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

Visible from space, Sudan's bloodied sands expose a massacre of thousands

telegraph.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 211 posts

Re: Visible from space, Sudan's bloodied sands expose a massacre of thousands

#201

Post by fakedang »

alephnerd wrote: post #190
fakedang wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You think the Abu Dhabi Qatari rivalry began in 2011? 1700s more like it.

It ebbs and flows depending on whether it's an al Khalifa or an al Thani who controls Doha. Before the 1995 coup, it was the al Khalifa and al Ghufran clan that was in control, and they had both familial and economic relations in KSA and Abu Dhabi. Khaleeji (like everyone else) are fine putting family history aside if it does not interfere with monetary incentives, and the crux of the issue has been clashing LNG clai…

Now I know 100% you're talking out of your ass. The Al Khalifas rule Bahrain. The Al Thanis rule Qatar. That bloodless coup you were talking about? That was the father of the current Qatari emir deposing his father when he was abroad (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1995_Qatari_coup_d%27%C3%A9tat).

The current emir succeeded him peacefully after the father stepped down.

All Arab families are intermarried in various ways, but the Al Nahyans have always been historical rivals to the Al Thanis, and have always tried to invade Qatar. The Qataris were invited to join with the UAE, along with Bahrain, but refused because they figured Abu Dhabi would take the leading role eventually (which it has). In all of the UAE, only Dubai remains more autonomous than usual because they were able to develop on their own with the guidance of the current sheikh of Dubai.

Re: Visible from space, Sudan's bloodied sands expose a massacre of thousands

#202

Post by Wazzymandias »

dzhiurgis wrote: post #39
shmageggy wrote: post #4

> ...the United Arab Emirates (UAE) accused of backing the RSF with supplies and mercenaries... And also helping to launder Hemedti's gold via Dubai. https://globalwitness.org/en/campaigns/conflict-resources/ex...

How come dubai hasn’t experienced any sanctions yet? They’ve been laundering everything for ages, esp Russian oil. How are they so immune to this?

Similar reasons why Israel hasn't experienced any sanctions yet despite their ongoing genocide against the Palestinians

Re: Visible from space, Sudan's bloodied sands expose a massacre of thousands

#203

Post by BobaFloutist »

cess11 wrote: post #197
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> likely that the US is kept at bay by trading UAE acceptance of Israel in return for diplomatic cover and military passivity Sudanese tensions predate the current mess in Gaza, as well as the Abraham Accords. At this point I’m surprised we aren’t seeing people conclude that we invaded Afghanistan and Iraq because of Israel.

The last time Janjaweed-style gangs engaged in similar acts of apartheid and genocide in Darfur the US opposed it and openly called it a genocide. This was in 2007. I'm not sure when UAE ramped up funding and equipping of similar groups in the Sahel and Maghreb, but when Libya collapses in 2011 they decided to do it there and a few years later they rebrand Janjaweed-militias as RSF and expects them to professionalise…

The US got (justifiably) yelled at for the war in Iraq, and again (less justifiably) in Libya and Afghanistan, and took the leas that military interference is always wrong, despite the obvious counterexamples of Syria and Crimes.

This is complicated by a lot of the yelling coming from US peace activists, who took advantage of their complete vindication in Iraq (and Vietnam before that) to pretend that there's a through-line and preventing a dictator from bombing dissidents or a naked land-grab-war-of-aggression is identical to starting our own naked-land-grab-war-of-aggression.

Re: Visible from space, Sudan's bloodied sands expose a massacre of thousands

#204

Post by isr »

tomhow wrote: post #200
isr wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Please don't fulminate, or make personal attacks like "Typical Hasbara lying", or use capitals for emphasis, or post flamebait or engage in ideological battle on HN. We've had to remind you to observe the guidelines before. Topics like this normally don't get discussed on HN because they inevitably turn into flame wars. If you can't participate in a thread like this without doing it in a flamewar style, please don't…

Hmm, and the outright deceitful and insidious nature of the post I was responding to? Where someone twists the facts in their very first sentence to hide the fact that the victims of that slaughter were themselves Muslim - just to justify an Islamophobic tirade for the remainder of their post ...

what do you call that? And how exactly does one counter such obvious lies of omission, without using the word "lying"?

"Sorry dear chap, but I believe you are intentionally hiding key facts here,namely the identity of the victims themselves"?

And btw, where was the flamebait? My 2nd paragraph is as close to a precise summary of what's actually happening as you can get, without hiding the identities of anyone involved.

