3 ms·

This is a more complex than that. I don't like the invasion, but its not like Russia has no vital interests in the area that is right on their border. And the

by starkd 4y ago

This is a more complex than that. I don't like the invasion, but its not like Russia has no vital interests in the area that is right on their border. And they have occupied Crimea in the past going back to 1776. I'm just saying they have as much national interest as the West does. Israel Prime Minister claims they had a deal that was agreed to but Biden administration turned it down. It's also the responsible thing to do to look at the prospects of forcing a war though, when the Urkainians are so heavily outgunned. 200,000 Ukrainians have died in this fight. Maybe 50,000 Russians have died (its hard to find out specifics). The US wants to fight this war on the cheap with the Ukrainians taking all the casualties so that Americans won't have to. That is pretty deplorable to me.

CamperBob2 4y ago
Your casualty figures don't seem to line up with most other sources. Any citations?
- starkd 4y ago
  The sources are all over the place, but they all seem to be horrific. There are estimates that Ukrainian deaths so far could be anywhere from 100K to 200K. Russians have lost a lot too. But the only thing we know is that they are depressingly high.
  - SideburnsOfDoom 4y ago
    > The sources are all over the place You gave specific figures. From which source, and why choose that one?
luckylion 4y ago
Of course Russia has vital interests all around it: everyone does. But it doesn't follow that "therefore Russia should be allowed to annex everything around it". Again, we know that playbook, it has played out before in Europe. Today it's Ukraine, tomorrow it's Poland, and your arguments will still be exactly the same: Russia has vital interests in Poland, Russia has occupied Poland before, Poland is outgunned, and why would we care about Poland, really? And then it's Germany, at which point, again, nothing has changed. Britain and France might use their nuclear deterrence when it's their turn, but if they listened to you, they'd probably say "do we want to end humanity just because we don't like Russia to rule over us? Surely not, humanity is too important to be destroyed over Russia's vital interest to annex whatever is next to Russia" and roll over. It would end only when Russia invades the US or China, because neither will allow it if their nuclear weapons are still available by then.
- starkd 4y ago
  [flagged]
  - mopsi 4y ago
    > Ukraine is hopelessly outgunned. That hasn't been true since HIMARS arrived last summer. Now there's parity, and Russian war correspondents report that in some sectors Ukraine even exceeds Russian capabilities. In coming months, we'll see how the "hopelessly outgunned" army will do with more modern weapons in the upcoming spring counteroffensive. All we know right now is that the Russian winter offensive was a spectacular failure: worst casuality figures since the war began and nothing to show for it. Let's hope that Ukraine makes good progress and ends the war soon.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - luckylion 4y ago
    You're making assumptions about me based on your projections. They're wrong. I don't profit from any weapon sales, and it's the Ukrainians who want to fight. I'm certain especially Western Europe would've been much happier if Ukraine hadn't resisted and Russia could've swallowed them (your preferred option), because it would've meant no annoying break with your main provider of gas and oil. But here we are, and some people are still claiming that Russia has the right to terrorize its neighbors because hurr durr Red Army strong.
  - yesenadam 4y ago
    > Stupid comment. Please don't talk anything like this in future on HN, thanks, regardless of what the other person says. You wrote similar things several other times on this page.
  - dang 4y ago
    You've posted dozens of flamewar comments to this thread and broke the site guidelines egregiously. That's abusive, regardless of how wrong other people are or you feel they are or how right you are or you feel they are. We ban accounts that do this. I'm not going to ban you because everyone goes on tilt sometimes, but if you'd please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and take the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd appreciate it.
schuyler2d 4y ago
What about Ukraine's national interest? Where does that fit in? What about the Eastern European countries' interests whose combined economies eclipses Russia?

by starkd 4y ago

CamperBob2 4y ago

Your casualty figures don't seem to line up with most other sources. Any citations?

starkd 4y ago
The sources are all over the place, but they all seem to be horrific. There are estimates that Ukrainian deaths so far could be anywhere from 100K to 200K. Russians have lost a lot too. But the only thing we know is that they are depressingly high.
- SideburnsOfDoom 4y ago
  > The sources are all over the place You gave specific figures. From which source, and why choose that one?

luckylion 4y ago

Of course Russia has vital interests all around it: everyone does. But it doesn't follow that "therefore Russia should be allowed to annex everything around it". Again, we know that playbook, it has played out before in Europe. Today it's Ukraine, tomorrow it's Poland, and your arguments will still be exactly the same: Russia has vital interests in Poland, Russia has occupied Poland before, Poland is outgunned, and why would we care about Poland, really? And then it's Germany, at which point, again, nothing has changed. Britain and France might use their nuclear deterrence when it's their turn, but if they listened to you, they'd probably say "do we want to end humanity just because we don't like Russia to rule over us? Surely not, humanity is too important to be destroyed over Russia's vital interest to annex whatever is next to Russia" and roll over. It would end only when Russia invades the US or China, because neither will allow it if their nuclear weapons are still available by then.

starkd 4y ago
[flagged]
- mopsi 4y ago
  > Ukraine is hopelessly outgunned. That hasn't been true since HIMARS arrived last summer. Now there's parity, and Russian war correspondents report that in some sectors Ukraine even exceeds Russian capabilities. In coming months, we'll see how the "hopelessly outgunned" army will do with more modern weapons in the upcoming spring counteroffensive. All we know right now is that the Russian winter offensive was a spectacular failure: worst casuality figures since the war began and nothing to show for it. Let's hope that Ukraine makes good progress and ends the war soon.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- luckylion 4y ago
  You're making assumptions about me based on your projections. They're wrong. I don't profit from any weapon sales, and it's the Ukrainians who want to fight. I'm certain especially Western Europe would've been much happier if Ukraine hadn't resisted and Russia could've swallowed them (your preferred option), because it would've meant no annoying break with your main provider of gas and oil. But here we are, and some people are still claiming that Russia has the right to terrorize its neighbors because hurr durr Red Army strong.
- yesenadam 4y ago
  > Stupid comment. Please don't talk anything like this in future on HN, thanks, regardless of what the other person says. You wrote similar things several other times on this page.
- dang 4y ago
  You've posted dozens of flamewar comments to this thread and broke the site guidelines egregiously. That's abusive, regardless of how wrong other people are or you feel they are or how right you are or you feel they are. We ban accounts that do this. I'm not going to ban you because everyone goes on tilt sometimes, but if you'd please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and take the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd appreciate it.

schuyler2d 4y ago

What about Ukraine's national interest? Where does that fit in? What about the Eastern European countries' interests whose combined economies eclipses Russia?