Hacker News Reader

Comment by keymone | Hacker News Reader

yeah, NATO occupying one chunk of neighbouring country and igniting and fueling armed rebellion in another chunk is certianly reason to be worried.

oh wait, that wasn't NATO, was it?

View on HN

Would you prefer it the other way around? Let's say hypothetically Russia puts their bases and ICBM in Canada and assures everyone, it's only to target Mexico, in case a large narco or terrorist threat appears there.

i would prefer Russia to not interfere with internal political processes. like giving Yanukovich $15bn loan on the eve of signing EU association which ultimately led to tens of thousands of people being killed.

That's avoiding my question.

But meddling into internal political processes seems like bread and butter for any would be superpower. Or are Iraq and Afghanistan invasion somehow not interference with political processes?

your question poses a false dichotomy. the choice is not between russia occupying ukraine versus russia behaving differently somewhere else, the choice is between russia occupying ukraine and russia not occupying ukraine. i prefer russia not occupying ukraine.

Are you implying that US or NATO put their bases and ICBMs in Ukraine?

yes it was NATO who fueled it, just like many other revolutions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colour_revolution

well for sure, comrade putin and his friends are the best so any protest against them must surely be a CIA coup! your logic is impeccable tovarish!

funny, please read more about current relationship between Ukraine and Poland, Hungary, Romania (all NATO members). they supported the revolution at first, but now they treat them to acquire Ukrainian territories https://www.unian.info/politics/2184929-certain-statements-i...

do tell which territories have Poland, Hungary and Romania have occupied? because russia is already occupying crimea and parts of some eastern regions via puppet governments funded and armed by russia.

https://www.unian.info/politics/2183494-mfa-ukraine-demands-...

Surprisingly, there wasn't a single word about 'NATO fueling' in that article.

s/S/Uns/

Reply on news.ycombinator.com