Re: Visible from space, Sudan's bloodied sands expose a massacre of thousands

#205

Post by tomhow »

isr wrote: post #204
tomhow wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please don't fulminate, or make personal attacks like "Typical Hasbara lying", or use capitals for emphasis, or post flamebait or engage in ideological battle on HN. We've had to remind you to observe the guidelines before. Topics like this normally don't get discussed on HN because they inevitably turn into flame wars. If you can't participate in a thread like this without doing it in a flamewar style, please don't…

Hmm, and the outright deceitful and insidious nature of the post I was responding to? Where someone twists the facts in their very first sentence to hide the fact that the victims of that slaughter were themselves Muslim - just to justify an Islamophobic tirade for the remainder of their post ... what do you call that? And how exactly does one counter such obvious lies of omission, without using the word "lying"? "So…

Some version of the second sentence could be fine if you omitted the all-caps words and belligerent tone. The phrases "Typical Hasbara lying", "Birds of a feather flock together" are flamebait, along with the overall hostile and escalatory tone of that comment, along with this entire comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45788190.

This style of commenting is a pattern extending back at least a year, maybe longer. We've already asked you before to do better.

The comment you replied to was also flagged and killed, and also wasn't what we like to see, but that doesn’t justify or excuse further escalation from you.

If you expect others to conduct themselves to a high standard, you need to show a sincere intent to conduct yourself to a high standard, and it makes it harder for us to take action against an earlier comment when a later comment escalates so egregiously.

None of this is personal or specific to this comment or any issue. The guidelines have been in place since HN began and have changed little. They apply equally to everyone. By participating on HN, you agree to adhere to the guidelines. If you don't like HN's guidelines, you can choose not to participate.

Re: Visible from space, Sudan's bloodied sands expose a massacre of thousands

#206

Post by culi »

spookie wrote: post #145
culi wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Looking into the past everyone looks like a barbarian. And yes, the use of the word was meant as sarcasm.

Not so. There are plenty of cultures that don't follow this. Off the top of my head I can think of the Sami people for whom we have zero archeological evidence of wars. They are not unique either. It just so happens that the barbaric cultures spread more rapidly than the peaceful ones

Re: Visible from space, Sudan's bloodied sands expose a massacre of thousands

#207

Post by [deleted] »

defrost wrote: post #107
victorbjorklund wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

says it was not supplied by US/UK but rather UAE.

UK|US weapons via an intermediary has been an ongoing handwashing pretence for many decades. eg: Very British bribery: the whistleblower who exposed the UK’s dodgy arms deals with Saudi Arabia ~ https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/aug/07/long-read-brit... discusses some of that history back to the 1970s. It has gone on far longer than that. Both the US and UK governments are aware of where their weapons are destin…

[deleted]

Re: Visible from space, Sudan's bloodied sands expose a massacre of thousands

#208

Post by victorbjorklund »

defrost wrote: post #107
victorbjorklund wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

says it was not supplied by US/UK but rather UAE.

UK|US weapons via an intermediary has been an ongoing handwashing pretence for many decades. eg: Very British bribery: the whistleblower who exposed the UK’s dodgy arms deals with Saudi Arabia ~ https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/aug/07/long-read-brit... discusses some of that history back to the 1970s. It has gone on far longer than that. Both the US and UK governments are aware of where their weapons are destin…

That is like saying Russia is suppling Ukraine with weapons to kill Russians because Russia has exported weapons to X that then made it to Ukraine. That is just silly claiming Russia is a supplier of arms to Ukraine.

Re: Visible from space, Sudan's bloodied sands expose a massacre of thousands

#209

Post by defrost »

victorbjorklund wrote: post #208
defrost wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

UK|US weapons via an intermediary has been an ongoing handwashing pretence for many decades. eg: Very British bribery: the whistleblower who exposed the UK’s dodgy arms deals with Saudi Arabia ~ https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/aug/07/long-read-brit... discusses some of that history back to the 1970s. It has gone on far longer than that. Both the US and UK governments are aware of where their weapons are destin…

That is like saying Russia is suppling Ukraine with weapons to kill Russians because Russia has exported weapons to X that then made it to Ukraine. That is just silly claiming Russia is a supplier of arms to Ukraine.

It's more like stating that Margaret Thatcher knew what her son was up to and could have stopped him had she wanted to.

It's exactly embracing the notion that five eyes track the volumes of their arms sales and are indiffeent to their arms being used to kill children, civilians, etc. as long as they're not being stockpiled for use against the originating nation in any significant volume.

I'd suggest that Russia is less adept here than the US or the UK if they're being harmed by thir own supply.

Re: Visible from space, Sudan's bloodied sands expose a massacre of thousands

#210

Post by victorbjorklund »

defrost wrote: post #209
victorbjorklund wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is like saying Russia is suppling Ukraine with weapons to kill Russians because Russia has exported weapons to X that then made it to Ukraine. That is just silly claiming Russia is a supplier of arms to Ukraine.

It's more like stating that Margaret Thatcher knew what her son was up to and could have stopped him had she wanted to. It's exactly embracing the notion that five eyes track the volumes of their arms sales and are indiffeent to their arms being used to kill children, civilians, etc. as long as they're not being stockpiled for use against the originating nation in any significant volume. I'd suggest that Russia is le…

No, it is not. It is the exact same situation. Do YOU think it make sense to put a headline claiming Russia is supplying weapons to Ukraine? Is that an accurate description of reality?
Post reply on HN