Hacker News Reader

So what you're saying is that the West should allow Russia to do whatever it likes from now on because the US invaded Iraq, and to do otherwise would be hypocritical.

Ok. If that's the case, then Russia's actions justify any action the West ever takes in the future. There are no rules, all bets are off, and all war crimes are justified henceforth. Including the use of nuclear weapons, which was normalized in 1945, and the use of biological and chemical weapons as normalized in World War 1.

You wont' complain if any nation - the US, Israel, anyone - invades a sovereign nation and slaughters civilians because that's been normalized and is now justified, correct? And nothing - absolutely nothing - is more important than not being a hypocrite, correct?

Actually, now that I think about it, since the US wasn't even the first country to invade Iraq or Afghanistan to begin with, their actions were already justified. It's not as if the US created imperialism or war, so what are people even trying to accomplish pointing out America's flaws? It's been normalized for thousands of years, what's the problem?

What the hell are you talking about? Your post is extremely difficult to even parse.

Let's be clear, there are war crimes happening daily in Ukraine and there is NOTHING normalized around this. The US having done it before doesn't make it fucking normal, but it also doesn't mean the top priority now is to talk about US war crimes.

1,582 civilians killed by Russian shelling and blockade in Mariupol (Reuters): https://www.reuters.com/world/ukraines-mariupol-says-1582-ci...

Lavrov confirmed that Russia deliberately bombed a maternity hospital in Mariupol (Article with more details from the Independent): https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/russia-maternity-hospti...

These are just two random recent examples I pulled from a long list of updates. Let me know if you want more, there's a buffet of choice.

Why not? They are enemies, not friends. We should vilify our enemies and celebrate our allies. This is the nature of the world. Sometimes you must draw a line in the sand and pick a side. It is not possible to straddle the middle and try to apply the same sets of rules to every actor; each circumstance is different and should be treated with the nuance it requires.

The thing is, if you treat all the russian people as enemies, than they will in fact all become your enemies. If some oligarchs were (secretly) opposing Putin before - then this is the way to bind them to Putin.

"It is not possible to straddle the middle and try to apply the same sets of rules to every actor"

And this would be, how justice is supposed to work. Apply the same rules to every actor. Otherwise it is not justice and you loose every credibility, when you claim to wage wars in the name of "justice". It becomes just a meaningless word and you no different from the bad guys.

"and celebrate our allies"

So hooray to the great rulers of Saudi Arabia and co. May they live long and prosper, bomb the shit out of their enemies in Yemen(370000+ deaths so far) and stone their own women to death, if they dare to speak up and disobey.

> if you treat all the russian people as enemies

Let's be extremely clear: Russian people are not the enemy. Very few people here in Europe think this, and those who do are mostly the xenophobic assholes who enjoy thinking anyone who isn't them is the enemy anyway.

Oligarchs are Putin's keys to power. Sanctioning them is a way to hurt Putin's power and influence, which has a chance to bring the war to an end. Not sanctioning them because "oh there's a chance maybe one of them actually doesn't like the guy" is an idiotic move.

"Not sanctioning them because "oh there's a chance maybe one of them actually doesn't like the guy" is an idiotic move. "

Given recent russian history of fights between Putin and various oligarchs - I rather think it would be a idiotic move to target them all without due process - because the chances are actually quite high, that many of them oppose Putin.

We're not imprisoning them, we're freezing their riches. This gets more of them to oppose Putin. And several are now having to come out publicly speaking against him.

This is how we're helping a coup d'état happen. It's a good and solid strategy. A lot is riding on this.

"We're not imprisoning them, we're freezing their riches"

Ok, I would be somewhat fine with it, if it is only "freezing". But still not without some form of process, that shows links of them to the government, or support/benefit of the war. Because otherwise this sets a (further) dangerous precedent. There was something called, "rule of the law".

and the reasons given for adding them to the sanctions list are not "some form of process"? (We can certainly argue if the process is sufficient, but targeted sanctions against named individuals is not the same as just grabbing everything with a russian name on it. And yes, some people are complaining that governments actually insist on proving that things belong to sanctioned people before acting, but "some people are complaining" is not the same as policy and what actually happens)

Pray tell, where is the rule of the law not being respected? Call out specific examples if this is where your problem with this lies.

But need I remind you, we are at war, with an enemy committing war crimes every day and absolutely not respecting any "rule of the law". When you're up against fair adversaries, it's right to call for a fair fight. When you're up against somebody who's getting dangerously close to getting us into a nuclear war, it's ok to take some damn shortcuts.

