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

Why Vladimir Putin and his entourage want war

economist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 267 posts

Re: Why Vladimir Putin and his entourage want war

#231

Post by gfosco »

HWR_14 wrote: post #220
gfosco wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's make your examples actually match the structure I set up. You've created some weird analogies that don't relate. A: I want to take your purse. B: If you take my purse, I will kill you. If A continues to try and take the purse, A is obviously the agitator. A: I want to leave you. B: If you leave, I will kill you. We agree B is a monster here, and this is a police matter, not global politics. Maybe we can create…

You flipped my first example. I said A said "I don't want to give you my purse" B says "give me your purse or I will shoot you". And I like how the only example you can think of where the word "agitator" flows well is when someone is trying to stop two consenting adults from having sex. Because clearly the person B on your last example is an asshole who is wrong, and you're using "agitator" to just mean "willing to i…

I flipped your first example because it doesn't relate to the situation we're talking about and what you were responding to.

B isn't trying to take something from A. A is trying to woo (something near B) and B is promising consequences.

It no longer has anything to do about who is right, or what is right... that black and white right and wrong are no longer relevant.

If B is willing to back up the claims, A has to seriously consider their choices.

It's pretty close to the same in my example with the cousin... It doesn't matter if B is an asshole or is wrong, what does that have to do with anything?

The funny thing is, I don't think I'm even taking a position on the actual argument... I just think there's so much narrative control that many aren't even capable of considering alternative explanations.

Re: Why Vladimir Putin and his entourage want war

#232

Post by krzyk »

t-3 wrote: post #88
krzyk wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You mean after the coup that placed Russia siding president in Ukraine?

The regularly-scheduled coup agreed upon by citizens, aka an election?

Elections with buses filled with Donbas miners having special voting permits that alloved them voting multiple times?

Yeah,cool ekections there, with no oversight.

Re: Why Vladimir Putin and his entourage want war

#233

Post by unclebucknasty »

sudosysgen wrote: post #155
unclebucknasty wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only way this argument makes sense is if Ukraine's sovereignty is not acknowledged.

That's not true. It's not just up to Ukraine to join NATO, it has to get approval for it. Beyond that, the US directly and blatantly meddled in Ukrainian affairs to make that happen.

It's true. Even your comment suggests Ukraine is not a sovereign nation, else you'd acknowledge they are free to join any alliance they wish.

Re: Why Vladimir Putin and his entourage want war

#234

Post by unclebucknasty »

Day1 wrote: post #170

It looks more and more like this is propaganda from the US—Which is rather unfortunate for my oil holdings.

It looks more and more like the western world is acknowledging Russia's prior aggression in the region, and their current aggression that sees them amassing upwards of 200k troops at Ukraine's border.

Suggestions otherwise are conspicuously in-step with Russian propaganda.

Re: Why Vladimir Putin and his entourage want war

#235

Post by coliveira »

Day1 wrote: post #170

It looks more and more like this is propaganda from the US—Which is rather unfortunate for my oil holdings.

This is what it looks like, especially when the US government is day and night trying to incite a war between Ukraine and Russia. Because Russia is not buying it, they are constantly "reading the mind" of the Russians and saying what they will do, even though neither Russian nor Ukraine are saying they want war.

In the end, just follow the money: if Russia enters into a war, the US is the only to benefit, the same way that in WW2 the US was the great beneficiary. It is always nice to incite wars far away from your country, when you're the main seller of weapons.

Re: Why Vladimir Putin and his entourage want war

#236

Post by [deleted] »

jabagigo wrote: post #69
daniel-cussen wrote: post #8

So to begin with, fact, Putin is a better chess player than Biden. You might think, oh it's just a board game, computers are better at it. You could say that. Apparently the strategy right now is get right next to the border of Ukraine and do military exercises, then watch as NATO loses its shit with every passing second.

