Hacker News Reader

Comment by mleg | Hacker News Reader

Another Russian here. I don't agree and don't support this action. We anticipate long years if not decades of isolation, even more stagnating economy, even more authoritarian government. By all means it's a terrible thing. For both Russians and Ucrainians alike. But... The drama around it as portrayed in Western media is ridiculous. There won't be major loss of life nor any "war" in conventional sense. It would be no more war than it was in Crimea in 2014. I don't justify. It's a political disaster but not a humanitarian one.

View on HN

> But... The drama around it as portrayed in Western media is ridiculous. There won't be major loss of life nor any "war" in conventional sense. It would be no more war than it was in Crimea in 2014. I don't justify. It's a political disaster but not a humanitarian one.

Two weeks ago: The Western media is creating fake drama. Russia is never going to invade Ukraine. We're just trying to protect our security.

This week: The Western media is overreacting. Yes, it's an invasion, but it's not really a war, there's not going to be that many casualties.

Two weeks from now: The Western media is exaggerating. Yes, lots of people are dying, but this is a war, it can't be avoided. But it's really exaggerated to talk about "war crimes" and "mass civilian casualties". And we must not forget that this all began because of Western provocations!

Exactly. A few months ago, Russian higher-ups were claiming that it was moving troops around for military exercises. They're blatant liars and you can't trust anything they say, nor should you believe that they have any particular set of morals.

> There won't be major loss of life nor any "war"

When people were drafted for ww1 they thought it would last a few weeks/months... wait and see.

At first most experts said there wouldn't be an invasion, then they said they'd only invade the eastern part, now we're talking about the whole country. Only time will tell

That's a bit naive. There are already hundreds of civilian casualties. The Russian shelling is not precise. They don't have the technology for that. They were using MLRS rockets which kill indiscriminately. There's a video circulating online of a little girl who got hit by a shell and killed. This is not like Crimea.

> There are already hundreds of civilian casualties... This is not like Crimea.

For those curious about the numbers, there were 2 soldiers and 1 civilian killed in the annexation of Crimea[0].

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annexation_of_Crimea_by_the_Ru...

>>>The Russian shelling is not precise. They don't have the technology for that.

Nitpick: they absolutely have the tech for it. They were using laser-guided heavy mortar rounds in Afghanistan.

https://community.apan.org/cfs-file/__key/docpreview-s/00-00...

> That's a bit naive.

They're not being naive. This is a deliberate effort to downplay the events. Always keep in mind that a war is often fought with different types of weapons, including information.

The fuck are you talking about? It’s already escalated to something much worse than Crimea. Lay off the state-propaganda.

- Russian that lives in the states

> It's a political disaster but not a humanitarian one.

Yet; it's a strategic move for now, but what are Russia's plans after this? Just sit there and pretend nothing happened? This is part of a bigger plan.

> There won't be major loss of life nor any "war" in conventional sense.

That's a bit premature.

As for the rest: Russians could rise en-masse to put a stop to this. Call a general strike all over Russia tomorrow and you might be able to avoid those decades of isolation and stagnating economy.

> That's a bit premature.

I don't think so when looking at what has happened historically. Also, until Putin attacks NATO territory (which he most likely won't) there's not going to be an all out war. We in the West are being a bit hyperbolic. This is a serious issue, but not a "omg nukes are going to be flying next week" level of seriousness. I'd instead watch what China will do with Taiwan while we are distracted...

Russia isn't some democracy that is cool with protesting. There are plenty of Russian's living there that are still USSR brainwashed and support this.

> I don't think so when looking at what has happened historically.

Interesting, I think that taking history into account that's actually far more likely than the opposite.

> Also, until Putin attacks NATO territory (which he most likely won't) there's not going to be an all out war.

That's two assumptions, both of which may be wrong, independently.

> We in the West are being a bit hyperbolic.

Hm. I don't think our current reaction to 'war at 30 km away from our Eastern border' is something that should be labelled hyperbolic. If anything it is rather tame.

> This is a serious issue, but not a "omg nukes are going to be flying next week" level of seriousness.

I'm not so much concerned with the next week bit as I am with the fact that you are worried about the timetable, but not about whether or not they will be flying at all.

> I'd instead watch what China will do with Taiwan while we are distracted...

Well, China now already knows something that they didn't know last week: that the Western world will stand by while they do what they want to do, as long as they don't attack a NATO member.

> Russia isn't some democracy that is cool with protesting.

Neither was Poland in the 80's. That didn't stop the protests.

> There are plenty of Russian's living there that are still USSR brainwashed and support this.

Yes, but that doesn't help the people in Ukraine.

This is not a case of a dictatorship pursing war against the interests of 90% the population. A lot of Russians support the separatists and are glad to see the military step in.

If you’re completely confused at why Putin is doing this and the best reason you can come up with is that he’s evil and stupid and just wants destruction, it’s only because you don’t understand the situation.

