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

No Russian

skibinsky.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 91 posts

Re: No Russian

#81

Post by vadman »

avmich wrote: post #76
egao1980 wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

NATO is expanding and Russians were not happy about that way before current situation. Being Crimean myself I would say that so much feared 'annexation' was forced on to Russia by Crimean local establishment. Not that Russia was against it though. As a matter of fact - throughout 23 of the Ukrainian independence it was never less than 65% of Crimeans that were ready to join Russia. Ukrainian crisis is the result of b…

I think saying "NATO is expanding" you mean that Ukrainian choice of signing agreements with EU left Russia no choice. From Ukrainian point of view, they are an independent country - which may, at different times, get into different unions with different partners. So, Russian (actually, Russian government) point of view that any Ukrainian motion towards EU signals a threat to Russia doesn't justify Russian hostilitie…

Ukraine is acting in its (perceived) interests, and Russia -- in its own. Where is the problem?

The thing is, there is a handful of superpowers in the world, which dictate the geopolitical motions. A smaller country bordering a superpower can be friends with it, be strictly neutral (see Finland) or be friends with opposing superpowers (see Ukraine). The last scenario means you are asking for all sorts of shit to happen to you. It's not "good", but that's how things are.

Re: No Russian

#82

Post by cafard »

hackerboos wrote: post #67
acqq wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This article isn't actually about the shooting down of any flights. Have you read it? It actually writes: "The mass murder of passengers & crew of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 using Russian’s weapons and (most likely) by hands of Russian military squad exposed to the world that Russia is now complicit in committing crimes against humanity." Now what do you think about proved US and Ukrainian plane shootings? Aren't…

>Aren't they crimes? Absolutely and it's unlikely that those incidents resulted in sanctions against those countries. It just highlights how hypercritical the US, Ukraine and the rest of the international community are. All three of these states commit crimes - none of them should be excused.

The US never denied that it had shot down the Iranian 737. It paid compensation to the families of victims. Which is the third state you have in mind?

Re: No Russian

#83

Post by Lasker »

egao1980 wrote: post #63
vezzy-fnord wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

videos of transported missiles, intercepted calls, orders of obstructing access to crash site... But do they specifically incriminate one side?

Missiles in video appeared to be Ukrainian - people identified street and city, calls has strong indication of being mixed up from several sources, OSCE dismissed all talks about obstructing access to the crash site. So the reasonable thing to do now is to wait for ICAO verdict. Regardless of who actually hit the plane, Ukraine is still to blame for directing it to fly over the war zone.

Stop spreading kremlin lies. Just one your line contains 3 of them.

And your attempt to blame Ukraine is just pathetic.

Like a robber blaming the victim because he went his way.

Re: No Russian

#84

Post by Lasker »

egao1980 wrote: post #57
songco wrote: post #34

At least facebook/twitter/github/most google services not blocked in Russian....

Living in UK I can say that something is terribly wrong with freedom of speech and objectivity of mass media - Russian media reports all possible scenarios, blames Putin, Ukraine, rebels, but UK press is all focused on blaming Russia. Where's the alternative? UK media is free to blame Russia? Remember that Russian gay propaganda ban? So much noise, and at the same time Saudi Arabia executes gay people and there's no…

Show me just one blame for Putin from Russian mainstream media. Or someone calling separatists a 'rebels'. They prefer to hide them under credible-sounded 'militia', you'll have to knew it if you're watching kremlin TV.

Re: No Russian

#85

Post by hackerboos »

cafard wrote: post #82
hackerboos wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Aren't they crimes? Absolutely and it's unlikely that those incidents resulted in sanctions against those countries. It just highlights how hypercritical the US, Ukraine and the rest of the international community are. All three of these states commit crimes - none of them should be excused.

The US never denied that it had shot down the Iranian 737. It paid compensation to the families of victims. Which is the third state you have in mind?

So by that logic if Russia admits supplying arms to rebels it's ok?

The three states are US, Ukraine and Russia.

Re: No Russian

#86

Post by lafar6502 »

Veinlash wrote: post #25
jakozaur wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It wasn't proved, but there is not a believable alternative scenario. There are videos of transported missiles, intercepted calls, orders of obstructing access to crash site... John Kerry even says there is "Enormous amount of evidence" for that scenario. Still not 100% sure, but 99% yes.

For a country to officially start condemning or placing blame on Russia there would have to be irrefutable evidence I'd say. I wouldn't want to get into a seriously heated conflict without being 100% sure, so even 99% wouldn't be good enough if I were in the driver seat. Result being people all standing around, shifty-eyed, 99% sure Russia and the separatists are behind the shooting, no one dares throw the first punc…

But what kind of evidence do you consider irrefutable? This is a murky situation where officially there are no russian soldiers in Ukraine and the 'separatists' are just volunteers who happen to have military training and access to russian weapons. You know, nothing special, such things happen in every country.

Re: No Russian

#87

Post by c23gooey »

hackerboos wrote: post #85
cafard wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US never denied that it had shot down the Iranian 737. It paid compensation to the families of victims. Which is the third state you have in mind?

So by that logic if Russia admits supplying arms to rebels it's ok? The three states are US, Ukraine and Russia.

to continue with the example above - would also mean that Russia engage in some sort of compensation with the victims

Re: No Russian

#88

Post by lcedp »

acqq wrote: post #78
lcedp wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh, it's simple. Separatists were posting how happy they were about bringing down the Ukrainian military plane. In some hours it turned out it was MH17, the messages were deleted then. (I've seen the post myself, not a screenshot).

How can you know if separatist on the internet are real rebel commanders or just some hotheads in their mommies' basements or (gasp) other intelligence agencies? How do you know that nobody took over their digital identities? We're on HN we all know how easy it is.

I assume I know that since that account has a rich history of timely reports, quite a few with unique media content. The account is being continued to be filled with the same inside information which indicates it is unlikely to be hacked.

Re: No Russian

#89

Post by ianphughes »

DominikR wrote: post #47
baddox wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most people will probably say the key difference is that the US incident was a mistaken attempt to defend an imminent attack, rather than a terrorist attack. Being perhaps more cynical, I would say the key difference is that Russia is not the biggest kid on the playground.

Really? What makes you believe that the incident a few days ago didn't happen for the exact same reasons? We do not even know who shot the plane down, but what we do know is that the captain who shot down the Iranian plane received medals and was promoted after the incident.

Also promoted and received medals for making visual confirmation of a civilian flight and still shot it down: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_Air_Lines_Flight_007

Re: No Russian

#90

Post by un1x0nly »

DominikR wrote: post #46

This is one of the most racist articles I've read in a long time. But it's the US enemy, so I guess it's okay to write: "The population at large is, statistically speaking, not very bright. Many are deranged from overuse of alcohol or drugs." You could easily replace the word "Russian" with the N-word and post this article on some white power blog.

And this was written by a Russian.
Post reply on HN