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

International Security and Estonia 2023

raport.valisluureamet.ee

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 265 posts

Re: International Security and Estonia 2023

#191

Post by orbital-decay »

ceejayoz wrote: post #51
01ce8c91872dd6d wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Russia tried to pull that shit in the United States , and "do nothing" was largely our response.

And 20 years before that, the US tried to pull that shit in Russia, with Yeltsin's second term in 1996. Not covertly, mind you, but while advertising it on every corner and in every media like NYT as a "fight against communism". (which it partly was!)

By that point, Yeltsin was universally hated for turning Russia back towards autocracy, for botched privatization, and the Chechen war. His rating rose from 6% to 53% in mere half a year before the elections, with the help of a massive campaign he organized using the stolen money. But the fact that the Clinton administration aligned with him and tried to "help" him with the massive NGO and media work (that's only the overt part) has been remembered by most who supported the democratic change.

Instead of Yeltsin, it could have been Nemtsov, who was truly popular during that time, but refused to run exactly because Clinton+Gore supported Yeltsin... Nemtsov, remember that name? US administration suddenly did, in 2015. Too bad they didn't before.

"Do nothing" was also Russians' response at the time (except for the brief investigation that was quickly stopped by the autocrat), but that was one of the turning points in the people's minds.

History truly rhymes.

Re: International Security and Estonia 2023

#192

Post by aa-jv »

ceejayoz wrote: post #189
aa-jv wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course, because that would destroy the frail moral authority that American's use to impose their war conditions across the globe... But, you know, those doing all the healing of the victims, have been keeping track: https://psr.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/body-count.pdf "Thus, the intense debate revolving around casualty figures is an important element in the discussion of whether the population supports such i…

Like I said, no one's claiming 2M. Even if we take the most aggressive estimate (out of those listed on Wikipedia) of 1M, that's not 5% of the population.

Maybe you should match your figures with those of the Physicians for Social Responsibility:

"However, should the number of Iraqis killed from the 2003 U.S. invasion until 2012 actually be around one million, as the analysis of the existing scientific studies presented in the present study suggests, this would represent 5% of the total population of Iraq .."

Of course Americans' aren't going to own up to the magnitude of this crime. But it should be noted that this report was issued in 2015 - and a lot more death has happened since then. 5% is a conservative estimate.

Re: International Security and Estonia 2023

#193

Post by consumer451 »

jnsaff2 wrote: post #141
consumer451 wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How does "the left" give them a pass exactly? Until recently, both Dems and Reps were happy to fund and expand NATO, which is basically and anti-russian expansion org. Now Republicans seem to have an issue with that though. I just don't understand what you mean by "Russia has gotten a pass?"

Chomsky, Greenwald and the lot.

I don't see any evidence that either of these two have influence on "the left's" policies as seen by actions and laws passed.

Re: International Security and Estonia 2023

#194

Post by ceejayoz »

aa-jv wrote: post #192
ceejayoz wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Like I said, no one's claiming 2M. Even if we take the most aggressive estimate (out of those listed on Wikipedia) of 1M, that's not 5% of the population.

Maybe you should match your figures with those of the Physicians for Social Responsibility: "However, should the number of Iraqis killed from the 2003 U.S. invasion until 2012 actually be around one million, as the analysis of the existing scientific studies presented in the present study suggests, this would represent 5% of the total population of Iraq .." Of course Americans' aren't going to own up to the magnitude…

The population of Iraq is 43 million. 1/43 isn't anywhere near 5%, and I'm not inclined to credit all of the high-end estimate of 1M to Americans.

Re: International Security and Estonia 2023

#195

Post by mananaysiempre »

sushzbdbehsh wrote: post #178
weberer wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You call this liberated? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holodomor

because a famine has never occured before in the history of civilisation

You have to admit, a famine in the region’s foremost exporter of grain, whose main export of that year was grain, takes spectacular mismanagement and neglect. That’s Soviet industrialization for you. I have to admit the genocide part makes no sense to me, though—I’ve seen no evidence that it was in any way targeted at Ukrainians specifically, only that they constituted a huge portion of the agricultural population at the time.

You don’t have to look that hard to find actual displaced peoples—the way the Russian Empire burned down all of Ossetia, the way Stalin ejected most of the population of Chechnya after that, the way Crimean Tatars constituted the bulk of the population in the Crimean peninsula and then suddenly Russians and Ukrainians did for some reason—there’s plenty. (If you really want to get into the history, care to find some speakers of the North Slavic languages for me?) It’s that the example does not seem to be a good one.

Re: International Security and Estonia 2023

#196

Post by qaq »

consumer451 wrote: post #153
qaq wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

None in russia's ruling class believes NATO is anti-russia that's a TV talking point for the masses.

