Hacker News Reader

Comment by drstewart | Hacker News Reader

Top article on the UK BBC right now: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-58460511

>Afghanistan: Minister apologises over 'inaccurate' veteran suicide claim

As a non-UK person, am curious about the use of the word "veteran" in the headline. What would be different about "Afghanistan: Minister apologises over 'inaccurate' person suicide claim" or "Afghanistan: Minister apologises over 'inaccurate' citizen suicide claim" ?

I understand that there is some veneration of veterans, but don't all citizens have the same rights? Since you're in London, perhaps you can shed some light on this for me.

View on HN

You are being silly and pointless. Is it not the role of the armed forces minster to comment on veterans affairs? Are these comparable - Is asset seizure a particular problem among veterans, as suicide definitely is? If not, what are you trying to say?

So it would be okay if the Minister of the armed forces said such a thing about non-veterans?

How is this in any way relevant?

It's relevant because you pretend you're shocked at the use of the word veteran in headlines when the country you're in does the very same thing. This shtick of "non-US" people is quite tiring.

Claptrap.

1) this is whataboutism. One can ask about one thing when another thing exists, it's not a valid rebuke to say "what about that?". I have given no opinion on that BBC story either way, as it's not relevant. I'm not the country that I'm in, for starters. I would gladly criticise its politics when it's on topic and in good faith. Here it is neither.

2) "shocked" is your spin, and an inaccurate one. I specifically said "curious".

3) as you are repeatedly refusing to address, these are not actually comparable - who in the US case is comparable for the armed forces minister talking about the veteran? Who in the US case has the remit to talk about veterans, specifically?

This is a waste of our time.

Tangentially related: In Afghanistan, the ministry similar to the US' Veterans Affairs is actually called "Ministry of Martyrs and Disabled Affairs", for real:

https://www.mmd.gov.af/en

Wait, who’s running that site now?

Are they just going to switch some logos and keep it up?

> who’s running that site now

You would expect the "gov.af" domain to change hands?

similarly, https://twitter.com/POTUS does when the administration changes.

Yet the Trump and Biden admins managed that handover in a civilised manner. It will probably be the same with gov.af.

There are career government employees that are apolitical and carrying out orders from political appointees at the top, which are mostly replaced with each incoming administration.

From what I can tell previous administration was trying to sabotage civilized transfer in every possible way… and the fallout is on display, including AF withdrawal.

However, is/was there such setup in AF government? For all I know, everyone just packed and went home/abroad…

I wouldn't expect it to change hands. It's still "same hands" just people giving orders are different. Like did .gov tld in general change hands when regime changed to next president?

I’m genuinely wondering, is there a “career bureaucracy” to handle such change?

I imagine they sit somewhere in government building, look out the window and “oh, wells, here goes last plane out of Kabul! Time to switch flags!”

Reply on news.ycombinator.com