9 ms·

While there are risks and many attempts are foolish, everybody should have realized by now that Putin will not stop in Ukraine unless he is crushed. Not to enga

by NoPie 5y ago

While there are risks and many attempts are foolish, everybody should have realized by now that Putin will not stop in Ukraine unless he is crushed. Not to engage military is even bigger mistake and will only lead to prolonged war and more deaths and suffering. It was not Biden's mistake that the war was started. Putin only used it as a pretext. It is a simple war of aggression that would have happened anyway.

csee 5y ago
Why the downvotes? Putin said as much in his invasion speech. Lukashenko's invasion map literally had Moldova as the next invasion target. Wake up people.
- NoPie 5y ago
  We have surprising many Putin bots or just naive followers.
  - ianai 5y ago
    Too bad icann didn't see this as a problem...imagine how the misinformation problem and cyberwarfare would diminish if they had been disconnected from the greater internet?
  - honkdaddy 5y ago
    HN doesn't allow downvotes for accounts with less than 500 karma. While I don't doubt there's considerable Russian astroturfing on FB or Twitter, I'm pretty skeptical that the Kremlin employs similar tactics here. Spambots or paid shills would stick out like a sore thumb.
    - ttttttthu66ttt 5y ago
      They are sticking out like a sore thumb.
      - NoPie 5y ago
        I noticed that when I write something like this, I immediately get downvotes. Then gradually as discussion developed I get upvoted. To me it seems that there really are vigilantes who are doing this for whatever reason. The same could be said about certain articles. For example, that Facebook allows to praise the Azov battalion. It is a controversial thing that Ukrainians shouldn't be proud of, but it has been explained already how the praise is allowed – not with regards to neo-nazi ideology but only when mentioned as part of regular armed forces where this battalion was incorporated to control them. And yet despite the explanation this article come up again and again which makes me think for concerted effort to spread anti-Ukrainian narrative.
    - NoPie 5y ago
      It is not that simple. Even the Guardian noticed that antivax bots are now silent and have switched to pro-Russian narrative. And many naive people are following them. I used to be tolerant of antivax views on the grounds of the freedom of speech even though personally I am strictly pro-vax. Today I was unpleasantly surprised that they are now quoting all this rubbish how the war in Ukraine is the mistake of the west and globalisation etc. It was from people whom I would expect the least to take pro-Putin stance. I know they are not bots but how could they have changed their narrative overnight? I guess some people are really so gullible and easily absorb all rubbish whether it is antivax or pro-Putin. This is even more interesting that the vaccination coverage is Ukraine is really low (less than 50%) and there are many reasons for this, historic problems, distrust in authorities, weak medical system, and also antivax bots. Nevertheless, antivax and Ukraine independence are completely different issues. It does not make sense logically to connect one with another. And yet, a lot of so called contrarians do and it is not due to strong analytical skills.
      - dmpk2k 5y ago
        But the pro-vax people are talking about Ukraine too, so not exactly compelling evidence.
        NoPie 5y ago
        I am sure there is a greater correlation between antivax and pro-Putin stance (except in Ukraine). Pro-vax people are majority and will have more divergent views about other issues so that doesn't mean much.
- zthrowaway 5y ago
  My guess for the downvotes is the claim this isn’t Biden’s fault. There’s a large camp of people who think the US is forcing Ukraine into this position by egging on Russia. I don’t think that’s the case personally. One thing I do think Biden did wrong was shut down the keystone pipeline and forcing us to buy oil from Russia as a result, which gave Russia a great way to fund a war campaign.
  - XorNot 5y ago
    The US is still oil independent - the keystone pipeline didn't change a thing in that regard (how could it? If you can ship oil from Russia, you can ship it from slightly further north in your own continent. Oil is a fungible commodity though: the price is effected by global demand - as I noted in a previous thread on this exact subject, the idea of "independence" and "dependence" both mean nothing so long as private enterprise can own the resource and faces no restrictions on its export.
