NATO websites hit in cyber attack over Crimea stance | Hacker News Reader

NATO websites hit in cyber attack over Crimea stance

reuters.com

24 pointstestrun29 comments

before everyone comes out with their russia hate here's old leaks of emails from the udar party[1].

a lot of people predicted that meddling with ukraine would lead to another split state, and that is precisely what we see unfolding.

it doesn't matter whether the west is right, or whether russia is right. the immense complacency that has grown in european, and us leadership with total disregard of russias interests is what brought the situation to the situation we have right now. when we do things it's justified. when others do them they're wrong.

what puzzles me, is that we're supposed to be on hacker news. people that decompose, and extend other people's works on a day to day basis sit here, and comment how it's "obviously" wrong to think putin is right. wait what? normally there is a bunch of people criticizing lack of objectivity or critical thought, but when it comes to territorial right, and sexism there is only one way. and what others say is dismissed as propaganda.

the group that made a political coup in the ukraine with the support of the west, to overthrow an elected leader - whether we like him or not is irrelevant -, directly, or indirectly(with money, threat of sanctions, threat of no economic cooperation), has now unanimously voted for creating a national guard to fight terrorists[2]. the terrorists? what?

heres a map of crimea[4]. have you ever thought about geopolitics? did you really think russia would completely distance itself from the situation? we didn't. we kept fueling the conflict. what on earth makes you think we're entitled to more than russia? what on earth made you think that russia wouldn't take advantage of it's influence like we took on ours?

according to a german politician the words the founder of the svoboda party were this: "Grab the guns, fight the Russian pigs, the Germans, the Jews pigs and others"(sadly, i am not entirely sure what the sources of his speech are, if you understand german you can listen to the speech here, he's been blasting both russia, AND the western leadership[3]).

the leader of the anti government riots is now the Secretary of the National Security and Defence Council of Ukraine. his deputy is the right sector leader yarosh.

I don't really care whether your think the current ukrainian government has legitimacy or not. that is your personal opinion, and may or may not be right. it's not really for me to judge. but completely disregarding the facts, and calling everyone that is not of your opinion a propagandatist or someone fed by russian propaganda is disgusting.

is that really the level we are discussing things on?

[1] http://pastebin.com/8mpTbTqY

[2] http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26558288

[3] http://youtu.be/pXLy0NGW9sM

[4] http://mkalty.org/crimea/

I'm not saying Russia is wrong on everything, and for someone who really dislikes US lately, it makes it very hard for me to try and be on US's side on this again, but Russia really isn't making it easy for itself when the only 2 options in the referendum for Crimea secession are:

1) Would you like to join Russia now?

2) Would you like autonomy from Ukraine?

I mean, come on! Where's the "No, go away!" option? Russia isn't giving Crimea a choice. It's forcing Crimea into a choice, that's only favorable to Russia.

Russia also didn't meet its quorum in Parliament when they decided to invade Crimea, making it illegal by its own laws. So this makes it more like Putin's own quest for more power, than "protecting Russia" or "giving Russia what's theirs" (which Crimea isn't - we settled this a long time ago). You can't come after decades and say "hey, you know that land that we lost decades ago? Yeah, that's ours. Give it back!

This combined with tyrannical leaders' "egoes" are what have always made for stupid and completely unnecessary wars.

I believe it's 1) Would you like to join Russia 2) Would you like to stay in Ukraine.

No?

No, it's not. That's the joke about the "referendum". The options are: Split from Ukraine and become part of Russia - or just split from Ukraine.

Yeah that joke is part of the western propaganda that tries to distill something not so simple into something that can be captured and made fun of in internet-meme format. The options are:

"Are you in favor of the reunification of Crimea with Russia as a part of the Russian Federation?"

And

"Are you in favor of restoring the 1992 Constitution and the status of Crimea as a part of Ukraine?"

One option quite clearly is for joining Russia, while the other option quite clearly is for staying within Ukraine, albeit with increased autonomy (the loss of which in the past was hugely unpopular)

according to the 1992 constitution Crimea can declare independence and then unite with Russia. How is that any different from 1?

Absolutely shameful that this is the top comment. People on HN have no idea about geopolitics and what danger Russia represents to countries like Poland and the Baltics. The West should now be speaking in unified voice and pressuring Russia to give up Kaliningrad. No patience anymore for objectivity.

Oh and it's fucking rich to complain about supposedly fascistic tendencies of Putin's opposition when it is Putin himself who says things like, "Russia doesn't need minorities. Minorities need Russia." Fucking hypocrites.

Then enlighten us, O Enlightened One. Absolve us of our shame for our knowledge is inferior to your grand mind. Perhaps those factions of Ukrainian politics that are self-described nationalists were misunderstood by those of us too cautious to throw our meaningless hats into the ring of warring propagandists. Please, oh wise bluekeybox, please teach us your ways. If I were of the power and stature to spread my own influence using shills (a descriptor I rarely use) I would have them appeal to emotion the way you did and end their contribution there.

