Hacker News Reader

Comment by dragontamer | Hacker News Reader

He attacked a neutral neighbor for piss poor reasons, despite having a strong cultural bond with them.

There is nothing "neutral" about Ukraine. The CIA deposed the legitimately elected government in 2014, and the actions of today have been inevitable since then.

You'd have to be an idiot to accept a CIA puppet regime sharing hundreds of miles of border with you, particularly one that commits systematic terrorism against its Russian-speaking population.

It's pretty shocking how well FVEY IC have run their propaganda campaigns for everyone to believe Ukraine is in any way "neutral". Very impressed.

> systematic terrorism against its Russian-speaking population.

Interested in knowing about this. Any proof?

It's Putin's propaganda that tries to make people believe these things. Any "proof" would be made up.

People in southern and eastern Ukraine, eg Odessa, and Kharkiv I think, speak Russian primarily more often than Ukrainian

There have been various incidents of terrorizing Russian speakers, perhaps the most famous being the burning at Odessa, and in this war the Nazi sympathizers shooting any Ukrainian soldier wanting to surrender, in some contested areas such as Mariopol they may shoot citizens who attend to flee too - aside from Putin's propaganda, I recently saw a first hand account of that by a Greek speaking resident there. As much as it is not widely mentioned in Western media for obvious reasons, Nazis having a real presence in Ukraine is not in Putin's fantasy, and with a few searches you will find both many expressions of that in Ukraine and endorsement/tolerance by Ukrainian authorities. I am not standing by Putin's invasion, and in general stating and inquiring for the truth should never be seen as an expression of opinion. Peace.

Calling them “neutral” is a mistake. At least from Putin’s perspective.

Yes, clear, they were occupied already, just not officially.

Clearly they are more "neutral", than say Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania - all former Soviet client states that are now NATO members.

I do honestly suspect this is about delusions of historical grandeur. Ukraine is after all the historical home of Kievan' Rus (with whom most peoples in the region claim historical antecedence). In its "golden age" Vladimir the Great (Volodymir I, Prince of Novgorod) united the Rus peoples under his reign.

When thinking about neutrality, it's worth comparing the Ukraine-Russia relationship to that of Vietnam-China, another case of dealing with an aggressive big neighbor. Despite having many disputes with China on the sea, as well as the shadow of the 1979 invasion still looming, Vietnam has a clear "four-nos" policy, which means no military alliance, no affiliation with one country to counteract the other, no foreign military base in the Vietnamese territory to act against other countries, and no force or threatening to use force in international relations.

And that perspective is clearly insane.

Not "medically insane", I'm talking like "Hitler insane" (who IIRC, was never actually proven to be crazy or with an actual medical disability). Attacking peaceful nations for no reason is warmongering and clearly evil... but doubly so when they're effectively brother countries.

It’s not insane, it’s completely rational. That’s why the US invaded Cuba during the Spanish American War. They felt that Spain had lost control on the ground entirely and that was the reason McKinley authorized invasion.

The weapons invented in WW1 proved to the world that wars like this weren't worth it anymore for anyone.

Weapons were too good in the early 1900s, and the wear-and-tear on soldiers would scar them for the rest of their lives. The Axis powers didn't get the message in the 1930s/1940s, so one more ass-kicking was needed, but its overall not a good idea to initiate wars of conquest in today's society.

It is worth it to invade a country that has no nuclear deterrent. The reason Russia will not invade a NATO country is that it would cause mutually assured destruction, or more specifically the Nash equilibrium in the case where both countries are nuclear powers.

It’s why China doesn’t invade Pakistan or India, aside from small skirmishes that are in borderlands that are effectively proxy wars.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com