8 ms·

It's fascinating to me how so many of these pieces have emerged. Normally this sort of admission comes after the fact. Decades later when everyone who was the

It's fascinating to me how so many of these pieces have emerged. Normally this sort of admission comes after the fact. Decades later when everyone who was there is dead, we would learn that the British, Americans, and probably other NATO countries were all-but pressing the button on the war against Russia. But now we seem to be openly bragging, daring Russia to retaliate against the actual powers fighting behind the thin veneer of Ukraine. Poke, poke, poke, the nuclear bear. At the same time, I would not be surprised if in time we'll learn that many of those "accidents" in key American industry this year have been successful Russian-aligned cyber attacks. But note that the Russians are not openly bragging and advertising it.

mwint 4y ago
Which American accidents are you referring to? (Genuine question)
- aaron695 4y ago
gerikson 4y ago
The article describes a team helping a country defend itself against cyberattacks. How is that "pressing the button on a war"?
- zmgsabst 4y ago
  Assisting the defense of a nation at war with your own military assets is traditionally considered “joining a war”.
  - BobbyJo 4y ago
    If that were the definition, then Russia is at war with nearly the entire developed world. Doesn't seem like they're doing a very good job of things. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_foreign_aid_to_Ukraine_during_the_Russo-Ukrainian_War#:~:text=The%20United%20States%20has%20provided,in%20order%20to%20support%20Ukraine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_foreign_aid_to_Ukraine....
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
  - halJordan 4y ago
    That's probably a necessary, but not sufficient response. Russia wasn't at war in 2014. The Soviets weren't at war in Korea or Vietnam. These are distinctions the West made.
  - ajuc 4y ago
    Good thing there's no war in Ukraine then, just "special military operation". Joking aside - it's not as simple. For one thing in modern times nobody actually declares wars, and Russia isn't abiding to all the conventions anyway. So the rules are very fuzzy. For another - selling weapons or providing volunteers was never considered "joining a war", even according to the strictest reading of the conventions assuming they applied.
    - zmgsabst 4y ago
      This doesn’t sound like either of those things. Per article: > Gen Paul Nakasone, who leads both the military's Cyber Command and the National Security Agency confirmed offensive missions have also been undertaken against Russia in the wake of the invasion of Ukraine.
  - mint2 4y ago
    Good thing then Russia’s official stance is that there is no war. In fact, that’s such a noxious lie in Russia view that they jail people for repeating it. Shouldn’t we trust Russia judgement on this if we’re trusting their claimed objections of NATO?
- BobbyJo 4y ago
  The line the Russian trolls tend to expose is "Taunting Russia risks all of our lives", then they proceed to explain how not giving Russia everything it wants is taunting. This person has likely fallen for the propaganda they push.
  - imwillofficial 4y ago
    I don’t think it’s helpful to categorize every opposing viewpoint as having fallen for propaganda. There are valid, reasonable concerns on both sides. Such as the US backed coup in 2012, the shelling on the Donbas for almost a decade, corruption in high levels of the Ukraine government, questions over Russia’s democratic integrity, etc… None of those are propaganda, they were in the New York Times. Which is a fairly respected news source in the west. Discounting everyone who disagrees with you as propagandists is intellectually lazy and keeps people from understanding the nuance of a very complex situation. Nobody’s hands are pure here, now we are discussing whose hands are dirtiest.
    - kramerger 4y ago
      > Such as the US backed coup in 2012, the shelling on the Donbas for almost a decade, corruption in high levels of the Ukraine government, questions over Russia’s democratic integrity, etc… What?
      - deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
    - thefounder 4y ago
      >> Such as the US backed coup in 2012, the shelling on the Donbas for almost a decade, corruption in high levels of the Ukraine government, questions over Russia’s democratic integrity, etc… If you study big corruption in Europe this is pretty much the effect/leftovers of the Soviet Union/communist system. I really doubt the US increased corruption in Ukraine. There was not much room left for the corruption to increase anyway. As far as Donbas is concerned you have to ask yourself how did it come that Ukraine had to shell its own territory. It's not about whose hands are pure. For some reasons Russia does not understand that nobody in Europe wants Soviet Union back. The rejection of Russia is not due American interference. It's due Russia's broken backwards policies. Russia it's a beacon of corruption and waste and now it started a new war in Europe. Even Russia's closest neighbours and "allies" are starting to reject Russia(i.e Kyrgyzstan). It's clear that Putin/Russia not only failed become more attractive as an ally/example to follow but lost the plot entirely. Compare that with Germany and the EU.
- imwillofficial 4y ago
  I’d say having boots on the ground fighting as “contractors” and openly supplying weapons and money is pressing the button.
- mint2 4y ago
  To many, Ukraine defending itself against an invasion means it’s the aggressors because words have no meaning except what sounds good to the immediate argument. Tomorrow the words may mean the opposite. I say maybe we should listen to the official Russian description of events to see what’s happening. It’s impossible for nato to be in a proxy war because Russia is not at war. In fact one can go to jail for spreading the noxious lie that Russia is at war. Yes there is a minor special military operation, but no war. Per Russia, at most they are carrying out a special military operation that nato has interfered with. Absolute no war! Careful, don’t “lie” according to Russia and say it’s a war.