Fat good the "long term consequences" of not having followed proper procedures will do us if half of Europe is irradiated. As we say in France, "there are largers cats to whip". I don't care, I live in Brussels, well within the blast zone.

"we are at war"

Erm, no we are not. Russia is at war with the ukraine, but not with the EU, nor the USA. So maybe do not escalate?

"where is the rule of the law not being respected"

Where is it? It is not the case btw. that there is a title called "oligarchs". What all of this means in its current shape, is targeting simply rich russian people. Now sure, chances are quite high, that they got to their wealth through crime, but law does not usually operate on cliches.

"with an enemy committing war crimes every day"

And as far as I can tell, way more horrible are being done in Yemen for example since 2014 with no one giving a shit about it.

> Erm, no we are not

Yes, we are. Like I said upthread, we're sending aid and weapons en masse into Ukraine. Putin has put us on a shit-list of countries, and even called the sanctions a declaration of war: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-60633482

It's a proxy war, but still a war, with high chances of escalation. It's also being fought online, over social networks, with Russians actively spreading propaganda on our media and networks.

I've not been drafted yet, but the likelihood is becoming higher over time. We are at war, it's just not official yet. But as far as Russia is concerned, it's not even official in Ukraine, so "official definitions" don't matter.

> And as far as I can tell, way more horrible are being done in Yemen

ctrl+f whataboutism on this page, please.

"ctrl+f whataboutism on this page, please. "

I know, I know, only good propaganda supporting your cause is allowed here by your opinion.

But can you please explain to me, why a ukrainian child is worth more, than a child in yemen? Because they are also dying right now, too and in greater numbers. Caused by "our" allies. Not only in the past - but also today.

I think we need to be doing something about both. Otherwise it is just hypocrisy.

"It's a proxy war, but still a war, with high chances of escalation."

And yes, with every fanatic statement, chances of escalation are increasing. But have you heard of something called "Mutual assured destruction"? Sowjet Union did probably way worse than russia today, but was not attacked. That's why.

"I've not been drafted yet, but the likelihood is becoming higher over time. We are at war, it's just not official yet."

And do you know that you can go there and fight today? Ukraine is welcoming volunteers. But maybe bear in mind, that unlike in CoD, you might actually die there on day one. And it likely won't be heroic. War seldom is, nor black and white, especially not if it is in part a civil war. And you might end up fighting next to actual fascists. Not (only) against them, but with them. Stepan Bandera is considered a National Hero there to many. Google him if you are curious. And then about the Regiment Asow. And then about the ukrainian law, that was targeted against the russian language way before the war. Not against russian propaganda, but against the russian language(and people). Putin is a war criminal, belonging to Den Haag - but the ukrainian side are not made up by saints either.

""official definitions" don't matter."

And unlike in your opinion, official definitions actually matter a lot, because the moment russia attacks NATO territory - ALL NATO forces will react. Not before, no matter how great the lust for war, for people beating the drums of war online.

> why a ukrainian child is worth more, than a child in yemen

This is whataboutism, again. I never said such a thing. I'm more involved in the war in Ukraine because I have personal stakes in it.

This thread, HERE, is about Ukraine. You're trying to make it about Yemen. I have a close acquaintance currently dying of cancer, do you see me making this thread about cancer?

> And do you know that you can go there and fight today?

Yes, I'm acutely aware. I almost signed up. I decided not to, because I do not have military training. Since the attacks, I've been taking first aid and firearm training, whatever I have time for. I intend to take combat training later this year. Don't think I'm sitting idle here; the best thing I can do until I'm ready, is fight propaganda.

"This thread, HERE, is about Ukraine. You're trying to make it about Yemen."

No, I am trying to make it about peace. How to resolve conflicts. And I seriously doubt we can really resolve conflicts, if we only solve some conflicts, but profit of others. Because yes - we profit of the war in Yemen. By selling weapons to Saudi Arabia and buying their oil (and in the case of the US also with direct military involvement). As long as we do that(and all the other shit) - how can anyone take us seriously when we say we care for peace and democracy? That's double standards and hypocrisy, which is the fuel for war and conflict.

"the best thing I can do until I'm ready, is fight propaganda."

So you want to fight propaganda? Why not fight the propaganda, that we are the good guys fighting the bad guys. Because this is not true, if we only do it sometimes and ignore the many times we don't.

Yeah. USA should be treated exactly like that when they annexed parts of Mexico. But global economy wasn't developed to such a degree that this would have any impact back then.