4 ms·
GP's writing is as you describe it, but the idea was quite clear. Right or not, I've no idea, but GP's meaning was clear. I thought it was insightful, in fact
by cryptonector 5y ago
GP's writing is as you describe it, but the idea was quite clear. Right or not, I've no idea, but GP's meaning was clear. I thought it was insightful, in fact -- again, I don't know if it's remotely correct, but it's a possibility I hadn't considered, and that makes it interesting.
- stavros 5y agoWhat was the idea? I honestly have no clue what it's saying, I don't know who the Chinese engineer leaders are, what the idea is, and why it somehow failed? I'm just completely lost.
- cryptonector 5y agoI understood that comment to suggest that China was willing to support Russia regarding Ukraine if the whole operation went smoothly and quickly presented the world with a fait accompli, but that if the whole thing drags on or worse then China might leave Russia flapping in the wind. Is that the case? I've no idea. The comment, however, was interesting.
- stavros 5y agoOh I see, thanks for explaining!
- cryptonector 5y agoMeanwhile the comment in question is flagged and removed. Too bad, now it's hard to understand this entire sub-thread. Aside from being written a bit obtusely and with language HN does not approve of, the comment was, nonetheless, interesting -- at least as I understood it, and I gather you understand as well now. IMO it should not have been removed.
- stavros 5y agoI agree, actually. It wasn't spam or inflammatory.
- cryptonector 5y agoRight, it wasn't worth flagging. It had language that might make half of HN readers scream about conspiracy theories, but the actual content of the comment was not far out at all, and was cogent and sane even if the language didn't seem to be.