bobiny 4y ago
Retaliate against what? Helping Russia's neighbor not being destroyed?
_kbh_ 4y ago
> Normally this sort of admission comes after the fact. Decades later when everyone who was there is dead, we would learn that the British, Americans, and probably other NATO countries were all-but pressing the button on the war against Russia. Ah the famous "Russia was forced to invade Ukraine, rape its civilians and commit genocide against its people" line. Why doesn't Russia have a agency to just you know, not do all this terrible things?. > But now we seem to be openly bragging, daring Russia to retaliate against the actual powers fighting behind the thin veneer of Ukraine. Poke, poke, poke, the nuclear bear. There is no 'thin veneer' of Ukraine, it's all Ukraine with support from other countries in the form of weapons and training. I also see the rhetoric of Russia being nuclear is coming up more and more so lately, which each decisive Ukrainian victory theres always certain people who are soooo concerned suddenly about nuclear war. > At the same time, I would not be surprised if in time we'll learn that many of those "accidents" in key American industry this year have been successful Russian-aligned cyber attacks. But note that the Russians are not openly bragging and advertising it. The Americans aren't bragging about anything specific either.
- zmgsabst 4y ago
  Russia was forced to invade Ukraine by Ukraine not adhering to the previous peace accords (Minsk agreements) and instead shelling ethnic Russians for a decade — until those Ukrainians declared independence to protect themselves from the decade long war. > The Americans aren't bragging about anything specific either. I think calling it an “opportunity” when they blew up the NS 1+2 pipelines to silence protests in Germany ahead of winter speaks to precisely the ethics involved.
  - squidbeak 4y ago
    Could you point to the articles of Minsk agreements that allow for military invasion as a penalty for any party failing to meet its obligations? You discuss the identities of the Nordstream pipeline saboteurs with some certainty. Are you privy to some exclusive information unavailable to the rest of us, or is this another belch of semi-digested RT-pap?
    - 4y ago
paulcarroty 4y ago
Russia is aggressor, and the aggressor must be kicked in the ass 'cause he won't stop and repeat again and again. Blaming NATO for all is typical stupid RT-style propaganda.
BobbyJo 4y ago
It's generally bad to brag about committing a crime, and generally ok to brag about stopping a crime. It makes sense Russia wouldn't be talking much about what they're doing.
- daniel-cussen 4y ago
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
AbrahamParangi 4y ago
The notion that the US or NATO will “provoke” Russia into retaliating is foolish. Either they will use their nuclear weapons in a first strike or they won’t and you have no levers over that except their fear of you. There is no game theoretic value to appeasement because the decisions your opponent makes are completely dominated by their estimate of the probability that you will obliterate them. If you assume your counter-party is rational then their expected value calculation is completely dependent on their fear of you- and if you assume they’re irrational then you should strike first.
wrp 4y ago
Downvoters and negative comments here completely misunderstand this comment. It does not defend Russia at all. It is just raising the interesting question of why the US is openly showing operations that are usually kept secret until long after a war.
- thfuran 4y ago
  And there's a certain irony in the mouth-frothing cries of "propaganda" at the barest hint of something that could be (wildly mis)interpreted as opposed to their position.
ajuc 4y ago
Russia invaded Ukraine 2 times and committed hundreds of war crimes. They already murdered thousands of people and are murdering more as we speak. There's no reason not to "brag" about stopping them, just like nobody was hiding their participation in stopping Hitler or Mussolini. I know you're either a paid russian troll or idiot brainwashed by their propaganda, so I don't expect to change your mind, but on the off chance you can be reasoned with - don't you see how self-contradictory russian propaganda is about this whole war? At first it was about saving Ukrainians (who are "really Russians") from the nazi junta supposedly preventing them from joining the big brother. And Ukrainians were supposed to welcome russian army with flowers. After these supposedly ruled-against-their-will Ukrainians defend for 8 months against Russia - somehow it's still true they are ruled by nazi junta AND Russia needs to destroy their civilian infrastructure to force them to surrender AND it's really NATO army fighting Russia and Ukrainians have nothing to say in that matter. How can all 3 of these things be true at once? If it's nazi junta then Ukrainians wouldn't be defending for so long, and destroying civilian infrastructure would just be a pointless war crime (dictator won't surrender cause some poor guy has no energy). Same if it's a NATO army fighting there against Ukraine's will. So why are Russians supporting the destruction of civilian infrastructure? The answer is obvious - nobody really believes that bullshit in Russia. Russians just want their empire back and Ukraine is in the way. The funniest thing is - some idiots in the west actually buy this all this bullshit.
WeylandYutani 4y ago
Let's not rewrite history. The West was willing to give Putin Crimea. It was he and he alone who decided to poke the bear and overplay his hand. Russia spent the last 10 years pissing off NATO.

