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

Russia approves use of military in Ukraine

hosted.ap.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 255 posts

Re: Russia approves use of military in Ukraine

#41

Post by rangibaby »

brown9-2 wrote: post #32
ck2 wrote: post #24

The scariest part of all of this is the 6000 mystery troops that showed up without any logos on their uniforms or carriers or tanks. They took over the border, airport, etc. without any identification, simply guns to insist "do as we say". They even blocked the coast guard from leaving their ports. Which means they had this kind of force all prepared. Can you imagine if US troops showed up somewhere in huge numbers w…

I think the strange/comical part of this is that Russia thought that "we'll just take off our logos" was a good strategy for keeping a secret or saving face.

I think it was actually a brilliant FUD strategy to buy the Russians time and stop the West from intervening in a timely (from their perspective) fashion.

Re: Russia approves use of military in Ukraine

#42

Post by davidw »

enraged_camel wrote: post #38
davidw wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I am glad this has finally got to the top of HN Because once HN is aware of it, we'll... uhm... Send Putin some nasty Perl scripts? This, like almost all political / breaking news stories, is probably off topic for this site, given the guidelines: http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html "Off-Topic: Most stories about politics, or crime, or sports, unless they're evidence of some interesting new phenomenon. Video…

I really wish "complaining about stuff being off-topic" was also against the guidelines. Oh wait, it is: "Please don't submit comments complaining that a submission is inappropriate for the site. If you think something is spam or offtopic, flag it by going to its page and clicking on the "flag" link. (Not all users will see this; there is a karma threshold.) If you flag something, please don't also comment that you d…

If no one points it out, people won't learn.

You folks can downvote all you want. I am more than willing to spend my "karma" to attempt to preserve this site from politics.

Also, while we're being picky, "I wish it were", not "I wish it was".

Re: Russia approves use of military in Ukraine

#43

Post by Mchl »

Russia has a long tradition of "protecting"

"[...]The Soviet Government also cannot view with indifference the fact that the kindred Ukrainian and White Russian people, who live on Polish territory and who are at the mercy of fate, should be left defenceless. In these circumstances, the Soviet Government have directed the High Command of the Red Army to order troops to cross the frontier and to take under their protection the life and property of the population of Western Ukraine and Western White Russia."

People's Commissar for Foreign Affairs of the U.S.S.R. V. Molotov

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_invasion_of_Poland

Re: Russia approves use of military in Ukraine

#44

Post by Yeroc »

danmaz74 wrote: post #18
osipov wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"a part of sovereign country is being aggressively annexed by their neighbor"...sounds like you are getting your media fix from Fox News

Did Ukraine attack Russia in any way? No. Is Ukraine a sovereign Country? Yes. Is Russia sending troops to Ukraine? Yes. This is an invasion. Isn't an invasion an aggression? If not, what is?

I can't reply to gk1 for some reason, but he's exaggerating. Russian's are still a minority, not half the population as he/she suggests. According to wikipedia it's around 17% of the population.

Russia has a lot of control over Ukraine however since over half of their exports go to Russia (and those exports are generally of poor quality that likely couldn't be exported elsewhere) and they're also heavily reliant on Russia for natural gas...

Re: Russia approves use of military in Ukraine

#45

Post by jcomis »

gk1 wrote: post #17

See what happened in Ukraine's neighboring country, Moldova, 24 years ago: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_of_Transnistria Moldova had a population of ethnic Russians that lived on the Eastern bank of the river D'niest'r. (Similar to the Crimean region in Ukraine.) Eventually a civil war broke out, and Russia stepped in to back the ethnically Russian region (sound familiar?). The end result was a stalemate. A ceasef…

I once stumbled upon this youtube about Transnistria: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O6kub-Ehbd4 Really fascinating, I had never even heard of the place. They really make it seem like the country is dependent on black market arms deals of former Soviet stock. Is it actually true?

Re: Russia approves use of military in Ukraine

#46

Post by vonmoltke »

adamlj wrote: post #8

This could turn ugly really fast. If Russia attacks Ukraine the US and Britain would have to protect the borders of Ukraine, according to a treaty signed in 1994 [0]. If the US don't follow the treaty I guess we will know how much these treatys really are worth. [0] http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2570335/Former-Briti...

And nothing in the Budapest Memorandum requires or even permits a signatory to defend Ukraine against another signatory or anyone else. Obviously the Ukrainian government would ask for help in such a case, but there is no current treaty obligation to provide it.

Complicating this is that Russia claims Yanukovich is still the legitimate leader of Ukraine and that their actions thus far have his blessing, meaning their troops are not attacking Ukraine but supporting it against an armed insurrection. Nobody outside Russia's circle of friends believes that, of course, but its the fig leaf they are using.

Re: Russia approves use of military in Ukraine

#47

Post by justinzollars »

The Russians have a lot more to lose in this situation than we do. The Russian Mediterranean fleet is based out of Sevastopol, hence their movements into the Crimean Peninsula. While I sympathize with the people of the Ukraine Obama wasn't smart to bet our credibility in a situation where the Russians could not back down.

Re: Russia approves use of military in Ukraine

#48

Post by rangibaby »

aaron-lebo wrote: post #22
yardie wrote: post #16

It's a crazy situation all around. Russia has a military base in the Ukraine, in Crimea. If Cuba had a modern day revolution would the US not send in troops to Guantanamo? Would we be in the wrong for doing so? Even if the interim government was more US friendly?

I tend to agree that the US would take such steps, but if the US decided to control larger portions of the country than just their bases (which is what is sounds like Russia is doing), that is a major problem and more than just protecting a military asset.

Who would it be a major problem for if Cuba was ostensibly part of another state, yet had a population of 60% Americans and a newly anti-American government?

Re: Russia approves use of military in Ukraine

#50

Post by iaskwhy »

ck2 wrote: post #24

The scariest part of all of this is the 6000 mystery troops that showed up without any logos on their uniforms or carriers or tanks. They took over the border, airport, etc. without any identification, simply guns to insist "do as we say". They even blocked the coast guard from leaving their ports. Which means they had this kind of force all prepared. Can you imagine if US troops showed up somewhere in huge numbers w…

I would avoid this "can you imagine if US" thing. US has done all sorts of things, maybe even that one, I don't know. Most of the time, US has done so without any repercussion. Let's hope things go for the best this time in Ukraine, as Candide would say.
Post reply on HN