Hacker News Reader

Hacker News

Comment by cr__ | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

cr__

Huh?

View on HN

He's saying the invasion is Ukraine's fault for trying to not get invaded.

It's the international politics version of "look what you've done, you made me hit you".

No that's not what he's saying. They were led with the promise of NATO/EU membership with no intention to back it up.

https://mate.substack.com/p/by-using-ukraine-to-fight-russia...

Aaron Maté's journalism consists of reposting things Konstantin Kilimnik told him which is why he's spent the last few years claiming every political story mentioning Russia is fake, they've never hacked the US, etc.

If Russia didn't want Ukraine to turn towards the EU, they shouldn't have annexed the parts of Ukraine containing all the citizens who didn't want to do it.

> Konstantin Kilimnik

Would this be the very same Konstantin Kilimnik who was the Russian Intelligence Officer found by the Special Counsel, US Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, and the US Treasury to have worked with Paul Manafort and the Donald Trump campaign during the 2016 election? Gee, I wonder why Aaron Maté would want to minimize Russia's moral culpability here.

Snark aside, I think one of the easier things we can stop doing here in America is stop sharing Russian disinformation from not disinterested bloggers, who have proven themselves to be very very wrong about the nature of Vladimir Putin and the allure of autocracy in general. This whole "Democracy and freedom are incompatible" idea circling techno bubbles needs to end asap.

Yes, but that was kind of a joke so don't read too much into it. (I do remember he reported an anonymous Twitter account wasn't Kilimnik because he DMed them and asked if they were.)

The Substackers, I think, mainly moved to those positions on their own because there was space to make money on it, and polemical opinion writers and disinformation agents end up working off each other because it's convenient rather than actually conspiring. Probably.

The article literally starts out condemning the Russia's invasion as illegal. That doesn't mean the West did not bungle this or should be exempt from criticism. When you lead a country with promises of NATO protection, when you KNOW it is going to be provocative, you better be prepared to defend it. The West did not do this and offered no real plan for this circumstance. We shouldn't be afraid to criticize our own government, when it fails.

Oh so instead of "look what you've done, you made me hit you", its "look what the US has done, they made me hit you"

Professor John Mearsheimer explained this 7 years ago: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JrMiSQAGOS4

The user in question spends an awful lot of time arguing that the West/Ukraine/NATO/insert current scapegoat of Russian propaganda is the reason why dear sweet Russia just had no choice but to invade.

"Russia needs to protect itself from NATO encroachment" is a common talking point that excuses the attack and implies that Ukraine and/or NATO somehow forced Russia to invade Ukraine.

It also goes off the assumption that the nations bordering Russia aren’t rational actors or independent polities capable of choosing their own path (or, apparently, being allowed to,)

So you’re against the Monroe doctrine? Thoughts on the Cuban Missile crisis?

Did you see the clip of Biden in the 80s saying the only thing that would turn Russia hostile would be the Baltic states joining NATO?

Finally, are you familiar with what happened in 08, 14, and 19, and the clear Russian warnings after each?

Russia is no longer a super power the faster they come too terms with it the better it will be for everyone.

Might makes right!

Whataboutism is the tool of useful idiots. I also don’t give two fucks what Russia “warns” us or anyone about. That literally just proves my point that you and all these other apologists believe that Russia should be the decider of what sovereign nations near them can do. This is the exact reason all these nations beg to join NATO instead of having to be forced into it.

You’re totally captured by propaganda, and unable to debate even one meaningful point.

I don’t entertain bad faith actors.

It's funny, whataboutism was always touted as the preferred tactic of Russian trolls, but I never had the chance to actually see them deploy it on a relevant topic. Now that there is one, my God, they're shameless, aren't they? To the point where if an actual human said these things to you in person you'd recommend a psychiatrist to them.

But forget about all that, what about the Monroe doctrine?

It’s crazy isn’t? I’m not sure what’s worse that they continue to try it even though it’s so obvious as to be funny or that it actually works on a lot of social media.

You do realize you’re both smearing an American citizen who supports Ukraine as a “Russian troll” with no evidence, for simply bringing up the fact that nations don’t like having hostile actors in their backyard and that Russia warned against this over a decade. I’m not on the side of Russia here, I’m just fascinated how one-sided things become.

Reminds me of so many political conflicts of recent past - if you dare try and have a debate to capture nuance, even if you’re on the “same side” - but dare to point out it’s not black and white - people form rank, dismiss you with not even an attempt at discussion, and attempt to make you into a joke with the other “insiders”.

It’s fascinating, and happening right here, and it’s because you don’t want to believe that maybe you’ve been captured a just bit by western propaganda, because that would make all the (extremely virtuous) social signaling you’ve been doing just a bit less so, and you just a bit less reliable/intelligent on foreign policy.

https://www.newsweek.com/joe-biden-resurfaced-clip-russia-ba...

https://www.npr.org/2022/01/29/1076193616/ukraine-russia-nat...

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=JrMiSQAGOS4

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=us3-Wq89fOE

Still no thoughts on the US coup in 2014? Wish there were smarter folks in politics around here. It’s sad there’s not even a chance for any decent conversation.

I didn’t say you were a Russian troll, I said you weren’t debating in good faith by bringing up irrelevant things like the Monroe doctorine in respond to my initial comment.

You agreed with the person doing so.

Calling whataboutism is lame (and why you got downvoted), it’s just shutting down a debate you are afraid to have.

Yeah, the attitude it's pushing is that Russia can do whatever they want, but if its neighbors do the same, then that's unacceptable.

I think he's referring to the Maidan revolution pushed in the region back in 2014. They led them with promises of NATO/EU membership, and then left them hanging when war finally broke out. You can reasonably conclude they had no intention to actually fight it out.

https://mate.substack.com/p/by-using-ukraine-to-fight-russia...

It’s cute you blame the west for this. Russia started an asymmetric war with Ukraine specifically because it knew NATO won’t except a new member until they shore up border disputes etc. Again this is the international relations equivalent of beating your wife because she wanted a divorce. It doesn’t make her being beat her fault or her new boyfriends. It’s your fault for beating her up.

It's interesting you read that as blaming the West. The article literally starts out calling the Russian invasion of Ukrain illegal and condemns it unequivocally. That doesn't mean the West's actions were not escalatory. When you lead a country with promises of NATO membership and protection, actions you KNOW will be provocative, you better be prepared to defend it. The West did not do this.

War didn't "break out". It wasn't some natural disaster that just happened with no fault of anybody. Putin waged the war, because he felt he could take Ukraine for himself and nobody would stop him. The evil will of Russian government, determined to deny Ukrainian people the rights to freedom and self-determination, combined with weakness of the West, and continued strategy of appeasement (has it ever worked?), led to it. It's as much "broke out" as you'd say "she left her home without a gun, and a rape broke out".

The West was wholly unprepared for this scenario. Even though they led them to believe NATO would be there for them (without specifically offering it). When you wage a campaign with the intended effect of bringing it into NATO, something you know is going to be provocative, you should be very prepared to defend it. This is a collosal failure of diplomacy.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com