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

Putin: A Plea for Caution From Russia

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 264 posts

Re: Putin: A Plea for Caution From Russia

#181

Post by smsm42 »

waps wrote: post #158
waps wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The same is trivially true for a dozen nations. Should we attack them all ? Hell, one might even say it's true for America itself.

Maybe crude to answer my own question but this seems a pretty good answer : http://www.reddit.com/r/TrueAskReddit/comments/1lw8yg/why_do...

I got a serious problem with "Naturally, Israel would rather the Syrian government fall.". It betrays deep misunderstanding of what Israel actually wants and what would benefit it (which makes all the rest suspect too). Weak Assad would benefit Israel greatly. Despite all the saber-rattling, Syria would never seriously think of going to war with Israel, because that would mean the end of the current Syrian regime. Helping Hezbollah? Sure. Passing weapons from Iran to whomever that could hurt Israel? No problem. But direct conflict? No way. Cold war is the worst Assad would ever do.

However, everything changes if Assad regime falls and rebels - among which would be such organizations as Syrian Islamic Front or Syrian Islamic Liberation Front, with predictable amount of love for Israel - were to come to power. They would have no experience of losing the war like Assad regime had, and no problem with suffering a bit more of mayhem is it's for the good purpose - after all, that's just what they did right before it and succeeded. And they'd own all munitions that Assad regime had assembled (at least those that left after the war, but there would probably be sizeable amount left, and if not, Putin could help), including WMDs. How there's any benefit for Israel in that?

Israel would be glad to have Assad's ass get some thorough kicking. However, having an explosive unstable government with WMDs on its borders is not exactly one's dream. Israel already has this problem with Lebanon, and it didn't work that well so far. Having second one is really not anybody's wish.

Re: Putin: A Plea for Caution From Russia

#182

Post by sytelus »

ihsw wrote: post #106
light3 wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What are the chances Putin didn't write the article?

There are some grammatical and capitalization errors, and numerous comma splices (stringing similar sentence fragments together in an effort to form a coherent statement). There was also usage of very short sentences in repeated succession. Those are mostly stylistic issues but they're indicative of non-native grasp of the English language. Furthermore it's clearly written by someone with enough capability to express…

That's very interesting. Any resources/research that you know about on how to identify non-native writing?

Re: Putin: A Plea for Caution From Russia

#183

Post by levosmetalo »

frozenport wrote: post #110
alan_cx wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do wonder if Russians, Arabs, Muslims, and so on feel the same way when Obama (Bush(s), Clinton, Blair, Cameron, etc) pontificates. The phrase "western hypocrisy" is not new. What is ironic, is that oddly I prefer the unashamed way Russia acts, compared to the cover-ups and lies of the west. You know where you stand. We in the west are supposed to be better, but all we are better at really is PR. In Russia, people…

In Russia an anti-american sentiment is heavily associated with Putin, often the Russian opposition is quite supportive of America - the place that made the Internet and YouTube.

Russian opposition might be supportive of America just because Putin is not. The moment Putin vanishes, the new government will still look up after Russian own interests and not care at all about America.

Re: Putin: A Plea for Caution From Russia

#184

Post by teamgb »

cbhl wrote: post #49
peterstjohn wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"we must not forget that God created us equal." As long as you're not gay.

IIRC, that's illegal in Russia, unfortunately. America is known for being religious in general, so this line will work well with his target audience, in general.

Not really true from a legal perspective. It is legal to be gay in Russia, but the recently passed law makes it illegal to spread "propaganda of nontraditional sexual relations to minors".

Re: Putin: A Plea for Caution From Russia

#185

Post by abcd_f »

frozenport wrote: post #110
alan_cx wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do wonder if Russians, Arabs, Muslims, and so on feel the same way when Obama (Bush(s), Clinton, Blair, Cameron, etc) pontificates. The phrase "western hypocrisy" is not new. What is ironic, is that oddly I prefer the unashamed way Russia acts, compared to the cover-ups and lies of the west. You know where you stand. We in the west are supposed to be better, but all we are better at really is PR. In Russia, people…

In Russia an anti-american sentiment is heavily associated with Putin, often the Russian opposition is quite supportive of America - the place that made the Internet and YouTube.

> the Russian opposition is quite supportive of America

Of course it is, because guess who's paying for said opposition?

