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

What is really happening in Ukraine

slideshare.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 324 posts

Re: What is really happening in Ukraine

#291

Post by strlen »

dimitar wrote: post #238
bitL wrote: post #11

Why don't you guys split Ukraine into two parts? The western part (pre-WW2's part of Poland) is pro-western, speaking Ukrainian, the eastern part is mostly inhabited by Russians that gravitate towards Moscow. Why nobody suggests this solution?

I upvoted this comment due to its honesty, but I disagree that Ukraine needs dividing. Let me bring up some points: * Why should apolitical people have their country divided? * Ukraine isn't divided by language, practically everyone can use both to a different extent and there is no miscommunication. The language that you use most of the time doesn't have to match your politics and often doesn't. * ~80% percent of th…

Indeed. What I see happening is young and liberal Ukrainians (whethers Russian, Ukranian, Tatar, and others) simply want their state to be like many other European countries: free, prosperous, democratic, but still multi-ethnic. In fact, they're actually asking for surrender of some aspects of national sovereignty by joining the EU.

Re: What is really happening in Ukraine

#292

Post by ctdonath »

stargazer-3 wrote: post #15
bitL wrote: post #11

Why don't you guys split Ukraine into two parts? The western part (pre-WW2's part of Poland) is pro-western, speaking Ukrainian, the eastern part is mostly inhabited by Russians that gravitate towards Moscow. Why nobody suggests this solution?

Why don't Americans split the USA into two parts, the red one and the blue one?

If you look at the red/blue split on election precinct levels, you'll see exactly why: the division is very distinct & consistent at the boundary between urban and rural. There is no single clear line (we tried that in the 1860s, didn't go very well), and the geographic (as contrasted with populous) bulk of the so-marked areas sharply disagree with the portrayal. Example: New York is a "dark blue" state, but something like 90% of the land votes "red", noting that the bulk of the population is highly concentrated in a half-dozen cities; Georgia is a "bright red" state, with the city of Atlanta strongly disagreeing. The sharp red/blue division is a waterline surrounding islands of high population; rural folk often do smile at the notion of separating from "blue" areas, but the latter would soon find that severely problematic and will do anything to prevent it.

Re: What is really happening in Ukraine

#293

Post by ctdonath »

tptacek wrote: post #289
ctdonath wrote: post #286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"OK" and "allowed" in this context practically refers to whether and what the host/target country will do about it. If that's "nothing" or very close thereto, then by Law Of The Jungle (which is the nature of military action) the answer is "yes". If that's "the perpetrators will be hunted down & killed, and the presiding government overthrown, and maybe another country's government will also get overthrown while we'r…

FWIW: The "upraised knife" quote is Oliver Wendell Holmes, in Brown v US, and goes "Detached reflection cannot be demanded in the presence of an uplifted knife." This is Holmes rejecting the idea that a defendant invoking self defense must carefully reason whether he can safely flee, rather than employing deadly force.

This is also the much-overlooked basis for "stand your ground" laws, which are not a license for citizens to kill, but are instead a reminder to the state that if deadly force is warranted then retreat is not a viable option to demand of the defendant.

Re: What is really happening in Ukraine

#294

Post by warfangle »

tptacek wrote: post #255
work_account_1 wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are those seriously the only options? Ignore, kill a US citizen with a drone strike, or have a full-out invasion resulting in hundreds or thousands killed? Citizenship can be revoked, but I'm pretty sure that matter needs to be decided by a judge, not the President. Am I incorrect?

What's the other option you're thinking about? The US cannot unilaterally revoke citizenship.

I guess there's that whole extraordinary rendition / kidnapping deal, but that'd probably have a death toll in the twenties to two-hundred fifties, depending on the tactics used*

*uneducated guess, informed by video games, with no bearing on real life whatsoever

Re: What is really happening in Ukraine

#295

Post by tptacek »

warfangle wrote: post #294
tptacek wrote: post #255

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's the other option you're thinking about? The US cannot unilaterally revoke citizenship.

I guess there's that whole extraordinary rendition / kidnapping deal, but that'd probably have a death toll in the twenties to two-hundred fifties, depending on the tactics used* *uneducated guess, informed by video games, with no bearing on real life whatsoever

"Extraordinary rendition" in al-Awlaki's case would have involved an invasion. He was hiding in a lawless province of southern Yemen controlled by AQAP.