The talking point afaik, is that NATO is coming to kill all russians, in Russia. The goal of NATO is to defend members against invasion. Who tends to invade those nations? Russia. BTW, I am fully in support in NATO. I think it's fair to say that NATO is an anti-Russian imperialist organization.

Hmm Russia can stop invading other countries ... In reality all of Russian elite was living in the west prior to the war. Lavrov's daughter in US Lavrov's Mistress and their children in UK. Putin's daughter in Netherlands and other daughter in South Korea and so on. Medvedev's son in California etc.

Re: International Security and Estonia 2023

#197

Post by qaq »

TheOtherHobbes wrote: post #152
qaq wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

pretty much everyone on the left too. Outside of Chechen wars I've never seen Russia criticised for it's colonial practices from prominent figures on the left.

Jeremy Corbyn has consistently criticised Putin's aggression since Georgia - far more consistently than anyone else on the Right or the Left in the UK. https://www.rferl.org/a/ukraine-corbyn-interview-russia-ceas...

This is for countries that gained independence from Russia not 100s of nations that are still part of it. Plus he parrots so many Russian talking points on stop arming Ukraine that it's not a very good look.

Re: International Security and Estonia 2023

#198

Post by sushzbdbehsh »

mananaysiempre wrote: post #195
sushzbdbehsh wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

because a famine has never occured before in the history of civilisation

You have to admit, a famine in the region’s foremost exporter of grain, whose main export of that year was grain, takes spectacular mismanagement and neglect. That’s Soviet industrialization for you. I have to admit the genocide part makes no sense to me, though—I’ve seen no evidence that it was in any way targeted at Ukrainians specifically, only that they constituted a huge portion of the agricultural population at…

it was collectivisation not industrialisation, there were droughts in Ukraine 3 years in a row, there was an epidemic, the kulaks were sabotaging farming

Re: International Security and Estonia 2023

#199

Post by asimpletune »

blub wrote: post #139
asimpletune wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The thing is that nonetheless every war ever has ended as part of a diplomatic process. When this doesn’t happen you have something like the Korean War, which is technically still going on. Also it’s bonkers that someone thinks Ukraine is untrustworthy this situation. Didn’t they give up all their nuclear weapons in a signed treaty under the guarantee that Russia promised to respect their territorial integrity? Doesn…

Nukes are an irrelevant issue that keeps getting brought up. Ukraine were pressured by Russia and the US and were offered incentives to hand the nuclear weapons to Russia. Furthermore the US even had to help Russia itself with the dismantling and disposing of some weapons over the years. It was in nobody’s interest for yet another country to have nukes when poverty and corruption would have almost certainly led to “l…

My point about territory is to point out one example, of many, that Russia will claim whatever it wants when it stands to benefit. This is because the OP was talking about trust, and I was giving reasons for disagreeing with their pov.

The nuclear stuff is also relevant because, again, nuclear disarmament was exchange for security (read: territory) guarantees. In this respect the issue of who can be trusted is clear.

Regarding your final point about both countries having corruption and being very close, sure. I don’t think I follow the point though. One country has invaded the other with an army after promising not to do so. That’s what is relevant here, not black markets or mafia or just a culture of cynicism and corruption. If Ukraine wanted to change and stop doing things the old way in 2014 then that’s good I guess.

Re: International Security and Estonia 2023

#200

Post by somenameforme »

ceejayoz wrote: post #194
aa-jv wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe you should match your figures with those of the Physicians for Social Responsibility: "However, should the number of Iraqis killed from the 2003 U.S. invasion until 2012 actually be around one million, as the analysis of the existing scientific studies presented in the present study suggests, this would represent 5% of the total population of Iraq .." Of course Americans' aren't going to own up to the magnitude…

The population of Iraq is 43 million. 1/43 isn't anywhere near 5%, and I'm not inclined to credit all of the high-end estimate of 1M to Americans.

The estimate of 1 million casualties is from 2007. We had not yet even begun withdrawing troops, and things like The War in Iraq (Islamic State) wouldn't even start until 2013. And that war was directly caused by our actions.

There's also the question of "when" when talking about a percent. The population of Iraq in 2003 (when the war started) was around 26 million. Their exceptionally rapid population growth is ironic when talking about us killing off a large chunk of their population, but relevant nonetheless. You end up with this weird scenario where Iraqi lives are measured (for those using percentages) less meaningful each year that passes.

Ultimately using percents is probably just a bad idea, and it's not like it's necessary to contextualize here how killing whether hundreds of thousands of some low millions of people, primarily civilians, is a really awful thing to do, let alone in a war based entirely on fabricated evidence.

Post reply on HN