    - zthrowaway 5y ago
      Okay, makes sense. But how does that negate us giving Russia a war chest of money the past year?
      - ModernMech 5y ago
        They’ve been seizing all of that money. It’s mostly unavailable at this point.
      - rsfern 5y ago
        If you mean Russian oil exports, I thought the bulk of those went to Europe and China. It looks like 8 or 9% of US oil imports have been coming from Russia. About half our imports are from Canada. I’m not sure what percentage of US oil usage would be Russian import, but it doesn’t seem like “war chest” level? https://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/pet_move_impcus_a2_nus_ep00_im0_mbbl_m.htm https://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/pet_move_impcus_a2_nus_ep00_im0... Edit: on further inspection, it does seem like a large dollar amount. And if you look at 2019 numbers, we imported a much larger fraction from Russia than in 2021. I still think much more Russian oil goes to Europe
baybal2 5y ago
> It was not Biden's mistake that the war was started. Putin only used it as a pretext. It is a simple war of aggression that would have happened anyway. It was President Biden who said it openly "we know Russia will invade Ukraine," the intel I believe Putin leaked purposefully to probe US response, and then said that "there will be no US boots on the ground" before the invasion has even started. This reassured Russian political establishment of not only US military not doing anything, but also about US political establishment being comfortable with that. Indicating that you know a credible threat is coming well ahead of time, and then doing nothing all that time is a terrible diplomatic move, which signalled Putin of US already "coming to terms with the inevitable." You never state your red lines.
- ModernMech 5y ago
  > This reassured Russian political establishment of not only US military not doing anything, but also about US political establishment being comfortable with that. If you want to talk about the American political establishment reassuring Putin, talk about former President Trump calling him a genius and savvy, the former Secretary of State saying he admired Putin as he was amassing equipment on Ukraine’s border, and the right airing fawning praise for Putin over the past 6 years. Seriously, American political media that is airing on Russian state TV right now is already celebrating that Republicans are taking over in the Fall, and these same Republicans are on TV all but claiming fealty to Putin. They spent the last 6 years spreading Russian propaganda that their hacking of the 2016 election was either a hoax, or if it wasn’t than it was Ukraine’s fault. The former US President attempted to extort a bribe from the Ukrainians and withheld the very weapons they knew they needed for a moment just as this. And talk about signals, Zelensky wanted a signal from Trump to Putin that America supported Ukraine in the form of a White House visit. This visit was denied and never occurred. What kind of signal did that send to Putin about American support for Ukraine? His party (the same people on TV “asking questions” as to why we should hate Putin so much) defended him for that and claimed it was his right to do so! Trump stood right next to Putin and acted like a beat dog as he claimed he trusted Putin and believed Putin did not hack the DNC in 2016. My God, this is happening today because Mitt Romney called Russia America’s number one geopolitical foe and the rest of his party scoffed and laughed and took a trip to Moscow on July 4. The problem today is that a huge contingent of people think that Russian style oligarchy would be a great model to bring here. Mostly very rich people like Peter Thiel, Tucker Carlson and Donald Trump, who mused he’d like to be America’s “President for Life” just like Putin. They have been signaling for years now that they want to be part of a new alliance of autocrats including Russia, Brazil, the UAE, Hungary, Saudi Arabia, and India. They would much prefer we abandon NATO, our European allies, and instead side with the rising tide of autocracy happening across the globe. You don’t get an invasion of Ukraine without that context.

