Hacker News Reader

Comment by the-dude | Hacker News Reader

We can clearly hear the drums beating from across the Atlantic. A new adventure was already expected with the change of administration.

View on HN

Something I don't get: Why is the Ukrainian president less concerned about invasion than the US president? Anyone have a good answer to this?

The Ukrainian President is concerned about invasion, not sure where you’re getting the idea he’s not. His criticism is specifically about the handling so as to not cause panic: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/01/28/ukraine-russ....

A more pragmatic look would just see this as political posturing to save face with the Russians to give off some look of independence and not wholly being lockstep with NATO geopolitical goals for the region.

I'm not going to claim to be some geopolitical expert, but if you want to negotiate your way out of this mess it would seem to absolutely necessary to divert yourself away from the West (even partially) in order to come across as more autonomous. It would give talks much more credence rather than Russians seeing Ukraine as US puppets and not speaking for themselves.

I said less concerned, which still means concerned... but apparently a lot less than the US. What I was referring to is this disagreement:

"US warns Russian attack may be 'imminent,' Ukraine disagrees"

From President Volodymyr Zelenskyy down, the Ukrainian government has tried to urge calm, with senior officials making clear in recent days they don't see the risks now as any more heightened than over the last eight years of Russian-stoked conflict in eastern Ukraine.

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/us-warns-russian-attack-immi...

Here is a video from RT about this "invasion". It contains Zelensky's reaction to the western media's fearmongering: https://twitter.com/RT_com/status/1487395105023528960

>Here is a video from RT

Here's a line that instantly disqualifies one from rational adult conversations about anything to do with Eastern Europe.

Why? So you are refusing to look at an information source with real quotes by the leaders involved if it isn't from one of your CIA-staffed western big-name news sources?

Hm, maybe i am not the one who is disqualified here.

I'll take non-CIA-staffed eastern small-name source too, as long as it's not literally the official propaganda agency of the regime that's in the middle of planning the fucking invasion being discussed. I don't think that's a very high bar, personally.

> I'll take non-CIA-staffed eastern small-name source too, as long as it's not literally the official propaganda agency of the regime that's in the middle of planning the fucking invasion being discussed. I don't think that's a very high bar, personally.

Ya, so... you have a choice between the official propaganda agency of the US (the so-called "free press" all marching in lockstep), or the propaganda of the person responding to a completely made-up "imminent" invasion. The second propaganda source is in agreement with the person who is literally the president of the nation whose "imminent invasion" is in question.

There is no imminent invasion, only a deliberately provoked one.

And they didn't invade Crimea. Or Georgia. ... right.

Why tankies insist on defending a homophobic, right-wing dictatorship in Russia is just beyond me.

Ukraine can't defend itself against Russia regardless of if they'd like to or not.

The buck stops at the US and Nato simply due to the size matches between the forces.

The Ukrainian president wants to avoid his tax paying population panicking and fleeing to Western Europe.

Ukrainians are very concerned right now.

It's worth noting Trump was the first US President to not start a war in half a century.

He also launched more drone strikes than Obama, relaxed the rules of engagement and civilian oversight over the chain of command, and killed hundreds of civilians in airstrikes on Afghanistan and the first use of a MOAB in combat.

> He also launched more drone strikes than Obama

And Obama more than Bush. Either way, the direction is monotonically increasing. Could it be the problem isn't who holds the presidency?

The technology was still in development under Bush, he can't really be compared to subsequent presidents who had full access to it.

I do think there's a chance that just having the capability is inherently corrupting. I guess we'll see how Biden does, though.

I'll give him credit for that. I didn't really like getting out of the nuclear deal with Iran however

Well, that's not for lack of trying. He subjected Iran to a strict regime of (illegal) sanctions, then assassinated Iranian general Qassem Soleimani. That could easily have started a war.

Now, I should perhaps qualify the above, since there are reasons to believe that Trump was not really able to get his way, foreign-policy-wise, due to military-intelligence-industrial complex objections, plus his defense secretary, head of the CIA etc (poor staffing which is mostly on him).

Give his some credit. Maybe he tried and failed, just like he failed in business many times.

He also pardoned war criminals. So there's that.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/dec/27/eddie-gallag...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com