I think the question the article brings up is, why is Russia playing chess against Ukraine and other such countries? Why isn't Russia instead building bridges, establishing stronger economic bonds, and addressing its own issues inside itself to help increase the quality of life of its people? And they seem to answer it by saying that Putin and entourage love chess and are really good at it, that's why. Thus the concl…

[deleted]

Re: Why Vladimir Putin and his entourage want war

#237

Post by unclebucknasty »

macilacilove wrote: post #172
unclebucknasty wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having little to lose is not a rationale for doing something. You've still not explained how the West is the aggressor in the face of the continued overt Russian military aggression that we can all see.

Ukraine is at the brink of a humanitarian catastrophe, where Western powers regularly encourage color revolutions bringing the country to a point of civil war. "The west" has virually no skin in the game but leaders would prefer Russia sanctioned and isolated so that once again US has unchallanged superpower status. Meanwhile, as discussed, Russia, Ukraine and EU have a lot to lose in a devastating and bitter war. At…

Aside from the fact that some of your statements are plainly incorrect, you're claiming that the U.S. is fomenting war simply because it wants "unchallenged superpower status".

That is obviously quite vague and unrevealing. A very elementary assertion that elides calls for verifiable facts.

Worse, Russia has rolled tanks in the region, annexed territory, and continues to fight a separatist war. The idea that they are somehow not the aggressor completely defies all reason and observable reality.

Likewise, the idea that they are somehow keeping stability and prosperity in the region through their overtly imperialistic military aggression in an otherwise peaceful context is directly contrary to the reality. Ukraine simply wishes to remain a free and sovereign democratic nation. If Russia were not invading and threatening them, there would be no conflict.

Three comments later, and you have still failed to explain how the West is the aggressor.

Re: Why Vladimir Putin and his entourage want war

#238

Post by throw0101a »

sudosysgen wrote: post #116
throw0101a wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why shouldn't it be expanding eastwards? Seems to me that if a bunch of countries want to get together to protect each other, they have every right to do so. Especially when a near-by country has a habit of being an aggressor: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Chechen_War * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Chechen_War * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russo-Georgian_War * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annexatio…

If NATO was nothing but a self defense pact, I'd tend to agree, but then if that was the case no one in NATO would want to expand too much. NATO is not just a self defence organisation. It's an offensive tool. NATO has gone into more offensive missions (at least 3) than truly defensive missions (literally zero - I don't count the invasion and occupation of Afghanistan as a defensive act). For many members of NATO, th…

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_invasion

"How Russia Got So Big":

* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X1R_ycU_fS4

My ancestry is Slavic. You're going to go have a hard time convincing me not to worry about Russia.

Re: Why Vladimir Putin and his entourage want war

#239

Post by foverzar »

rosndo wrote: post #191
rdtsc wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s the Georgia playbook as well. They encouraged Georgia to fight the Russians. Georgians lost territory and lives and the American and Western allies shrugged and said “oh well, that’s unfortunate”.

Your comment implies that Georgia might have had better ways out of that situation, that’s probably not true.

Trying to solve an ancient ethnic conflict by force was definitely not the best way to go.

Expecting that western countries will start a third world war just to help you get rid of all those inconvenient Russian peacekeepers was simply stupid.

It seems to me that people often seem to forget that Georgia was never a "good guy" in that conflict: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgian–Ossetian_conflict

Re: Why Vladimir Putin and his entourage want war

#240

Post by sudosysgen »

unclebucknasty wrote: post #233
sudosysgen wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not true. It's not just up to Ukraine to join NATO, it has to get approval for it. Beyond that, the US directly and blatantly meddled in Ukrainian affairs to make that happen.

It's true. Even your comment suggests Ukraine is not a sovereign nation, else you'd acknowledge they are free to join any alliance they wish.

But they're not free to join NATO, are they? They need approval of all member states to do so. Last time they tried, France and Germany almost prevented them from joining. If they are free to choose NATO, why aren't they a member right now? Why aren't they a EU member? Why isn't Turkey a EU member?
Post reply on HN