A genocide against the Rohingya may be looming
nytimes.com
nytimes.com
"Though the Rohingya armed groups carried out attacks on security forces and civilians on 9 October 2016 in which nine policemen were killed and on 25 August 2017 in which 30 police outposts were attacked leading to the death of 10 police officers, one soldier and one immigration officer, the [UN] Special Rapporteur Lee failed to name the Rohingya armed opposition groups."
"On all issues, the people of Myanmar are with you. But on the Rohingya issue, the people will never be with you. What is at the heart of this huge gap between perspectives of the majority of Burmese and the international community, and how does this inform making progress on alleviating the genuine humanitarian crisis facing the Rakhine Muslims in Sittwe?"
"On the other side of the political tension in Rakhine state ... are Rakhine Buddhists who are genuinely afraid of a (false) Muslim takeover."
"For Aung San Suu Kyi to retain legitimacy where it matters most, it is understandable that she is not outspoken on an issue that could spark even more violence."
I wish there was (forcible) injection of ideas from computer science and mathematics into politics. An example, for this case: a subset of general language that could describe a political or humanitarian situation in unambiguous terms, so that there could be no 'wriggle room' for politicians to shirk their duties. (Herbert's Dune featured a 'battle' language.)
And signatories to the UN should be compelled to adhere to a set of clearly defined moral principles, to open the way for action to be taken immediately against violators.
Sure, I've been criticized many times for such 'simplistic' ideas, but why shouldn't it be this simple??
Here's some other genocidal activity taking place right now: Turkey against the Kurds, Russia against the Caucasian peoples (Chechnya, Dagestan, etc.).
Incidentally, Stallone's most recent Rambo movie (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rambo_(2008_film)) addressed the brutality of the Burmese regime. He wasn't afraid to speak out, 9 years ago.
You mean like a legal system?
International Law is great when there's some incident between nation states, but there's a dire need for intra-national law, where nations can poke their noses into the affairs of an aggressor government.
Case in point: Russian actions in Chechnya back in the early 2000s. When there were murmurs of disapproval, Russia basically just told everyone: "Go away, it's an internal problem." And, shamefully, everyone did just that.
Was it flagged by too many people or removed by administrators?
> How are stories ranked?
> The basic algorithm divides points by a power of the time since a story was submitted. Comments in comment threads are ranked the same way.
> Other factors affecting rank include user flags, anti-abuse software, software which downweights overheated discussions, and moderator intervention.
[0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsfaq.html
To everyone in discussion here, please ask yourself: what is your goal? It pays to revisit the guidelines, particularly on hot, divisive topics. Are you trying to understand the others you're talking with? To express your opinion? To convince the "other side"? If you're not here for useful, constructive, civil, and respectful discussion, please just refrain from commenting. As the mods repeatedly point out, HN is not the place for ideological flamewars. There are places elsewhere on the internet for that.
To be fair though, they do happen here all the time and often without any mod intervention. IMO the problem is most opinions on HN seem to just get stated as fact and if they happen to be popular opinions then there's no possibility for them every to be discussed because any contrary opinions just get brigaded into oblivion.
Yup. The mods are limited in number and readily admit that they don't see everything. If you see something particularly egregious, use the Contact link in the footer to email them and let them know.
> IMO the problem is most opinions on HN seem to just get stated as fact
Also very much agree, and often apparently with very little reflection on the part of the submitter that others may reasonably hold other positions (in that you can follow their logic even if you think it's flawed or disagree with it)—and that some things are often just a matter of taste.
> and if they happen to be popular opinions then there's no possibility for them every to be discussed because any contrary opinions just get brigaded into oblivion.
Compound this with the inherent bias everyone has to tend to notice where their opinion is being attacked and not see where it's being supported, everyone has a tendency to think that theirs is a minority or attacked position. It's tough.
None of this negates that goal of reducing the frequency and intensity of ideological flame wars on HN. One of the reasons I pipe up with comments like this is that I think it's the community's responsibility as a whole to encourage this, not just the mods'.
IMO, There's more to it that what seems. Just because someone (like the author of the article) says "genocide", doesn't mean it is the fact.
Also, with global climate change, there will be more refugees from Bangladesh etc.
Even 1% of a population speaking out in favor of genocide is a fucking travesty.
If they really have been in that area since the 8th century - an assertion made by Soros' HRW, and mindlessly repeated by the media - you'd expect the language to diverge a lot more.
They are clearly not native to Myanmar.
Also, it's conveniently forgotten that they triggered the latest spurt of violence by attacking Buddhist and Hindu citizens.
It's odd how suddenly this is the latest humanitarian crisis.
Nothing to do with oil and gas pipelines, I'm sure. Unlike Syria, Iraq, Libya and so on.
Call me cynical but I don't see the international community - code for US interests - caring about people in resource poor regions.
Wonder what would happen if NK suddenly was found to have oil fields ...
They trickle in, respect no boundaries and no laws.
Now if they integrated and contributed to the regions culture and economy, that would go a long way towards their acceptance. But that's against the tenents of their religion/culture/ideology and it's demonstrated by their violence.
I'd quote Karl Popper on tolerating the intolerant, but it would be another "weak argument."
You can't drag people who insist on living by pre-medieval norms into the 21st century.
Please don't use HN to fight ideological, national, or racial battles. That's definitely not what this site is for: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.
China on other hand trying best not to give US or UN a chance enter here by any excuse.
In all cases, Muslims are being used as bait
That sort of name-calling is not allowed here: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.
All: please don't use this site to fight ideological, national, or racial battles.
I'm sure you feel strongly about defending your group, but so does everybody else. That's why we don't allow people to lash out at others when commenting here—it's a short path from there to internet hell. So if want to keep posting to HN, please control this impulse. We ask the same of everybody: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.
Alright no issue. Agreed.
PS: I did not defend because of their faith rather because they are my biological brothers.