6 ms·

> Tech companies are making themselves active participants in conflicts involving powerful countries Same can be said about media companies, banks, car manufac

> Tech companies are making themselves active participants in conflicts involving powerful countries Same can be said about media companies, banks, car manufacturers, luxury brands, fast foods, etc.

ajross 5y ago
And... rightly so? I mean, we know who we want to win here. There's a good side and a bad side. Have we really gone so far down the rabbit hole of "media neutrality" that a unilateral military invasion needs to be protected as... a form of speech, I guess? No, that's wrong. Russia is wrong. Limiting Russia's ability to invade its neighbors isn't being "biased" in a discussion about different perspectives, it's doing the right thing. At some point, there's a line drawn at the limit to tolerance. And Russia literally rolled tanks over it.
- yucky 5y ago
  [flagged]
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - jacquesm 5y ago
    Could you please stop spouting Russian propaganda at every step? Russia has a far bigger Neo Nazi problem then Ukraine, on top of that it isn't exactly the Ukranian Neo Nazi's that are currently invading another country to slaughter their citizens. Neo Nazi's are unfortunately all too common, in the context of Ukraine they are merely a very convenient excuse to invade another sovereign country.
    - yucky 5y ago
      Help me understand what I said that is Russian propaganda. I don't think anybody denies the Ukrainian Azov Battalion is clearly Neo-Nazi. Are you saying this is one of those things that is best left unsaid, since it is an uncomfortable truth? Is that what makes it propaganda in your mind? Because nobody denies the accuracy of it. It's especially odd that you call it Russian propaganda since in the same sentence I call out the Russians for invading a sovereign country.
      - woodada 5y ago
        You said: > Are you referring to the Ukrainian Azov Battalion with their Nazi ideology, or the Russians who have invaded a sovereign country? > The choice may seem simple to you, but it's not as easy as you might think for many to side with avowed Nazi's either.. What you're implying is that there is some moral justification to invading Ukraine if the goal is to eliminate the Nazi Azov battalion. That is false -- there is no justification at all. The reason is that if you applied this standard equally to all countries (i.e. "if x% of population is Nazi, then invade"), then you could invade 90%+(just to be conservative) of the countries in the world: how many people are there in the Azov battalion? 2k? 3k? 5k? Ukraine has a population of 44 million. How many Nazis are there in the United States? How many Nazis are there in Germany? How many Nazis are there in Mongolia? And how many Nazis are there in Russia itself? If you're not planning to "de-naizify" all of them, then "de-nazification" is but a meaningless excuse to your invasion, aka -- propaganda.
        yucky 5y ago
        The comment was in response to the statement that "the choice was clear" on who should be supported. Except it's not. There is a lot of blame to go around, it's been abundantly clear for 25 years that NATO expansion to Ukraine & Georgia would result in war[1]. So when we have continually pushed for that, we have been pushing for war. Also, we can't ignore the US-backed Ukrainian coup/revolution in 2014[2] which then resulted in the invasion of Crimea. Nor can we ignore that after the democratically elected government in Ukraine was removed via that coup/revolution, that the US handpicked the post-coup leadership in Ukraine and helped rewrite the Constitution to put NATO membership back on the table, knowing this would antagonize Russia.[3] Should we not consider all of these things? Russia is clearly being the aggressor now that they have decided to invade Ukraine, but that didn't happen in a vacuum. Our actions in the West are what has led to this, either intentionally or though incompetence. Ignoring everything that happened before February 24th is ignorant. [1] https://www.armscontrol.org/act/1997-06/arms-control-today/opposition-nato-expansion https://www.armscontrol.org/act/1997-06/arms-control-today/o... [2] https://apnews.com/article/970e8e54b3df46eab593e9e11beb056d https://apnews.com/article/970e8e54b3df46eab593e9e11beb056d [3] https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-ukraine-tape/leaked-audio-reveals-embarrassing-u-s-exchange-on-ukraine-eu-idUSBREA1601G20140207 https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-ukraine-tape/leaked-a...
- haveyoubeen 5y ago
  - Nahtnah 5y ago

