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

Statement from Roman Abramovich

chelseafc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 151 posts

Re: Statement from Roman Abramovich

#91

Post by rodgerd »

honkycat wrote: post #19

This war just makes 0 sense to me. Are things so horrible in Russia they feel they need to invade and subjugate another country? I realize you could make the same argument for the US invasion of Afganistan, or Iraq, or many many other idiotic blunders the US political class has made to undermine the US's ability to weigh in on these sorts of situations. I suppose the difference is that Ukraine is a healthy liberal de…

> This war just makes 0 sense to me.

Killing one third of the population of Chechnya made zero sense. Murdering so many people in Grozny that it's still only a third of the population pre-war makes zero sense. Legalising domestic violence makes zero sense. Mass murder in Syria makes zero sense. Mass killing of gay Chechens makes zero sense. Moving to criminalise homosexuality makes zero sense.

Much of what Putin has done has made zero sense for a very long time.

Re: Statement from Roman Abramovich

#92

Post by paxys »

machineleaning wrote: post #86
paxys wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well blame is a tricky word, and I'm sure he did not personally authorize the attack or had any say in it, but it is quite indisputable that he has been a huge factor in propping up Putin for the last 20+ years.

Is it? My understanding is that he completely peaced out of Russia shortly after Putin came to power and has been uninvolved in Russian affairs for ~15 years.

Putin literally became president under his recommendation to Yeltsin. When Putin was warring with the oligarch class and billionaires like Berezovsky, Gusinsky, and Khodorkovsky were imprisoned/killed and their assets seized, Abramovich kept hold of his wealth and influence. He was the one who hand picked Medvedev as Putin's successor in 2008. There are regular articles in the news about his meetings with Putin and exchange of lavish gifts. They are said to still maintain a close friendship.

It's hilarious that people are buying his PR transformation into some kind of philanthropist. Guy was and is rotten to the core.

Re: Statement from Roman Abramovich

#93

Post by senko »

slibhb wrote: post #56
0xB31B1B wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Oligarchs" are people who were friends with Boris Yeltsin in the 90s. USSR was collapsing, government upheaval, etc. In this period, the government of Russia sold off state owned enterprises for extremely cheap prices, fractions of a penny on the dollar, to Russian nationals. The state owned enterprises were things like mines, shipping companies, iron smelting, etc. The people who bought these state owned enterprise…

You might not be using it "as a generic slur for billionaire" but lots of other people are. Further, according to many people, every rich person is a "beneficiary in a kleptocratic system".

Those people clearly do not live in countries in which this is literally true, like Russia and many Eastern European countries.

Otherwise the difference would be blindingly obvious to them.

Think Bezos is filthy rich? Imagine the president selling Library of Congress to him for the nominal price of the building(s) and paper stored.

It's next level.

Re: Statement from Roman Abramovich

#94

Post by rodgerd »

slibhb wrote: post #56
0xB31B1B wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Oligarchs" are people who were friends with Boris Yeltsin in the 90s. USSR was collapsing, government upheaval, etc. In this period, the government of Russia sold off state owned enterprises for extremely cheap prices, fractions of a penny on the dollar, to Russian nationals. The state owned enterprises were things like mines, shipping companies, iron smelting, etc. The people who bought these state owned enterprise…

You might not be using it "as a generic slur for billionaire" but lots of other people are. Further, according to many people, every rich person is a "beneficiary in a kleptocratic system".

They aren't going to give your their money if you shill for them, you know.

Re: Statement from Roman Abramovich

#95

Post by helloworld11 »

pingec wrote: post #34
honkycat wrote: post #19

This war just makes 0 sense to me. Are things so horrible in Russia they feel they need to invade and subjugate another country? I realize you could make the same argument for the US invasion of Afganistan, or Iraq, or many many other idiotic blunders the US political class has made to undermine the US's ability to weigh in on these sorts of situations. I suppose the difference is that Ukraine is a healthy liberal de…

I've found this article interesting https://www.salon.com/2022/02/26/the-ukraine-and-how-we-got-...

Quite aside from all the injustices, lies and pushes for military action by the U.S. since the end of the Cold War, this article takes a blatantly one-sided view that essentially seems to state "well, you shouldn't have pushed Russia into a corner. The invasion is your fault".

As another reply below says, no mention of Russia's own military aggression with neighbors under Putin's rule or of the fact that if NATO grew closer to the country's borders, it mostly did so with the full willingness of the countries that later joined. Having Russia close to them caused a choice and that choice (fully within their rights as countries) was to become closer with the NATO alliance and western Europe because they found it preferable to possible Russian domination.

The writer describes war and military provocation as a lucrative business and insinuates that western greed motivated the expansion of NATO, but sidesteps that Russia's own military/political moves are often no less motivated by the same things where possible.

Re: Statement from Roman Abramovich

#96

Post by slibhb »

rodgerd wrote: post #94
slibhb wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You might not be using it "as a generic slur for billionaire" but lots of other people are. Further, according to many people, every rich person is a "beneficiary in a kleptocratic system".

They aren't going to give your their money if you shill for them, you know.

Not everything comes down to material interest. When you make this comment, you reveal something about yourself.

Re: Statement from Roman Abramovich

#97

Post by adolph »

vernie wrote: post #18
nemo44x wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it implies Ukrainian and Russian (and other!) people. It's very much not taking a stance and if anything agreeing that the war has to be done, people will unfortunately be hurt, and he plans on helping them all. But still supports the invasion.

Calling it a war is already a departure from Russia's "special military operation" messaging.

  sed -e 's;"special military operation";"special" military operation;'
Transported by short bus

Re: Statement from Roman Abramovich

#98

Post by squarefoot »

benjaminwootton wrote: post #60

The guy is giving away £3 billion+ to charity and writing off a £1.5 billion loan, and yet the whole thread is looking for holes in the short statement. Nice gesture I say as he didn’t start the war.

He's always been a strong supporter of Putin, and is selling his property only because there was serious risk that it would have been seized. He, among other billionaires, contributed to keep Putin in power, so albeit not directly involved, he has his share of responsibilities.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-60506563

Re: Statement from Roman Abramovich

#99

Post by sbmthakur »

pingec wrote: post #34
honkycat wrote: post #19

This war just makes 0 sense to me. Are things so horrible in Russia they feel they need to invade and subjugate another country? I realize you could make the same argument for the US invasion of Afganistan, or Iraq, or many many other idiotic blunders the US political class has made to undermine the US's ability to weigh in on these sorts of situations. I suppose the difference is that Ukraine is a healthy liberal de…

I've found this article interesting https://www.salon.com/2022/02/26/the-ukraine-and-how-we-got-...

> There was a near universal understanding among diplomats and political leaders at the time that any attempt to expand NATO was foolish, an unwarranted provocation against Russia that would obliterate the ties and bonds that happily emerged at the end of the Cold War.

Did they put it on some legal paper?

Re: Statement from Roman Abramovich

#100

Post by alkonaut »

The positive: he calls it a war - which is a very clear distancing from Moscow.

The more questionable: “all victims”. The correct call would be to clarify that all victims are on the Ukrainian side. That would have made an even clearer message against Putin too.

Post reply on HN