mwint 4y ago

Which American accidents are you referring to? (Genuine question)

aaron695 4y ago

gerikson 4y ago

The article describes a team helping a country defend itself against cyberattacks. How is that "pressing the button on a war"?

zmgsabst 4y ago
Assisting the defense of a nation at war with your own military assets is traditionally considered “joining a war”.
- BobbyJo 4y ago
  If that were the definition, then Russia is at war with nearly the entire developed world. Doesn't seem like they're doing a very good job of things. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_foreign_aid_to_Ukraine_during_the_Russo-Ukrainian_War#:~:text=The%20United%20States%20has%20provided,in%20order%20to%20support%20Ukraine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_foreign_aid_to_Ukraine....
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
- halJordan 4y ago
  That's probably a necessary, but not sufficient response. Russia wasn't at war in 2014. The Soviets weren't at war in Korea or Vietnam. These are distinctions the West made.
- ajuc 4y ago
  Good thing there's no war in Ukraine then, just "special military operation". Joking aside - it's not as simple. For one thing in modern times nobody actually declares wars, and Russia isn't abiding to all the conventions anyway. So the rules are very fuzzy. For another - selling weapons or providing volunteers was never considered "joining a war", even according to the strictest reading of the conventions assuming they applied.
  - zmgsabst 4y ago
    This doesn’t sound like either of those things. Per article: > Gen Paul Nakasone, who leads both the military's Cyber Command and the National Security Agency confirmed offensive missions have also been undertaken against Russia in the wake of the invasion of Ukraine.
- mint2 4y ago
  Good thing then Russia’s official stance is that there is no war. In fact, that’s such a noxious lie in Russia view that they jail people for repeating it. Shouldn’t we trust Russia judgement on this if we’re trusting their claimed objections of NATO?
BobbyJo 4y ago
The line the Russian trolls tend to expose is "Taunting Russia risks all of our lives", then they proceed to explain how not giving Russia everything it wants is taunting. This person has likely fallen for the propaganda they push.
- imwillofficial 4y ago
  I don’t think it’s helpful to categorize every opposing viewpoint as having fallen for propaganda. There are valid, reasonable concerns on both sides. Such as the US backed coup in 2012, the shelling on the Donbas for almost a decade, corruption in high levels of the Ukraine government, questions over Russia’s democratic integrity, etc… None of those are propaganda, they were in the New York Times. Which is a fairly respected news source in the west. Discounting everyone who disagrees with you as propagandists is intellectually lazy and keeps people from understanding the nuance of a very complex situation. Nobody’s hands are pure here, now we are discussing whose hands are dirtiest.
  - kramerger 4y ago
    > Such as the US backed coup in 2012, the shelling on the Donbas for almost a decade, corruption in high levels of the Ukraine government, questions over Russia’s democratic integrity, etc… What?
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
  - thefounder 4y ago
    >> Such as the US backed coup in 2012, the shelling on the Donbas for almost a decade, corruption in high levels of the Ukraine government, questions over Russia’s democratic integrity, etc… If you study big corruption in Europe this is pretty much the effect/leftovers of the Soviet Union/communist system. I really doubt the US increased corruption in Ukraine. There was not much room left for the corruption to increase anyway. As far as Donbas is concerned you have to ask yourself how did it come that Ukraine had to shell its own territory. It's not about whose hands are pure. For some reasons Russia does not understand that nobody in Europe wants Soviet Union back. The rejection of Russia is not due American interference. It's due Russia's broken backwards policies. Russia it's a beacon of corruption and waste and now it started a new war in Europe. Even Russia's closest neighbours and "allies" are starting to reject Russia(i.e Kyrgyzstan). It's clear that Putin/Russia not only failed become more attractive as an ally/example to follow but lost the plot entirely. Compare that with Germany and the EU.
imwillofficial 4y ago
I’d say having boots on the ground fighting as “contractors” and openly supplying weapons and money is pressing the button.
mint2 4y ago
To many, Ukraine defending itself against an invasion means it’s the aggressors because words have no meaning except what sounds good to the immediate argument. Tomorrow the words may mean the opposite. I say maybe we should listen to the official Russian description of events to see what’s happening. It’s impossible for nato to be in a proxy war because Russia is not at war. In fact one can go to jail for spreading the noxious lie that Russia is at war. Yes there is a minor special military operation, but no war. Per Russia, at most they are carrying out a special military operation that nato has interfered with. Absolute no war! Careful, don’t “lie” according to Russia and say it’s a war.

bobiny 4y ago

Retaliate against what? Helping Russia's neighbor not being destroyed?