> Tech companies are making themselves active participants in conflicts involving powerful countries Same can be said about media companies, banks, car manufacturers, luxury brands, fast foods, etc.

ajross 5y ago

And... rightly so? I mean, we know who we want to win here. There's a good side and a bad side. Have we really gone so far down the rabbit hole of "media neutrality" that a unilateral military invasion needs to be protected as... a form of speech, I guess? No, that's wrong. Russia is wrong. Limiting Russia's ability to invade its neighbors isn't being "biased" in a discussion about different perspectives, it's doing the right thing. At some point, there's a line drawn at the limit to tolerance. And Russia literally rolled tanks over it.

yucky 5y ago
[flagged]
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- jacquesm 5y ago
  Could you please stop spouting Russian propaganda at every step? Russia has a far bigger Neo Nazi problem then Ukraine, on top of that it isn't exactly the Ukranian Neo Nazi's that are currently invading another country to slaughter their citizens. Neo Nazi's are unfortunately all too common, in the context of Ukraine they are merely a very convenient excuse to invade another sovereign country.
  - yucky 5y ago
    Help me understand what I said that is Russian propaganda. I don't think anybody denies the Ukrainian Azov Battalion is clearly Neo-Nazi. Are you saying this is one of those things that is best left unsaid, since it is an uncomfortable truth? Is that what makes it propaganda in your mind? Because nobody denies the accuracy of it. It's especially odd that you call it Russian propaganda since in the same sentence I call out the Russians for invading a sovereign country.
    - woodada 5y ago
      You said: > Are you referring to the Ukrainian Azov Battalion with their Nazi ideology, or the Russians who have invaded a sovereign country? > The choice may seem simple to you, but it's not as easy as you might think for many to side with avowed Nazi's either.. What you're implying is that there is some moral justification to invading Ukraine if the goal is to eliminate the Nazi Azov battalion. That is false -- there is no justification at all. The reason is that if you applied this standard equally to all countries (i.e. "if x% of population is Nazi, then invade"), then you could invade 90%+(just to be conservative) of the countries in the world: how many people are there in the Azov battalion? 2k? 3k? 5k? Ukraine has a population of 44 million. How many Nazis are there in the United States? How many Nazis are there in Germany? How many Nazis are there in Mongolia? And how many Nazis are there in Russia itself? If you're not planning to "de-naizify" all of them, then "de-nazification" is but a meaningless excuse to your invasion, aka -- propaganda.
      - yucky 5y ago
        The comment was in response to the statement that "the choice was clear" on who should be supported. Except it's not. There is a lot of blame to go around, it's been abundantly clear for 25 years that NATO expansion to Ukraine & Georgia would result in war[1]. So when we have continually pushed for that, we have been pushing for war. Also, we can't ignore the US-backed Ukrainian coup/revolution in 2014[2] which then resulted in the invasion of Crimea. Nor can we ignore that after the democratically elected government in Ukraine was removed via that coup/revolution, that the US handpicked the post-coup leadership in Ukraine and helped rewrite the Constitution to put NATO membership back on the table, knowing this would antagonize Russia.[3] Should we not consider all of these things? Russia is clearly being the aggressor now that they have decided to invade Ukraine, but that didn't happen in a vacuum. Our actions in the West are what has led to this, either intentionally or though incompetence. Ignoring everything that happened before February 24th is ignorant. [1] https://www.armscontrol.org/act/1997-06/arms-control-today/opposition-nato-expansion https://www.armscontrol.org/act/1997-06/arms-control-today/o... [2] https://apnews.com/article/970e8e54b3df46eab593e9e11beb056d https://apnews.com/article/970e8e54b3df46eab593e9e11beb056d [3] https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-ukraine-tape/leaked-audio-reveals-embarrassing-u-s-exchange-on-ukraine-eu-idUSBREA1601G20140207 https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-ukraine-tape/leaked-a...
haveyoubeen 5y ago
- Nahtnah 5y ago