> A lot of Russians support the separatists and are glad to see the military step in.

That doesn't really matter though, what matters is that they are there illegally. A lot of Germans supported the invasion of Poland as well to gain some 'lebensraum'. That did not make them right.

> If you’re completely confused at why Putin is doing this and the best reason you can come up with is that he’s evil and stupid and just wants destruction, it’s only because you don’t understand the situation.

I'm not confused at all. But it appears that you are given your alternative history regarding Donbas.

Putin has a country that is imploding, and if he doesn't find a way to make it seem as though he is a powerful leader then he may be out of leadership position soon. Him starting this war is an act of desperation: nothing to lose and everything to gain because whatever he stands to lose he would have lost anyway.

> [Domestic support] doesn't really matter though, what matters is that they are there illegally. A lot of Germans supported the invasion of Poland as well to gain some 'lebensraum'. That did not make them right.

You’re moving the goal posts. You suggested that the Russian people could or should stage mass protests. I responded that you’re naive for thinking that Russians are going to stage mass protests against this because there’s large public support for the military actions here. Now you’re saying it doesn’t matter if there’s support for the war because it’s still wrong and illegal. Well, no shit?

So which is it? Is it Putin acting as a dictator against the will of his people in a desperate attempt to retain power, or is it just that the Russians support those in the Donbas region?

You are apparently utterly unaware of the reality on the ground in Russia, which I can't fault you for but it makes the discussion a bit tedious. FWIW: your 'average Russian' may well grumble at Putin, the hardships the country is operating under and the effect that sanctions will have on their already fragile economy. But they're likely not going to act, this has to do with living like that for the last 75 years or so. That does not mean that they support the invasion of Ukraine, but it does mean that when asked about this they are aware that whoever is asking it may have an agenda so of course they will say that they support it.

But it's not as simple as support vs a lack of support, the third option is apathy, something that Russia has plenty of.

I tried to show you - apparently that didn't work - that verbal support for Putin's safari does not necessarily equate to actual support, the alternatives are probably not even on the radar if you haven't lived under a repressive regime: you are very careful to toe the party line in public, no matter what you may think in private, and bitching against the state is a cottage industry in Russia. Given all this, what is surprising is that plenty of Russians are actually quite vocal against this invasion, which I consider to be a very positive sign.

https://www.voanews.com/a/moscow-warns-russians-against-stag...

and

https://www.businessinsider.com/russia-arrests-anti-war-prot...

> Is it Putin acting as a dictator against the will of his people in a desperate attempt to retain power

Yes

> or is it just that the Russians support those in the Donbas region?

Yes.

So there: false dichotomies are false, reality is a bit more difficult than you can imagine.

It’s making me crazy to see so many in this thread attempt to have a conversation about the motivations of the Russians without talking about the central point of this conflict: the independence of the Donbas, their natural right to secede from Ukraine and join the Russian confederation, and their recent pleas to the Russians for recognition of their state and military defense.

The Russians did not just simply decide to up and bomb Ukraine. The world is not that simple. A majority of Russians support Russian support for the Donbas region. They are culturally and ethnically Russian in the region.

I’m not defending Russia here but if you don’t talk about the core of the conflict you’re not coming any closer to a real understanding.

Oh please. You can't seriously make this argument, the whole Donbas independence movement was a Russian ploy from day #1 to create the pretext required to do exactly what they are doing today.

What makes me crazy is that there would be people that fall for such an obvious ploy.

A majority of Russians is not the same as a majority.

What's next? Latvia splitting in half?

For some background reading:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_in_Donbas

I can’t have a reasonable conversation about this with someone who believes that the Russians are puppet masters pulling strings and setting narratives and that I’m just stupid for believing them.

The fact that Russia says it’s true is not a good reason why it cannot be true.

This has been going on for 8 years and we had peace and stable lines for the last 4. What changed?

> I can’t have a reasonable conversation about this with someone who believes that the Russians are puppet masters pulling strings and setting narratives and that I’m just stupid for believing them.

I don't know where the puppet masters and the narratives came in, you were the one bringing this bullshit in here, I didn't see any Russians. Where you got your ideas only you know.

> The fact that Russia says it’s true is not a good reason why it cannot be true.

I read it in Pravda. What's written there must be true, right? Just like they wrote last week: Russia will not invade Ukraine, so therefore I am right now hallucinating.

> This has been going on for 8 years and we had peace and stable lines for the last 4. What changed?

Russia went to war. And there was maybe peace in your book but for the people in Ukraine there wasn't peace and now there won't be for a much longer time.

> I don't know where the puppet masters and the narratives came in, you were the one bringing this bullshit in here, I didn't see any Russians. Where you got your ideas only you know.