_kbh_ 4y ago

> Normally this sort of admission comes after the fact. Decades later when everyone who was there is dead, we would learn that the British, Americans, and probably other NATO countries were all-but pressing the button on the war against Russia. Ah the famous "Russia was forced to invade Ukraine, rape its civilians and commit genocide against its people" line. Why doesn't Russia have a agency to just you know, not do all this terrible things?. > But now we seem to be openly bragging, daring Russia to retaliate against the actual powers fighting behind the thin veneer of Ukraine. Poke, poke, poke, the nuclear bear. There is no 'thin veneer' of Ukraine, it's all Ukraine with support from other countries in the form of weapons and training. I also see the rhetoric of Russia being nuclear is coming up more and more so lately, which each decisive Ukrainian victory theres always certain people who are soooo concerned suddenly about nuclear war. > At the same time, I would not be surprised if in time we'll learn that many of those "accidents" in key American industry this year have been successful Russian-aligned cyber attacks. But note that the Russians are not openly bragging and advertising it. The Americans aren't bragging about anything specific either.

zmgsabst 4y ago
Russia was forced to invade Ukraine by Ukraine not adhering to the previous peace accords (Minsk agreements) and instead shelling ethnic Russians for a decade — until those Ukrainians declared independence to protect themselves from the decade long war. > The Americans aren't bragging about anything specific either. I think calling it an “opportunity” when they blew up the NS 1+2 pipelines to silence protests in Germany ahead of winter speaks to precisely the ethics involved.
- squidbeak 4y ago
  Could you point to the articles of Minsk agreements that allow for military invasion as a penalty for any party failing to meet its obligations? You discuss the identities of the Nordstream pipeline saboteurs with some certainty. Are you privy to some exclusive information unavailable to the rest of us, or is this another belch of semi-digested RT-pap?
  - 4y ago

paulcarroty 4y ago

Russia is aggressor, and the aggressor must be kicked in the ass 'cause he won't stop and repeat again and again. Blaming NATO for all is typical stupid RT-style propaganda.

BobbyJo 4y ago

It's generally bad to brag about committing a crime, and generally ok to brag about stopping a crime. It makes sense Russia wouldn't be talking much about what they're doing.

daniel-cussen 4y ago

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

AbrahamParangi 4y ago

The notion that the US or NATO will “provoke” Russia into retaliating is foolish. Either they will use their nuclear weapons in a first strike or they won’t and you have no levers over that except their fear of you. There is no game theoretic value to appeasement because the decisions your opponent makes are completely dominated by their estimate of the probability that you will obliterate them. If you assume your counter-party is rational then their expected value calculation is completely dependent on their fear of you- and if you assume they’re irrational then you should strike first.

wrp 4y ago

Downvoters and negative comments here completely misunderstand this comment. It does not defend Russia at all. It is just raising the interesting question of why the US is openly showing operations that are usually kept secret until long after a war.

thfuran 4y ago
And there's a certain irony in the mouth-frothing cries of "propaganda" at the barest hint of something that could be (wildly mis)interpreted as opposed to their position.

ajuc 4y ago

Russia invaded Ukraine 2 times and committed hundreds of war crimes. They already murdered thousands of people and are murdering more as we speak. There's no reason not to "brag" about stopping them, just like nobody was hiding their participation in stopping Hitler or Mussolini. I know you're either a paid russian troll or idiot brainwashed by their propaganda, so I don't expect to change your mind, but on the off chance you can be reasoned with - don't you see how self-contradictory russian propaganda is about this whole war? At first it was about saving Ukrainians (who are "really Russians") from the nazi junta supposedly preventing them from joining the big brother. And Ukrainians were supposed to welcome russian army with flowers. After these supposedly ruled-against-their-will Ukrainians defend for 8 months against Russia - somehow it's still true they are ruled by nazi junta AND Russia needs to destroy their civilian infrastructure to force them to surrender AND it's really NATO army fighting Russia and Ukrainians have nothing to say in that matter. How can all 3 of these things be true at once? If it's nazi junta then Ukrainians wouldn't be defending for so long, and destroying civilian infrastructure would just be a pointless war crime (dictator won't surrender cause some poor guy has no energy). Same if it's a NATO army fighting there against Ukraine's will. So why are Russians supporting the destruction of civilian infrastructure? The answer is obvious - nobody really believes that bullshit in Russia. Russians just want their empire back and Ukraine is in the way. The funniest thing is - some idiots in the west actually buy this all this bullshit.

WeylandYutani 4y ago

Let's not rewrite history. The West was willing to give Putin Crimea. It was he and he alone who decided to poke the bear and overplay his hand. Russia spent the last 10 years pissing off NATO.