4 ms·

> It was an invasion and annexation according to international law. That is crystal clear and there is not even any leeway for interpretation about it. It is a

> It was an invasion and annexation according to international law. That is crystal clear and there is not even any leeway for interpretation about it. It is always a bit amusing, though also somewhat infuriating, whenever somebody writes something like this. It often is a good indicator of what likely is to follow. Truly ironic, that the people who (apparently) know the least about international law are usually the first to mention it. Even more that most of these people appear to come from countries that probably are the biggest violators of international laws, by historical track record. I'm not even going to argue with you, for you rather obviously take personal convictions over actual knowledge. Good luck with that. Here is a fact for you: the forces/interest behind most of this will come back to roost one day. Maybe rather sooner than you think. One thing I'm pretty sure of: you're not going to like. Don't say that nobody tried to warn you, when it turns out that the joke was always on you.

jonathanstrange 6y ago
Your comment is an irrelevant ad-hominem argument. That's may be okay for Reddit but I'd expect a bit more from someone posting on HN. Besides, that international law was broken by Russia is not my personal opinion, it's backed up by the majority of countries and by almost all scholars in international law, see e.g. [1] for a good analysis. You're just plain wrong in both of your posts. [1] https://www.mpil.de/files/pdf4/Marxsen_2014_-_The_crimea_crisis_-_an_international_law_perspective.pdf https://www.mpil.de/files/pdf4/Marxsen_2014_-_The_crimea_cri...
- elmo2you 6y ago
  You may call it an ad-hominem attack, if you like. However, what I am doing is calling you out .. I honestly don't know if you are a deliberate propaganda mouth piece or just an unfortunate victim of it. Either way, the moment you mentioned international law in relation to this issue, and even had to nerve to declare that the truth of your convictions are factually undeniable, you yourself were the one who pretty much shoved all-in and closed the door for any meaningful discussion. Maybe you should take a look in the mirror first, if you want to blame someone for being called out for that. I have a pretty decent track record of being rather respectful (definitely beyond and above average) towards to opinions of other. Just maybe not for people who talk like you. You can take your (abuse of) political correctness and .. EDIT: I see what you are trying, but you still don't get it (regarding international law). Good luck and goodbye.
  - jonathanstrange 6y ago
    You're again just raising ad-hominem attacks. There is not a single point worth discussing in your last two posts. I'll leave my original reply to you standing as is - Crimea was annexed by Russia in violation of international law, as the paper I've linked to also concludes. On a side note, there is no respect in your posts at all. On the contrary, after two ad-hominem attacks you even make up a completely new topic of "political correctness" that has nothing to do with anything that has been said so far. > I honestly don't know if you are a deliberate propaganda mouth piece or just an unfortunate victim of it. Right... have a good one!

jonathanstrange 6y ago

Your comment is an irrelevant ad-hominem argument. That's may be okay for Reddit but I'd expect a bit more from someone posting on HN. Besides, that international law was broken by Russia is not my personal opinion, it's backed up by the majority of countries and by almost all scholars in international law, see e.g. [1] for a good analysis. You're just plain wrong in both of your posts. [1] https://www.mpil.de/files/pdf4/Marxsen_2014_-_The_crimea_crisis_-_an_international_law_perspective.pdf https://www.mpil.de/files/pdf4/Marxsen_2014_-_The_crimea_cri...

elmo2you 6y ago
You may call it an ad-hominem attack, if you like. However, what I am doing is calling you out .. I honestly don't know if you are a deliberate propaganda mouth piece or just an unfortunate victim of it. Either way, the moment you mentioned international law in relation to this issue, and even had to nerve to declare that the truth of your convictions are factually undeniable, you yourself were the one who pretty much shoved all-in and closed the door for any meaningful discussion. Maybe you should take a look in the mirror first, if you want to blame someone for being called out for that. I have a pretty decent track record of being rather respectful (definitely beyond and above average) towards to opinions of other. Just maybe not for people who talk like you. You can take your (abuse of) political correctness and .. EDIT: I see what you are trying, but you still don't get it (regarding international law). Good luck and goodbye.
- jonathanstrange 6y ago
  You're again just raising ad-hominem attacks. There is not a single point worth discussing in your last two posts. I'll leave my original reply to you standing as is - Crimea was annexed by Russia in violation of international law, as the paper I've linked to also concludes. On a side note, there is no respect in your posts at all. On the contrary, after two ad-hominem attacks you even make up a completely new topic of "political correctness" that has nothing to do with anything that has been said so far. > I honestly don't know if you are a deliberate propaganda mouth piece or just an unfortunate victim of it. Right... have a good one!