So please, do go on -- there is always time for objectivity.

Because most people would rather support their allies and people who like them, rather than playing the hand of people who hate them. This is actually a tragic situation. I don't want to comment further.

Has anyone noticed all the bizarrely pro-Putin comments on English language news sites over the past few weeks? I mean actually repeating Russian propaganda which is completely contrary to reality. The Guardian is flooded with this in every article on the subject.

It's weird, and I'm sure some of it is an actual orchestrated propaganda effort, but I worry that a lot of it is just another instance of people being knee-jerk contrarians.

There was a well known pro-government astroturfing in Russia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_brigades#Nashi_involvement

But it can be real people commenting at The Guardian. Brainwashing is very strong.

I expect those kind of comments popping up on The Guardian. I was surprised when I saw an entire thread of them on HN:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7404280

(although maybe I shouldn't be surprised)

Sock-puppet accounts are hard to prevent. If you employ an entire army to influence social media and news comments, it can be a powerful force.

Unfortunately, the superpowers have been doing it for a while.

Just don't forget that there is propaganda from both sides.

It has traditionally been illegal for the US to spread propaganda to US citizens: http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2011/mar/17/us-spy-ope...

But in 2013: http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2013/07/12/us_backs_...

There should be a law that requires the US government to put a notice on anything that could be considered propaganda. Hopefully that would mean more transparency, which is a good thing.

Technically, it is not "US", it is "private companies" (media).

Just like with censorship. Plausible deniability, but getting their way anyway.

Astroturf everywhere.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=2903802...

Are you sure what you've read is "completely contrary to reality"? I don't know how the situation is where you live, but the Belgian media has repeated some half-truths or even outright lies. I've been reading up on myself, with which I don't mean checking RT, and I've found that the situation is not as clear as it seems.

I've noticed people having varying opinions based on varying pieces of information and misinformation.

But what I've also noticed is these blatantly populist comments like yours that attempt to preemptively discredit any pro-Russian opinion by blaming it all on Putin propaganda in a very handwavey fashion... Props to you for for stepping up the sophistication level by also including the possibility that it could also be attributed to "knee jerk contrarianism."

I don't think anyone is naive enough to believe that Russia doesn't have a propaganda machine at tries to protect its very pragmatic if unpopular interests. The difference between now and maybe 10-20 years ago is that more and more people aren't naive enough to think that they are only ones.

Pro-Kremlin astroturfers recently attacked Polish Newsweek [1]. If they care even about _Polish_ web, there are certainly plenty of them in English web.

[1] http://swiat.newsweek.pl/wynajeci-rosjanie-cyber-bombarduja-...

>Has anyone noticed all the bizarrely pro-Putin comments on English language news sites over the past few weeks

I've noticed the opposite all over reddit -- people calling Russia an undeveloped dictator-ruled 3rd world country, saying that they should just get bombed by NATO, so on, so forth. It all just reminds me of the anti-Iraq comments from back in the day, and I'm sure the Cold War dialogue was not much different. The fact that we were so quick to recognize an independent ethnic-Albanian Kosovo in Russian-aligned Serbia but not an independent ethnic-Russian Crimea in EU-aligned Ukraine is one small evidence of that. Quite frankly, I'd wish the people of the US would keep their out-of-place views about East-European politics to themselves.

There is an orchestrated propaganda effort, no doubt about that, and it's from both sides.

There are two sides two every story. The average HN reader is very likely to be in an echo chamber that by its own nature as well as by controlled intervention spins a view against the Russian position. As am I. Certain things feel so obvious to me and seemingly everyone else, I can't help being suspicious. Of course the same is true for the other side.

I suppose the Russians will be telling their people that the "West" did it themselves in order to make Russia look bad, just like the "Ukranian" unmarked fascist troops surrounded their own bases "for the laugh" and now want a part of their country annexed.

Sigh

WTF?

Nope; they no longer give a shit about looking bad. This is scary.

Please don't bring politics into HN. Sigh

P.S. You need read the article, "Lungescu noted the statement by "a group of hacktivists" but said that, due to the complexities involved in attributing the attacks, NATO would not speculate about who was responsible or their motives."

Yes because there hasnt been any politically motivated cyber attacks on countries within the Russian "sphere of influence" in the past /sarcasm

I understood your original comment. It raised two polarizing political hypotheticals based on childish cyber attacks, that even the attacked cannot speculate on. It's just a website.

It would be nice if the US/EU sanctions against Soviet includes cutting them of the net. 99.99999% of everything thats comes over the wire from Russia is just crap anyway. Don't get me wrong, there is a lot of good Russians out there, but if you're a good Russian you don't stay in Russia.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com