Comment by dustinmoris | Hacker News Reader

Comment by dustinmoris | Hacker News Reader

Am I the only one who thinks that the reality of this crisis is a lot more nuanced than what Western media shows us?

Same as with Taiwan. It's an island off China and rebels flew there at some point and started to govern Taiwan as if it was theirs. China always insisted that Taiwan is part of China but because they never used military force to put an end to the game which those rebels played on that island it became harder for China to maintain the premise that Taiwan is in fact still part of China. Obviously the West has HUGE incentives to keep Taiwan seperate from China so will only portray one side of the story and the longer China was doing the objectively speaking right thing (not using force to exercise their right) the easier it is for the West to peddle the idea that Taiwan is in fact not part of China. It's almost like the West has been intelligently exploiting the good will of the East and I do feel like there is a lot of that going on between Ukraine and Russia as well.

Unfortunately there are no objective sources of news anymore and it's hard to really get a well balanced overview of the crisis. When I read on Wikipedia that for instance more than half of the Ukraine was not in favour of the Euromaiden protests, or other minor facts which shine a slightly different light on everything I am curious how much did the West contribute in stirring the crisis like we know they did in other countries in the world (Cuba, Middle East, Arab Spring, etc.)

> Same as with Taiwan. It's an island off China and rebels flew there at some point

That's a subjective way to put it, isn't it? You could also say that "rebels" took all of mainland China and Taiwan is the last remaining standoff of the "true" China.

Disagree. Objectively speaking this is not how it works and never has worked in history. The winner takes it all, that's how it worked across the globe in all other territories across the world.

EDIT: Also this argument if completely flawed because Taiwan has no leg to stand on. The only reason why it existed the way it has for so long is because China has actually been nice and not exercised its power. If China was to move troops into Taiwan next week there would be no actual opposition apart from fake outrage in the West, same as what happened with Hong Kong. HK was always part of China historically and the West initially agreed a deal with China to be allowed to have a base there and as time has moved on they thought they could infiltrate from within HK to make the independent and make it a US proxy state, but China, just like Russia now probably, has remained firm to the original roots of HK and now re-exercised their right claim over it and as we have seen the West has done nothing abou tit because they know they 1. cannot and 2. have no real right.

Who cares about what happened 100 years ago if 80-90% of Taiwan do not want to be governed by the CCP in the year 2022. That's all that matters. You speak as if these aren't people that deserve sovereignty over themselves.

Country formation is a complex topic, and there is certainly no "objectively speaking right thing" like you said. Rebels/insurgent forces start to become legitimate leaders of their land and country at some point, though every one has different definition of where that point is that suits their liking.

I find comparing RT, BBC and al jazeera gets a fairly complete picture on this crisis. All three will emphasize things others dont.

It doesnt elucidate everything though. E.g. it's not clear from this who really killed the minsk protocols though.

You wonder how much the US contributed? I think Victoria Nuland said US spent a billion dollars in “aid” for the euromaodan. When Biden visited a few years ago, he sat at the head of the table. I think it shouldn’t be too hard to guess how much US has contributed here.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com