Re: What is really happening in Ukraine

#296

Post by dimitar »

dmytrish wrote: post #252
dimitar wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I upvoted this comment due to its honesty, but I disagree that Ukraine needs dividing. Let me bring up some points: * Why should apolitical people have their country divided? * Ukraine isn't divided by language, practically everyone can use both to a different extent and there is no miscommunication. The language that you use most of the time doesn't have to match your politics and often doesn't. * ~80% percent of th…

I agree with all your points with a minor exception: Crimea does have more than 50% Russians[0] - it's the only region that has more Russians than Ukrainians. [0] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crimea#Demographics

Point taken, it appears that in Crimea 58% percent is Russian according to the 2001 census.

Re: What is really happening in Ukraine

#297

Post by ash »

tptacek wrote: post #277
ash wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We can't be sure what the result of that hypothetical trial would be. Otherwise why have a trial in the first place? It appears there was a lawsuit against U.S. It was brought by al-Awlaki father after U.S. put him on a kill list (while he was still alive). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anwar_al-Awlaki#Lawsuit_agains... .

What hypothetical trial? The USG could not apprehend al-Awlaki without invading Yemen. No trial was possible.

He could have been trialed in absentia, get death penalty and then get killed by a drone. I don't know if this scenario was even possible, let alone probable.

Re: What is really happening in Ukraine

#298

Post by tptacek »

ash wrote: post #297
tptacek wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What hypothetical trial? The USG could not apprehend al-Awlaki without invading Yemen. No trial was possible.

He could have been trialed in absentia, get death penalty and then get killed by a drone. I don't know if this scenario was even possible, let alone probable.

It is not, because trials in absentia, particularly criminal trials, and specifically capital trials, are unconstitutional in the US.

Re: What is really happening in Ukraine

#299

Post by nate_meurer »

tptacek wrote: post #284
nate_meurer wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

WW2 was a declared war, with uniformed soldiers, citizens of foreign nations. What does WW2 have to do with Al Awlaki? Am I misunderstanding your question?

The war against al Qaeda was a declared war. al Qaeda is specifically called out in the 2001 AUMF. Nobody in al Qaeda wears a uniform; they deliberately avoid them, to maximize the probability that their opponents will kill innocent civilians. And, we killed Americans fighting for the Nazis during WW2.

I'm unaware of any U.S.-sponsored assassinations of non-uniformed American citizens outside the theater of war during WW2. I'd be interested to know what you're referring to.

Look, I understand you're trying to support your argument by drawing comparisons to another better-defined war, but your particular choice of wars is baffling. Most often, comparisons are made to the American civil war; Lincoln's explorations of executive power in the face of an existential threat to the republic are profoundly relevant to this debate. WW2... I'm at a loss.

The 2001 AUMF, for example, is as far removed from the US declaration of war against the axis as you can get. It's everything that a typical formal declaration of war isn't, with the vaguest possible definitions of who the enemy is and where the battle can be fought. It has no real limits of any kind, and has henceforth been used as a license for indefinite military action.

>"Nobody in al Qaeda wears a uniform; they deliberately avoid them, to maximize the probability that their opponents will kill innocent civilians."

I may be a bit slow, but honestly I already knew this :) Yes this conflict is very different from the canonical 20th century wars which naturally shape our views of what war "ought" to be. Our laws and treaties are inadequate, and leave us in troubling gray areas, and I'm not convinced there are any good ways out.

BUT...

I'm also pretty sure a good solution is NOT to simply give the president the license to do whatever he wants to whomever he labels a "terrorist", regardless of location or citizenship. This is precisely the license assumed by the Bush administration during John Yoo's tenure. It appears to be the basis of your own assertions as well; please tell me I'm wrong.

Re: What is really happening in Ukraine

#300

Post by ash »

agrostis wrote: post #272
anovikov wrote: post #54

That has some elements of propaganda yes, but from my talks with many Ukrainians including several of my employees, this seem to be more or less fair depiction of the facts. Nobody calls protesters Nazis, but Russian media view of the subject is indeed extremely biased. What's worst of this is that the view of it from Eastern and Western sides of Ukraine is totally different, too (while both dislike Yanukovich strong…

Re. Russian media: I wonder, why their view (extremely biased, no doubt) could be of any concern to HN readers who are predominantly English-speaking and get much of their information from Internet sources?

Because there are Russian-speaking HNers too. And Ukrainian topic certainly attracted more of them to this thread.
Post reply on HN