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

Kissinger's killing fields

theintercept.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 176 posts

Re: Kissinger's killing fields

#91

Post by kornhole »

int_19h wrote: post #57
kornhole wrote: post #41

Imperial wars and the people who waged them in the past are horrible, but the current wars are just and worthy of our support. This type of reporting perpetuates war by putting us in a loop of kill, repent and repeat. This is generally the type of reporting I find from this and other billionaire owned outlets. If you disagree, please reference an article where they are not in support of the current war in Ukraine.

The war in Ukraine is an imperial war, instigated by another empire. So if you consider imperial wars to be horrible, supporting their victims is a good way to make amends, no?

Your understanding supports this claim. If you go outside the mainstream media and this outlet, you might hear that the US is the only real empire with ~800 military bases around the world and their NATO that has expanded right up to Russia's borders. The best way to support the victims of Ukraine is to help them not die and suffer further by supporting peace talks, cease fires, and détente instead of sending them weapons that Russia will destroy along with them. It may be too late for Ukraine now. MSM has done its job already. We can only hope this does not go nuclear.

Re: Kissinger's killing fields

#92

Post by eynsham »

emodendroket wrote: post #68
b215826 wrote: post #7

"The illegal we do immediately. The unconstitutional takes a little longer." -- H. Kissinger. It's sad this deplorable human being was given the Nobel Peace Prize.

To be honest I'm not sure the megalomaniacs who pushed him aside are any better... in a way, better to deal with someone amoral who can be reasoned with than a true believer who thinks he's going to remake the Middle East in the image of America or whatever.

Kissinger wasn't exactly unimpeachably rational; see e.g. G.J. Bass's The Blood Telegram.

Re: Kissinger's killing fields

#93

Post by eynsham »

kornhole wrote: post #91
int_19h wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The war in Ukraine is an imperial war, instigated by another empire. So if you consider imperial wars to be horrible, supporting their victims is a good way to make amends, no?

Your understanding supports this claim. If you go outside the mainstream media and this outlet, you might hear that the US is the only real empire with ~800 military bases around the world and their NATO that has expanded right up to Russia's borders. The best way to support the victims of Ukraine is to help them not die and suffer further by supporting peace talks, cease fires, and détente instead of sending them we…

Personally I think it's up to the Ukrainians to decide whether they want to die fighting Russians, and I'm happy for my taxes to go to them if they want to keep going. The notion that the US is the only empire in the morally salient sense of the word is so laughably US-centric that only Western contrarians unironically believe it.

Re: Kissinger's killing fields

#95

Post by dragonwriter »

kornhole wrote: post #91
int_19h wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The war in Ukraine is an imperial war, instigated by another empire. So if you consider imperial wars to be horrible, supporting their victims is a good way to make amends, no?

Your understanding supports this claim. If you go outside the mainstream media and this outlet, you might hear that the US is the only real empire with ~800 military bases around the world and their NATO that has expanded right up to Russia's borders. The best way to support the victims of Ukraine is to help them not die and suffer further by supporting peace talks, cease fires, and détente instead of sending them we…

> NATO that has expanded right up to Russia's borders.

NATO was formed on Russia's borders, it didn’t need to expand to reach them.

And countries near you joining a regional security arrangement isn’t a casus belli, most especially not against completely different countries that you have already succeeded in getting the alliance not to admit, thereby also quelling the country’s interest in joining the alliance.

I know Russian propagandists like to point to the renewed interest in NATO membership Ukraine developed in 2014 for the war, the problem with that is that that interest (aside from not justifying the war in any case) was a direct result of Russia launching the war of aggression.

Re: Kissinger's killing fields

#96

Post by msla »

camillomiller wrote: post #65
msla wrote: post #51

So many people were wrong about Cambodia: https://globalist.yale.edu/in-the-magazine/glimpses/ghosts-o... > At the time, American scholars Noam Chomsky and Edward Herman argued that media claims of the Cambodian genocide were propaganda, designed to make the US look favorable in the ongoing Vietnam War. Swedish diplomat Gunnar Bergstrom dined with Pol Pot in Phnom Penh while the dictator’s cadres continued their geno…

So, let me understand: the mistake of a non-military intellectual who was not in a position of power at the time, and was proven wrong about his ideologically loaded perspective, is presented as an equivalent to the position of a high ranking official that physically commanded actions that killed thousands of innocent civilians?