by NoPie 5y ago

csee 5y ago

Why the downvotes? Putin said as much in his invasion speech. Lukashenko's invasion map literally had Moldova as the next invasion target. Wake up people.

NoPie 5y ago
We have surprising many Putin bots or just naive followers.
- ianai 5y ago
  Too bad icann didn't see this as a problem...imagine how the misinformation problem and cyberwarfare would diminish if they had been disconnected from the greater internet?
- honkdaddy 5y ago
  HN doesn't allow downvotes for accounts with less than 500 karma. While I don't doubt there's considerable Russian astroturfing on FB or Twitter, I'm pretty skeptical that the Kremlin employs similar tactics here. Spambots or paid shills would stick out like a sore thumb.
  - ttttttthu66ttt 5y ago
    They are sticking out like a sore thumb.
    - NoPie 5y ago
      I noticed that when I write something like this, I immediately get downvotes. Then gradually as discussion developed I get upvoted. To me it seems that there really are vigilantes who are doing this for whatever reason. The same could be said about certain articles. For example, that Facebook allows to praise the Azov battalion. It is a controversial thing that Ukrainians shouldn't be proud of, but it has been explained already how the praise is allowed – not with regards to neo-nazi ideology but only when mentioned as part of regular armed forces where this battalion was incorporated to control them. And yet despite the explanation this article come up again and again which makes me think for concerted effort to spread anti-Ukrainian narrative.
  - NoPie 5y ago
    It is not that simple. Even the Guardian noticed that antivax bots are now silent and have switched to pro-Russian narrative. And many naive people are following them. I used to be tolerant of antivax views on the grounds of the freedom of speech even though personally I am strictly pro-vax. Today I was unpleasantly surprised that they are now quoting all this rubbish how the war in Ukraine is the mistake of the west and globalisation etc. It was from people whom I would expect the least to take pro-Putin stance. I know they are not bots but how could they have changed their narrative overnight? I guess some people are really so gullible and easily absorb all rubbish whether it is antivax or pro-Putin. This is even more interesting that the vaccination coverage is Ukraine is really low (less than 50%) and there are many reasons for this, historic problems, distrust in authorities, weak medical system, and also antivax bots. Nevertheless, antivax and Ukraine independence are completely different issues. It does not make sense logically to connect one with another. And yet, a lot of so called contrarians do and it is not due to strong analytical skills.
    - dmpk2k 5y ago
      But the pro-vax people are talking about Ukraine too, so not exactly compelling evidence.
      - NoPie 5y ago
        I am sure there is a greater correlation between antivax and pro-Putin stance (except in Ukraine). Pro-vax people are majority and will have more divergent views about other issues so that doesn't mean much.
zthrowaway 5y ago
My guess for the downvotes is the claim this isn’t Biden’s fault. There’s a large camp of people who think the US is forcing Ukraine into this position by egging on Russia. I don’t think that’s the case personally. One thing I do think Biden did wrong was shut down the keystone pipeline and forcing us to buy oil from Russia as a result, which gave Russia a great way to fund a war campaign.
- XorNot 5y ago
  The US is still oil independent - the keystone pipeline didn't change a thing in that regard (how could it? If you can ship oil from Russia, you can ship it from slightly further north in your own continent. Oil is a fungible commodity though: the price is effected by global demand - as I noted in a previous thread on this exact subject, the idea of "independence" and "dependence" both mean nothing so long as private enterprise can own the resource and faces no restrictions on its export.
  - zthrowaway 5y ago
    Okay, makes sense. But how does that negate us giving Russia a war chest of money the past year?
    - ModernMech 5y ago
      They’ve been seizing all of that money. It’s mostly unavailable at this point.
    - rsfern 5y ago
      If you mean Russian oil exports, I thought the bulk of those went to Europe and China. It looks like 8 or 9% of US oil imports have been coming from Russia. About half our imports are from Canada. I’m not sure what percentage of US oil usage would be Russian import, but it doesn’t seem like “war chest” level? https://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/pet_move_impcus_a2_nus_ep00_im0_mbbl_m.htm https://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/pet_move_impcus_a2_nus_ep00_im0... Edit: on further inspection, it does seem like a large dollar amount. And if you look at 2019 numbers, we imported a much larger fraction from Russia than in 2021. I still think much more Russian oil goes to Europe

baybal2 5y ago

> It was not Biden's mistake that the war was started. Putin only used it as a pretext. It is a simple war of aggression that would have happened anyway. It was President Biden who said it openly "we know Russia will invade Ukraine," the intel I believe Putin leaked purposefully to probe US response, and then said that "there will be no US boots on the ground" before the invasion has even started. This reassured Russian political establishment of not only US military not doing anything, but also about US political establishment being comfortable with that. Indicating that you know a credible threat is coming well ahead of time, and then doing nothing all that time is a terrible diplomatic move, which signalled Putin of US already "coming to terms with the inevitable." You never state your red lines.

ModernMech 5y ago
> This reassured Russian political establishment of not only US military not doing anything, but also about US political establishment being comfortable with that. If you want to talk about the American political establishment reassuring Putin, talk about former President Trump calling him a genius and savvy, the former Secretary of State saying he admired Putin as he was amassing equipment on Ukraine’s border, and the right airing fawning praise for Putin over the past 6 years. Seriously, American political media that is airing on Russian state TV right now is already celebrating that Republicans are taking over in the Fall, and these same Republicans are on TV all but claiming fealty to Putin. They spent the last 6 years spreading Russian propaganda that their hacking of the 2016 election was either a hoax, or if it wasn’t than it was Ukraine’s fault. The former US President attempted to extort a bribe from the Ukrainians and withheld the very weapons they knew they needed for a moment just as this. And talk about signals, Zelensky wanted a signal from Trump to Putin that America supported Ukraine in the form of a White House visit. This visit was denied and never occurred. What kind of signal did that send to Putin about American support for Ukraine? His party (the same people on TV “asking questions” as to why we should hate Putin so much) defended him for that and claimed it was his right to do so! Trump stood right next to Putin and acted like a beat dog as he claimed he trusted Putin and believed Putin did not hack the DNC in 2016. My God, this is happening today because Mitt Romney called Russia America’s number one geopolitical foe and the rest of his party scoffed and laughed and took a trip to Moscow on July 4. The problem today is that a huge contingent of people think that Russian style oligarchy would be a great model to bring here. Mostly very rich people like Peter Thiel, Tucker Carlson and Donald Trump, who mused he’d like to be America’s “President for Life” just like Putin. They have been signaling for years now that they want to be part of a new alliance of autocrats including Russia, Brazil, the UAE, Hungary, Saudi Arabia, and India. They would much prefer we abandon NATO, our European allies, and instead side with the rising tide of autocracy happening across the globe. You don’t get an invasion of Ukraine without that context.