayay02 »

siva7 wrote: post #87

Truly bizarre to ask as the head of state for foreign military intervention in your own country to dump down civil protest. Almost like it’s just a russian puppet state

I forget how many heads of states have conveniently asked for US intervention in their own country.

Re: Russia sends troops to Kazakhstan to put down deadly uprising

#153

Post by solarhoma »

MathCodeLove wrote: post #132
kingofkyiv wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is only on camera. He has been kicked off almost every other platform except YouTube. Visa, Uber, PayPal among others all kicked him off. Off camera he has been exposed as a debased sexual predator. Anyone interested can find the whole drama exposing him by searching reddit, his name, and similar terms to what I discussed.

I'm not interested one way or another but if you're going to make claims this extreme the least you can do is provide a link to the evidence yourself. Let's leave making unsubstantiated, outrageous statements to the other social media platforms that do it best.

These are just a few posts digging into his past. There are plenty more to research as well.

https://www.reddit.com/r/internetdrama/comments/d4zo17/1_mil...

https://www.reddit.com/r/BaldAndBaldrDossier/comments/judnlm...

Re: Russia sends troops to Kazakhstan to put down deadly uprising

#154

Post by Kiro »

awb wrote: post #134

How are articles like this relevant on HN? https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html > Off-Topic: Most stories about politics, or crime, or sports, unless they're evidence of some interesting new phenomenon. Videos of pratfalls or disasters, or cute animal pictures. If they'd cover it on TV news, it's probably off-topic. This is all over TV news. I get that it’s newsworthy, but it’s Reddit newsworthy not HN ne…

This comment thread is much better and more interesting than the usual hateful and toxic discussions HN is known for.

Re: Russia sends troops to Kazakhstan to put down deadly uprising

#155

Post by culebron21 »

siva7 wrote: post #144
culebron21 wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Kazakhstan asked CSTO contries ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collective_Security_Treaty_Org... ) to do that, whether we like this or not (I don't). So that's nothing bizzare, and 3000 Russian paratroopers (plus 1000 from other conutries) don't make such a huge country a puppet state. P.S. So funny, you complain you don't get the logic, and I get downvoted for explaining it, rather than calling names.

It absolutely is bizarre, even if they are military allies. Can you imagine Canada asking for US military on their own grounds to fight civilian protests? Me neither. That’s a definition of puppet state.

No, it's not the definition of puppet state. Wikipedia:

> A puppet state is a state that is de jure independent but de facto completely dependent upon an outside power and subject to its orders.

Even though Kazakh president does become dependent on Russian forces to some degree, I don't see how 3000 soldiers can control a country with an army of 100,000, National guard of 32,000 and 86,000 policemen. It may give an upper hand, but against whom? There's even no organized opposition.

If you make paragons Czechoslovakia uprisings in 1968, then USSR sent 500,000 soldiers and 5,000 tanks in a 10 times smaller country.

So it was 3 orders of magnitude larger intervention than this.

Using a military treaty in case of a popular unrest may be illegitimate, but it's nowhere near a puppet state.

Re: Russia sends troops to Kazakhstan to put down deadly uprising

#156

Post by sinyug »

It is always a surreal experience to see the sheer scale at which western media outlets deploy propaganda and rewrite history.

Attempts to overthrow governments in Belarus, Russia and Kazakhstan are "protests." So are attacks on the residence of the President of Kazakhstan with rifles and grenades, and burning down the office of the mayor of Almaty.[1]

The same outlets described the mild violence by a congregation of Trump supporters near the Capitol last year as a "coup," "attack" and "riot."

[1] Russia-led alliance sending peacekeepers to Kazakhstan (https://apnews.com/article/business-kazakhstan-almaty-9da423...)

Re: Russia sends troops to Kazakhstan to put down deadly uprising

#157

Post by siva7 »

throwawayay02 wrote: post #152
siva7 wrote: post #87

Truly bizarre to ask as the head of state for foreign military intervention in your own country to dump down civil protest. Almost like it’s just a russian puppet state

I forget how many heads of states have conveniently asked for US intervention in their own country.

Examples?

Re: Russia sends troops to Kazakhstan to put down deadly uprising

#158

Post by whimsicalism »

throwaway0a5e wrote: post #130
glofish wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a really good point, when an American (or other rich Westerner) shows up in remote area, they are treated like a king, basically you are treated as people treat ridiculously good looking and popular people around them that they want to be around, that generosity you feel is nothing more than being popular and center of attention start living there, all of a sudden that generosity is not so obvious, families a…

>start living there, all of a sudden that generosity is not so obvious, families are at each other's throats for that bushel of corn one guys grandfather stole from the other fifty years ago, random shit gets stolen, the garden is trampled, trash is thrown over your yard because the neighbor wants to "save" on trash collection fees, people cut ahead of you around in the queues, So basically all the same petty BS that…

Yeah, my Berkeley neighbor has been on my case for that bushel of corn for the last two decades

Re: Russia sends troops to Kazakhstan to put down deadly uprising

#159

Post by VictorPath »

slapeel wrote: post #140
Guessnotgauss wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess this is just taking the bait, but Noam Chomsky has never accepted any genocide as ok or rational. Stop with the poorly constrcuted strawman.

You're technically correct (AFAIK); genocide denial is not genocide apologia . But boy what a hair to split... To those who aren't aware, Noam Chomsky vehemently denied Pol Pot's mass murder of millions in Cambodia.

The nom de guerre Pol Pot didn't appear in the New York Times until August 1976, which was after things calmed down in Cambodia. Which makes your assertion he was doing so at the time unlikely.

Vietnam invaded Cambodia and the US began arming Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge in the late 1970s and 1980s, which again the Times covered, although slightly obliquely. Chomsky condemned the US arming Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge.

Re: Russia sends troops to Kazakhstan to put down deadly uprising

#160

Post by jcfrei »

cookieswumchorr wrote: post #141
jcfrei wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's certainly not "backed by the west". These dictatorships exists because they allow the elites to exchange the profits from the sale of natural resources in exchange for dollars and euros. That money then flows into western equities, bonds and real estate. It's the (western) dependence on these natural resources that enables the regimes not the backing by the governments.

it's tolerated by the west. The most effective way to punish regimes would be to: - take away (arrest, freeze, whatever) the elite's real estate in the west - same thing with other assets, banc accounts etc - ban them from living in the west or going to the west on vacation, for medical treatment. - ban their families from living in the west, their kids from studying there. this is not my idea, you will find similar…

That's very difficult to do because it will increase prices of said natural resources (for example natural gas). As you've seen in Kazakhstan itself the tolerance for fuel increases is not very high in the population. A very noble thinking government can be ousted very quickly just because it tries to do the "right thing" and punish said exporters. The best thing to do is to reduce reliance on these countries exports, investing in alternative energy sources or develop domestic resources. But there's often an even stronger opposition to develop let's say a domestic natural gas field than to send money to corrupt regimes somewhere far away. So that's where we're at.
Post reply on HN