6 ms·

Usually we keep the mainstream news out of here but felt I had to post this one because I've never seen anything like it and was curious to hear other people's

Usually we keep the mainstream news out of here but felt I had to post this one because I've never seen anything like it and was curious to hear other people's perspective here. To me it feels like a setup to look good in front of their audience without any proper desire to engage in true diplomacy.

neom 2y ago
Some of the stuff I've had to deal with building business to $100MM++++++ revenue give me stress and anxiety. I've been through so much shit at this point I think it's hard to stress me out. Watching that interaction between the 3 of them invoked a feeling I've not felt in a very long time, it was incredibly stressful. That was neither politics nor business, personally I'd have accepted either, but that was not those.
- Buttons840 2y ago
  How many millions of workers endure endless shit and disrespect from their boss, but they get the job done anyway for the benefit of their families? How many business leaders, like you, let slide so much shit and instead focused on what was important for their business? Even if Trump and Vance were disrespected, suck it up like the rest of us and do the thing that benefits the entire country. They met to make a deal to benefit the country; Trump failed to make the deal.
  - Varriount 2y ago
    That assumes that any amount of capitulation would have persuaded Trump to support Ukraine, and that any reasonable deal could have been reached. I obviously can't say what could have been, but every sign Trump (and those in his administration!) has given up to this point indicate that there's only one outcome they support, and that's Ukraine surrendering all or some of its land to Russia, along with a deal barring Ukraine from NATO.
    - Nathanba 2y ago
      it's not even about support, Trump wanted to extort Ukraine out of their resources without giving anything back. He failed to do so.
      - TrapLord_Rhodo 2y ago
        I'm very curious to see how this comment ends up ageing. saved for follow up ;) My prediction is ukraines got three options; -Show europe that the US is an unreliable trading partner, and get them to commit atleast $500B, with SF troops coming to ukraine to train their troops. - Make a deal with trump. - lose their country.
    - kragen 2y ago
      Yes, and that's also the only outcome Russia would accept, unless Putin is replaced by a US puppet, which seems unlikely; such a puppet would be deeply unpopular in Russia and have great difficulty remaining in power. The people in Crimea, Donetsk, and Luhansk would also reject any deal that doesn't involve Ukraine surrendering some of its land, either to Russia or to some sort of Republic of Texas limbo-state. So, even if Russia were taken over by a CIA asset, fighting there would continue unless extremely repressive measures were taken. So that sort of deal is the only way to end the fighting with anything resembling humanity, even though Trump supports it. Stopped clocks, etc.
  - shipscode 2y ago
    Isn’t Zelensky the worker who is getting disrespect from their boss? Seems like the roles are reversed.
lolinder 2y ago
I can understand, but honestly it was a mistake. I just scrolled down to get here, and there are no curious perspectives being shared or interesting questions being asked, just the entirely understandable and expected mass anger and frustration. In an ideal world we could have a threat or two like this that would serve as outlets, but what I've actually seen is that having these discussions leads to them bleeding out into other threads that should have been unrelated. HN is going to need to more aggressively enforce its rules about political news if it's going to stay a haven for curiosity and not descend into just another place for angry politics.
- spiderfarmer 2y ago
  Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. And this is a pivotal moment in US history, the moment where the world realizes the emperor has no clothes.
  - BLKNSLVR 2y ago
    Agreed. These are potentially historic moments worthy of discussion amongst rational and educated folks. Hopefully, however, these are not historic moments...
- voidhorse 2y ago
  Whether we like it or not, politics pervades everything. Attempting to keep certain forums sanitized and "apolitical" while a regime shift is occurring and people's civil liberties face very real threats is to live in an amoral and ahistorical fashion. Desperate times...
  - mongol 2y ago
    I have found myself lately to feel indifferent to many threads on HN that would otherwise have exicted me because of the insane world politics events which were occuring simulatenously but without mention. There is an intelligent crowd here, and important topics ought to be discussed, not just the latest hacker news.
kesor 2y ago
[flagged]
- disgruntledphd2 2y ago
  That's an interesting perspective, do you have some links to better video? My wife saw it live, but I watched a 4min video from the BBC and it certainly seemed as though a lot of the aggression was on the US side.
elihu 2y ago
> To me it feels like a setup to look good in front of their audience without any proper desire to engage in true diplomacy. If that's what it was, I don't think it worked. I think rather that Trump and Vance manufactured a conflict to use as pretense to do what they wanted to do in the first place, which was to cut off Ukraine from U.S. aid. Whether it flies with the American public generally is largely irrelevant to Trump at this point, as he's not constitutionally eligible to run for another term. (He might simply refuse to leave in 2028, but he doesn't need an election to do that.)
veidr 2y ago
Everything is like that with this guy. He looks at the world through the prism of old-fashioned network TV ratings. You saw that during the infamous COVID press briefings (the bleach and light ones), holding the bible after the paramilitary cleared the streets in Washington, D.C., when he stood on the balcony after he had COVID, etc., etc. It's the same thing here — he literally said as much today[1]. As a worldview, that is incomprehensible to me (and I suspect most people), but it really does help understand the choices Donald Trump makes. The spectacle — the attention paid — is what matters to him. How it looks on TV is what matters. How it actually is, is secondary at best, but often irrelevant. He does a lot of things that "don't make sense" until you think of it that way. That the executive of a country as powerful as the USA perceives the world this way, and makes instinctual decisions on this basis without any credible effort to reason through the possible consequences, is of course very alarming. As a US citizen, I'll admit that the "gravitas" of the USA as the "leader of the free world" was always carefully stage-managed. Still, it's depressing to watch momentous and crucial international wartime negotiations degraded to this reality-TV/pro-wrestling level, and so swiftly, for the whole world to watch. [1]: https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/5169464-trump-zelensky-great-television/ https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/5169464-trump-ze...

neom 2y ago

Some of the stuff I've had to deal with building business to $100MM++++++ revenue give me stress and anxiety. I've been through so much shit at this point I think it's hard to stress me out. Watching that interaction between the 3 of them invoked a feeling I've not felt in a very long time, it was incredibly stressful. That was neither politics nor business, personally I'd have accepted either, but that was not those.