You suggested very literally that the separatist movement in east Ukraine was a Russian ploy from the start to justify war. Somehow to you that’s more reasonable that just assuming it came about organically.

> Russia went to war. And there was maybe peace in your book but for the people in Ukraine there wasn't peace and now there won't be for a much longer time.

Objectively, the lines hadn’t moved and people stopped dying. We had peace and the conditions for a peaceful resolution and new borders.

Then all of a sudden, things escalated. A big important gas pipeline blew up. Then Russia came in and got involved.

You can believe one of two things:

1. Russia wanted so badly to curb stomp their economy that they blew up their own important pipeline to justify war.

2. Either the CIA or the neonazi militias, or both working together, are responsible for these attacks.

Neither makes a ton of sense, but one has to be true.

> You suggested very literally that the separatist movement in east Ukraine was a Russian ploy from the start to justify war.

It is. This was a response to Russia's puppet being ousted. I'll forgive you if you haven't been following Ukraine since 2010 or so. But then stop making out like you have some special knowledge about what has been happening there for the last 12 years because it is a bit silly.

> Somehow to you that’s more reasonable that just assuming it came about organically.

No, I know that it did not came about organically, as do most people that are informed about Ukraine. This is not subject to discussion, nor is it subject to your fantasy story suddenly becoming true, in fact this is exactly the propaganda line coming out of the Kremlin.

> Objectively, the lines hadn’t moved and people stopped dying. We had peace and the conditions for a peaceful resolution and new borders.

There was at best an unresolved situation, and this is what is happening today: the furthering of the same goal that was in view when this whole thing escalated the first time. Consolidate, move forward. Consolidate, move forward. Putin is not making the same stupid mistake that Hitler made, he is taking his time to consolidate, which makes him far more dangerous.

> Then all of a sudden, things escalated. A big important gas pipeline blew up. Then Russia came in and got involved.

What a coincidence.

I'm going to stop responding to you, if you want to take that as a victory of sorts be my guest but I don't have the energy to continue to debate this, it makes no sense, but if you want to persist in it be my guest.

For the record, we’re ultimately on the same side here. I’m just trying to push back on what I see as an overly simple narrative around the Russian motivations for this. But I’m ultimately rooting for an independent Ukraine and anyone fighting for that.

Seeing a few accounts parotting lines like these in here, and on LinkedIn.

Scary stuff.

>>>You can't seriously make this argument, the whole Donbas independence movement was a Russian ploy from day #1 to create the pretext required to do exactly what they are doing today.

Isn't that pretty much the argument Russia made, when the US supported Kosovo independence from Serbia?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russia%27s_reaction_to_the_200...

Russia making an argument doesn't necessarily mean that there is truth to that argument.

A lot of people in Eastern Ukraine identify themselves as Russian (source: a friend of mine near Poltava). They speak Russian first, Ukrainian second. Trying to argue which came first is rather moot, the tug-of-war between eradication and strengthening of the Ukrainian identity has been going on for more than a century (see [1] and [2]). There's nothing obvious about that cultural conflict, except perhaps to Putin, who is clearly more interested in Rusifikatsiya than in Korenizatsiya.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukrainisation

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russification

Sure. Ditto Latvia. But that doesn't mean that those provinces had a majority in favor of secession before all this started sliding, that's just the pretext used to invade after the Russian puppet was voted out.

Uh-huh, ask the Sailors of Kronstadt how that went: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kronstadt_rebellion#Aftermath

1904? Really?

> Russians could rise en-masse

In order to do that in effective numbers that wouldn't get squashed immediately, there would have to be people leading and coordinating the opposition.

Appearing to be such a person is a quick way to accidentally eat plutonium for breakfast.

>The drama around it as portrayed in Western media is ridiculous. There won't be major loss of life nor any "war" in conventional sense. It would be no more war than it was in Crimea in 2014. I don't justify. It's a political disaster but not a humanitarian one.

Lay off the Vodka Sergei, there have already been airstrikes in a Dozen Ukrainian cities. The scale already far outpaces anything that happened in Crimea.

Trying to level with you here - what makes you so sure?

can you tell me what pro-Putin Russians think about this? The ones that are not brainwashed? Like, how does Russia gain anything from this action? It only stands to lose economic ties in an ever increasing interconnected world. When Oil and Gas won't be king in 20 years, Russia is doomed without more cooperation with advanced countries. What are people thinking? What is the reason behind all this?

I'm sure they think "we dont want the usa puppet masters anywhere around here". Which is exactly what Putin is writing in his speeches about. Have you read the speeches on the Kremlin's website? There is an english version that explains pretty much every reason that a pro-Putin Russian would gobble up as gospel.

Imagine North Korea, but with a shitload of nukes.

I have never seen a comment on politics which demonstrated non-brainwashed thinking on HN. Surprisingly, I saw more humane, fact-based, and independent thinking on tiktok.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com