No, of course not. I'm just providing context.

Re: Kissinger's killing fields

#97

Post by xorcist »

mythrwy wrote: post #90
AbrahamParangi wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's amazing to see how durable the opinion that everything in the world is somehow the fault of the US. Russia attempts to annex its neighbor - US fault. China invades Taiwan - the US PROVOKED them. It's warped.

I don't think you understand the history of the area nor what has taken place. Which is understandable if the lens is Western media. The British were after Crimea 180 years ago. (see charge of the light brigade) It's a big prize. And it had been Russian from the 1700s until 1956. And now it is again. Likewise many of the breakaway republics (until 1920s). And what happened to Russia in the 90s. How the borders of Ukr…

All of what you say could be factually correct, and it's still an imperialistic war instigated by Russia to subsume a neighbor. Accepting an Ukranian identity was never on the table.

War may be a racket, but history is what it is and now we're here. There are several morally corrupt parties, but that does not make them equal. That is a fallacy. Civilians suffer, and they suffer tremendously. We mustn't lose sight of right and wrong even when we're deep in moral relativism.

Re: Kissinger's killing fields

#98

Post by hayst4ck »

moffkalast wrote: post #36
b215826 wrote: post #7

"The illegal we do immediately. The unconstitutional takes a little longer." -- H. Kissinger. It's sad this deplorable human being was given the Nobel Peace Prize.

Once more the Sith will rule the galaxy, and we shall have... peace.

Words are indirect references to ideas. For some, particularly oppressors, peace references the idea of lack of physical violence. To other peace references the presence of justice.

If someone thinks peace is lack of violence, how do you even communicate with them when you think peace is the presence of justice. To the former war violates peace, to the latter war is required for peace.

Re: Kissinger's killing fields

#99

Post by vlovich123 »

mythrwy wrote: post #90
AbrahamParangi wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's amazing to see how durable the opinion that everything in the world is somehow the fault of the US. Russia attempts to annex its neighbor - US fault. China invades Taiwan - the US PROVOKED them. It's warped.

I don't think you understand the history of the area nor what has taken place. Which is understandable if the lens is Western media. The British were after Crimea 180 years ago. (see charge of the light brigade) It's a big prize. And it had been Russian from the 1700s until 1956. And now it is again. Likewise many of the breakaway republics (until 1920s). And what happened to Russia in the 90s. How the borders of Ukr…

> It's a big prize. And it had been Russian from the 1700s until 1956. And now it is again.

Except the USSR released it. Nothing to do with the US. And Russia trying to recapture it now has nothing to do with the fact that it’s been it’s own country for almost 50 years. Not to mention Ukraine has repeatedly sought entrance into NATO for exactly this fear and Russia has dissuaded NATO from considering it under threat of viewing it as a direct aggression against Russia.

> It's an economic war. Like most, or even all wars are in reality.

Whatever else I don’t think the war in Ukraine is an economic one. It seems more like a militarily and politically strategic one. Ukraine (specifically Crimea) is an extremely important naval base (at least that’s my impression). The US has also supported the pro-Western political factions within Ukraine which is a problem for Putin considering Ukraine’s proximity to the Russian border and Crimea. Additionally Putin regularly engages in acts of military aggression because it boosts his strongman image which helps him domestically, which, along with the political assassination, helps maintain his power over the political environment in Russia. Putin is already wealthy enough. His moves are about acquiring geopolitical power, not basic wealth.

Re: Kissinger's killing fields

#100

Post by hayst4ck »

eynsham wrote: post #92
emodendroket wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be honest I'm not sure the megalomaniacs who pushed him aside are any better... in a way, better to deal with someone amoral who can be reasoned with than a true believer who thinks he's going to remake the Middle East in the image of America or whatever.

Kissinger wasn't exactly unimpeachably rational; see e.g. G.J. Bass's The Blood Telegram .

I would appreciate the short version if you have the time to summarize it.
Post reply on HN