Re: Putin: A Plea for Caution From Russia

#186

Post by teamgb »

anigbrowl wrote: post #140
nikcub wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here is everything the major allies have released to back up their case: http://www.theguardian.com/world/graphic/2013/sep/03/syria-c... It isn't very good, it seems to be a case of finding scraps that fit your narrative rather than building a case. One thing that leads me to believe that it might have been the rebels: the civilians and soldiers killed in that rebel controlled area around Damascus were part of the mo…

True, but in that case the government forces should have been falling over themselves to facilitate the work of the UN inspectors.

It's a civil war and the alleged incident area is (or was) under rebel control. The UN inspectors were in within two or three days and started their work. Is that not fast enough?

Re: Putin: A Plea for Caution From Russia

#187

Post by [deleted] »

anigbrowl wrote: post #130
jtc331 wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, it's valid to question his motives. But that doesn't change the fact that he's making a perfectly reasonable argument. And when we're deciding whether or not to go to war, the reasonable and valid argument should win--regardless of who's making it.

I don't think his claims that the rebels are the source of the gas attack are 'perfectly reasonable,' and if you don't sign on to his breezy certitude on this point the rest of his argument falls apart.

[deleted]

Re: Putin: A Plea for Caution From Russia

#188

Post by levosmetalo »

kstenerud wrote: post #164
akiselev wrote: post #66

"The law is still the law, and we must follow it whether we like it or not." The irony of Putin saying this cannot be understated. This entire editorial is dripping with it. For those of you buying into his rhetoric, remember that Putin is the head of a "virtual mafia state" [1] and a government of thugs who are too busy stealing the wealth generated by Russia's natural resources to pursue the eternal dream of Russia…

CleanedStar, it looks like your account has been hellbanned.

Repeating his comment. If he was banned because of this comments, then ban me too.

> Putin is the head of a "virtual mafia state"

And what was Russia the year before Putin became head of it? It's not like corruption came in with Putin. Most Russians I know think Putin has lowered the amount of corruption, and I agree. Russia was so corrupt it was barely functioning under Yeltsin. You're correct there is significant corruption in the government, but amazingly there was even more corruption before Putin came in.

> eternal dream of Russia as a global hegemon on par with the United States

Russia's GDP is one eighth of the US's. It's ratio was even lower back in 1917. Who thinks this? Not even Zhirinovsky thinks this is realistic.

> The Russian state has assassinated journalists

Then you link to a list of journalists killed by persons in Russia. Where's the link?

Who killed Chauncey Bailey in the US in 2007? Who killed Dona St. Plite? Who killed Manuel de Dios Unanue? Scores of journalists in the US have been killed who did not agree with the government foreign policy on Haiti, on Vietnam etc.

> and jailed political opponents with impunity

How about Manning? They want to extradite Snowden. Lynne Stewart is in jail. American jails are filled with political opponents. Oh, they broke the law? Well that's what they say in Russia too.

Re: Putin: A Plea for Caution From Russia

#189

Post by Sagat »

haberman wrote: post #102
cdash wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The entire point of the UN and "the law" is that Russia gets to veto the same as the US gets to veto.

That may be, but Putin is making a case against intervention while omitting his huge conflict of interest. He is making self-serving arguments under the guise of caring about lofty ideals that his own actions demonstrate he has no regard for.

Replace "Putin" with "Obama" is this sentence and there you have it, a perfect description of the United States. Waxing about freedom and human rights while manipulating and coercing the whole world according to their manifest destiny.

Re: Putin: A Plea for Caution From Russia

#190

Post by teamgb »

anigbrowl wrote: post #142
nikcub wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Syria broke one of the most important international laws that we have Syria are not a signatory to the Chemical Weapons Convention (neither are the USA, Israel or Russia) which is why Kerry has chosen his words carefully and described what the Syrian government did as against international norms , not laws. > The goal would not be to upset the balance of power or to cripple the Syrian army in any way This is the pa…

Syria are not a signatory to the Chemical Weapons Convention (neither are the USA, Israel or Russia) The US, Russia and Israel most certainly are signatories to the CWC. US and Russia both ratified in 1997, Israel has signed but not ratified. The CWC had the force of law once it had 65 signatories. Why would you not bother to check such a simple fact before posting? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemical_Weapons_Conve…

Why won't Israel ratify? Does Israel have chemical weapons?

Maybe there should be a UN resolution requiring all countries in the Middle East to declare and destroy their chemical weapons under UN supervision.

Post reply on HN