Comment by arcticbull | Hacker News Reader

Comment by arcticbull | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

> Let's cut off some of the western countries first then as well.

... first? Why first? Which western country is actively invading anyone right now? Which western country started a land-war in Europe last week? Why would I cut off someone not doing anything for something that happened 20 years ago when there's a land-war in the Ukraine now?

> You've US who voted to invade Iraq based on a lie (along with UK).

On bad pretenses sure, but to overturn a despot who used chemical weapons against his own people. He wasn't a threat to the US, and the pretenses were wrong - and I didn't support the war at the time. But is it the same thing? Not even close.

> Or are you implying that Russian invasion of Ukraine matter more than all these examples, and if you do so, I wonder why that is? (fyi, it's a rhetorical question, I know why that is)

Yeah because the Russians launched an un-provoked land war in Europe to re-create the Soviet Union - on the premise of "de-Nazifying" a country run by a Jewish PM.

Save your whataboutism for once this is resolved.

Well, you've Saudi with the support of Western countries and US weapons that is bombing the shit of Yemen. I don't see you calling for sanctions there. Where was the outrage while that is happening? I like how you choose the timeline of right now/last week. US just got out of Afghanistan few months, have destroyed countries and families for generations to come in the past 10-15 years, but you know what let's only count two weeks.

> On bad pretenses sure, but to overturn a despot who used chemical weapons against his own people. He wasn't a threat to the US, and the pretenses were wrong - and I didn't support the war at the time.

Yeah, looks like US actively knew and helped him gas his own people though because Iran would've been too powerful otherwise, and US can't have that.

https://foreignpolicy.com/2013/08/26/exclusive-cia-files-pro...

> But is it the same thing? Not even close.

Yeah it isn't, while the world looks to sanction Russia (which they should btw), US blackmailed other countries into invading Iraq and no country got sanctioned. But like you said, US only got pretenses wrong, s who whore cares that millions of lives were lost as a result and a country has been destabilized and destroyed.

> Save your whataboutism for once this is resolved.

Reddit's favourite term to use when you point out double standards. I don't support this invasion either, it's just the hypocrisy in the outrage that is astonishing. But hey I guess, as the media puts it, world cares more when it's white people with blonde hair and blue eyes that are dying and not brown people you've in middle east, so it's different this time.

Nothing you raised has anything to do with this situation which is what we're talking about. Pointing fingers wildly in every direction isn't going to solve this problem. I'll never say the US has a pristine track record, however what they are doing right now, I'm in support of. Even if they haven't acted appropriately in the past.

I can oppose Yemen, I can support Palestine, I can oppose the coup in Guatemala - all while I reject the actions of the Russians in Ukraine. These are not mutually exclusive positions and there is nothing hypocritical about it.

But the US is supporting Saudi Arabia in Yemen right now. It's just as much of an ongoing situation so there isn't even that excuse of "that was before and now is now".

And I don't support it. But that has nothing to do with the current situation in Russia or the Ukraine. Focus please, one problem at a time.

Pointing out double standards is not futile or pointless. It exposes the true intentions and interests of those who have them. In this case, for example, the double standards of Western governments and elites show that they do not really care about the suffering of people, rather they act based on their (geopolitical? economical? general?) interests. So, in some occasions they themselves help destroy countries and have no problem with it (Not caring about people's suffering: confirmed), then an opponent creates suffering and they react (is it because of the suffering? No, they proved they do not care.). It is relevant to this, past and future situations, because it helps (those who wish to understand things, at least) shake off pretenses of the various players and see the real motives clearer. Repeat for any other section where double standards exist to get a clearer picture.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com