decebalus1

> Ps: 'untrusting of women' is an alarm bell that makes me think you see women as a class rather than humans, this should be an alarm bell for you too to realise that generalisations about groups of people are always a bad idea.

I may be wrong but reading OPs post led me to believe he is a straight male and does not feel like a relationship with the opposite sex is a good idea right now. I don't believe this is sexist or an over-generalization, just that he is currently not in the right mindset to be able to open up/trust members of the opposite sex. And that's ok. It will eventually pass.

> Aren't they more afraid of violence and threats from the other execs?

Is Amazon Cosa Nostra nowadays? I find it hard to believe they'd be more scared of other execs than the government..

Yes, exactly. An overall poor country.

> The grunts who are turning themselves in say they thought it was “training” until the last minute.

Take that with a grain of salt. If you research the history of Russian conflicts, stating that they were told it was just training is a common trope of captured Russians (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30549427). It's basically a survival technique. Don't underestimate the indoctrination apparatus of the Russian army. They were sent there to kill, and they know it. Imagine being in 'training' and seeing medical tents + doctors + blood supplies. Give me a break. That doesn't rule out poor planning and/or poor logistics..

> Their skin will be cleaned off the pavement.

Agree to disagree but let's hope it doesn't end up like some Tiananmen Square massacre in some large city..

> There was no signed agreement, I'm not disputing that.

So why allegedly breaking this 'no signed agreement' held at a higher standard than Russia breaking actually signed agreements?

Between my country and Russia, I can say for sure that one of them has not bombed/invaded/occupied/ethnically cleansed/impoverished another nation in the past 80 years. So again, fuck Putin and fuck Russia.

Only one side of the kids have skin in the game and don't really need to be fed anything..

I don't think you understand the difference between https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum_on_Securit...

and a meeting 'memo', when you say 'memorandum'. Hearsay is something someone says about what they've heard. Which is what you linked. Also, the plural of memorandum is 'memoranda'.

I still haven't seen any treaty in your links.

> Verbal guarantees were given on many occasions but conveneniently forgotten or dismissed later on.

Putin also said, months ago, that he's not going to invade Ukraine and that the West is creating panic. But we're conveniently forgetting these 'verbal guarantees', right?

> It is just a fact of life that smaller countries are more frequently invaded

Yeah, 'just a fact of life'. NATO expansion into smaller countries, due to this 'fact of life' is a 'fact of life' itself.

> your support for the deaths of thousands

I don't. The Russian aggressors do.

> I’ve been anti-Russia from Day 1

Judging by your post history, that's extremely debatable

> Ukraine is fighting a war they can’t win

Again, debatable. Russia can't 'win' in Ukraine. Whichever way to take it, even if they manage to take the large cities, it is impossible for them to 'conquer' a country, 1800's style. That's just not how things work anymore. You can't stifle dissent at this scale unless you go full nuclear and if that's the case, we're all fucked anyway (including Russia). The more time passes, the more strangled Russians are going to be economically, so there is a non-zero chance of Russia collapsing or Putin getting ousted before Ukraine falls.

> If China rolls up onto US mainland with auto-aim drones, I’m hiding, and if surrendering is on the table then I’m definitely surrendering.

Then I'm glad you're not in charge of US defenses. We really don't need cowards around here.

It's literally hearsay. Quite literally. Again, is there any treaty, any memorandum, any pact or anything about NATO not expanding eastwards? Any trade agreement, any signed piece of paper between heads of state and representatives of NATO or NATO members about this?

Because again, there is a 1994 Memorandum about Ukraine's borders and nuclear weapons which someone is deliberately ignoring.

I find it both troubling and disingenuous for people to beat the dead horse about the NATO expansion myth while completely ignoring Russia breaking both the 1994 Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances and the 1987 Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty. Those weren't hearsay, they were actual agreements which were negotiated and signed.

But sure, 'you can't trust the west'. I'm coming from a former communist country and to be honest, the west never invaded. The Russians did, repeatedly. Across history, the Russians were the only constant invaders. And this is actually why my country joined NATO the first chance it got.

So, if someone is to blame for NATO expansion, it's actually Russia. Actually, this invasion we're witnessing is one of the best advertisements for NATO in history. So, fuck Putin, fuck Russia and their expansionist ambitions. I hope I live to see Putin's head on a pike.

You're repeatedly posting such cheap Russian propaganda it crosses the threshold of offensiveness to actually become hilarious.

> Russia was promised no NATO expansion when the Warsaw Pact was terminated.

That is factually incorrect. There is no treaty, no memorandum, no statement about that, except for some hearsay from a meeting between Baker and Gorbachev. This is the treaty about east Germany https://usa.usembassy.de/etexts/2plusfour8994e.htm and NATO, which the west has respected. Stop spreading misinformation.

What is correct is that Russia promised guarantees of Ukraine's borders in the Budapest memorandum.

That's straight up Russian propaganda, so beware. In his ideas, a sovereign nation signing a treaty is an 'existential threat' for Russia, which of course, makes any problem in Ukraine the 'west's fault'. NATO expansion is not western imperialism, it is the result of 50 years of communist oppression and present-day anxiety of not ending up like Ukraine is right now. So, as someone who grew up in the eastern bloc, fuck Mearsheimer.

That's not the point. People don't really seem to get that Russia is basically a terrorist state right now. The goal is not only to cut power but to terrorize - striking a nuclear plant and preventing firefighters from intervening is, as you currently see, scary as fuck. They're sending a message.

If you want an actual explanation for the extension of NATO into the former communist countries, look no further. East Europeans have a collective memory about how the Russian military operates.

The 'training mission' trope is as old as the Red Army and it's bullshit.

They pulled the same shit in 1956 when they got captured by the Hungarians and in 1968 when they invaded Czechoslovakia: 'We were told it was a training mission'. This is straight-up a survival tactic for the prisoners. They're playing dumb and acting innocent. It's impossible not to know by now where, what and why you are doing in a foreign country, in a fucking military convoy.

Which shows that even the rich and powerful are a bunch of fucking cowards

Wrong address, tovarisch. I didn't grow up with US cold war propaganda and can detect Kremlin bullshit from miles away.

You're phrasing it as if 'we're firing any orchestra conductors' but anyone with half a brain is able to figure out who that guy is and what are his past political involvements:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valery_Gergiev#Social_and_poli...

So honestly, he can get fucked either way, regardless of how vigorously he's denouncing Putler.

Lots of new accounts with a lot of opinions lately..

The company has employees in Ukraine. I think that's a pretty good reason, isn't it?

The company has employees in Ukraine. And you're also a new account with only 2 comments specifically about this issue. What unit are you in, tovarisch?

The company has employees in Ukraine. Where's the double standard?

No, they're actually not valid <in this context>. This is textbook whataboutism and not worth engaging. Cheers!

> cheap, free, open, independent of govt control

Literally neither of those is true about Starlink.

please read the room

See this as an example: https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/06/11/abolish-police-georgia-...

> February 17, 2021

"During a gold rush, sell shovels"

hello fellow hn-ers, I also like how [company] offers this [benefit] to [customers]