Buttons840 2y ago
How many millions of workers endure endless shit and disrespect from their boss, but they get the job done anyway for the benefit of their families? How many business leaders, like you, let slide so much shit and instead focused on what was important for their business? Even if Trump and Vance were disrespected, suck it up like the rest of us and do the thing that benefits the entire country. They met to make a deal to benefit the country; Trump failed to make the deal.
- Varriount 2y ago
  That assumes that any amount of capitulation would have persuaded Trump to support Ukraine, and that any reasonable deal could have been reached. I obviously can't say what could have been, but every sign Trump (and those in his administration!) has given up to this point indicate that there's only one outcome they support, and that's Ukraine surrendering all or some of its land to Russia, along with a deal barring Ukraine from NATO.
  - Nathanba 2y ago
    it's not even about support, Trump wanted to extort Ukraine out of their resources without giving anything back. He failed to do so.
    - TrapLord_Rhodo 2y ago
      I'm very curious to see how this comment ends up ageing. saved for follow up ;) My prediction is ukraines got three options; -Show europe that the US is an unreliable trading partner, and get them to commit atleast $500B, with SF troops coming to ukraine to train their troops. - Make a deal with trump. - lose their country.
  - kragen 2y ago
    Yes, and that's also the only outcome Russia would accept, unless Putin is replaced by a US puppet, which seems unlikely; such a puppet would be deeply unpopular in Russia and have great difficulty remaining in power. The people in Crimea, Donetsk, and Luhansk would also reject any deal that doesn't involve Ukraine surrendering some of its land, either to Russia or to some sort of Republic of Texas limbo-state. So, even if Russia were taken over by a CIA asset, fighting there would continue unless extremely repressive measures were taken. So that sort of deal is the only way to end the fighting with anything resembling humanity, even though Trump supports it. Stopped clocks, etc.
- shipscode 2y ago
  Isn’t Zelensky the worker who is getting disrespect from their boss? Seems like the roles are reversed.

lolinder 2y ago

I can understand, but honestly it was a mistake. I just scrolled down to get here, and there are no curious perspectives being shared or interesting questions being asked, just the entirely understandable and expected mass anger and frustration. In an ideal world we could have a threat or two like this that would serve as outlets, but what I've actually seen is that having these discussions leads to them bleeding out into other threads that should have been unrelated. HN is going to need to more aggressively enforce its rules about political news if it's going to stay a haven for curiosity and not descend into just another place for angry politics.

spiderfarmer 2y ago
Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. And this is a pivotal moment in US history, the moment where the world realizes the emperor has no clothes.
- BLKNSLVR 2y ago
  Agreed. These are potentially historic moments worthy of discussion amongst rational and educated folks. Hopefully, however, these are not historic moments...
voidhorse 2y ago
Whether we like it or not, politics pervades everything. Attempting to keep certain forums sanitized and "apolitical" while a regime shift is occurring and people's civil liberties face very real threats is to live in an amoral and ahistorical fashion. Desperate times...
- mongol 2y ago
  I have found myself lately to feel indifferent to many threads on HN that would otherwise have exicted me because of the insane world politics events which were occuring simulatenously but without mention. There is an intelligent crowd here, and important topics ought to be discussed, not just the latest hacker news.

kesor 2y ago

[flagged]

disgruntledphd2 2y ago
That's an interesting perspective, do you have some links to better video? My wife saw it live, but I watched a 4min video from the BBC and it certainly seemed as though a lot of the aggression was on the US side.

elihu 2y ago

> To me it feels like a setup to look good in front of their audience without any proper desire to engage in true diplomacy. If that's what it was, I don't think it worked. I think rather that Trump and Vance manufactured a conflict to use as pretense to do what they wanted to do in the first place, which was to cut off Ukraine from U.S. aid. Whether it flies with the American public generally is largely irrelevant to Trump at this point, as he's not constitutionally eligible to run for another term. (He might simply refuse to leave in 2028, but he doesn't need an election to do that.)

veidr 2y ago

Everything is like that with this guy. He looks at the world through the prism of old-fashioned network TV ratings. You saw that during the infamous COVID press briefings (the bleach and light ones), holding the bible after the paramilitary cleared the streets in Washington, D.C., when he stood on the balcony after he had COVID, etc., etc. It's the same thing here — he literally said as much today[1]. As a worldview, that is incomprehensible to me (and I suspect most people), but it really does help understand the choices Donald Trump makes. The spectacle — the attention paid — is what matters to him. How it looks on TV is what matters. How it actually is, is secondary at best, but often irrelevant. He does a lot of things that "don't make sense" until you think of it that way. That the executive of a country as powerful as the USA perceives the world this way, and makes instinctual decisions on this basis without any credible effort to reason through the possible consequences, is of course very alarming. As a US citizen, I'll admit that the "gravitas" of the USA as the "leader of the free world" was always carefully stage-managed. Still, it's depressing to watch momentous and crucial international wartime negotiations degraded to this reality-TV/pro-wrestling level, and so swiftly, for the whole world to watch. [1]: https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/5169464-trump-zelensky-great-television/ https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/5169464-trump-ze...