Hacker News Reader

Comment by voidsnax | Hacker News Reader

That the Russian government is characterizing these personnel as “peacekeepers” would be a fair statement, but to regurgitate that characterization in reporting on the matter seems rather less credible.

View on HN

Parroting obvious government horseshit with a straight face is part of the job of news organizations. They don’t call the US/UN puppet government in Somalia or Libya puppets either. They call them UN approved transitional governments.

If a transitional government is UN-approved, meaning it even survived UNSC rounds without any of the five veto powers objecting, then it’s ridiculous to call it a ‘puppet’ government.

The US does not control the UN.

Of course they do. Where was the UN when Iraq was attacked?

The same place it’ll be now: Unable to substantively act because by design the five veto powers effectively neutered the ability of the UN to act against them.

The US is just one of the five, the UK, France, Russia, and China are the others.

Why do you think no UN action was taken against Russia for annexing Crimea and invading parts of Ukraine in 2014? Or against China for its treatment of the Uyghurs?

None of this means the US ‘controls’ the UN though, any more than the other four veto powers do.

It’s all just show. Forget the rules. America runs the world, does whatever it wants and ignores the UN as it pleases. When other countries do it, they get sanctioned or bombed. And Russia and China are out to change that unipolar world, cause America is out of control. And has been for a long time already.

On September 16, 2004 Secretary-General of the United Nations Kofi Annan, speaking on the invasion, said, "I have indicated it was not in conformity with the UN Charter. From our point of view, from the charter point of view, it was illegal."

And still, it's Russia invading its neighbors, not America.

Oh really? And how many countries has the US invaded already? Not to mention the ones it subverted to force their worldview on them.

Why apply double standards here? There's no good vs. evil. The world is more complex than that.

Because it's in the aggressor's interest to point out the failures of others and scream: they did it too.

But I lived under both and, while there are no angels, I know which one is evil and which one is (flawed) good. Only one had to keep their people from fleeing their empire of misery with walls and guns.

True that!

Yeah they should've called them democracy promoters

separatists are “fair” peacekeepers?

Edit: Removed everything else because I can't delete. I should know better than to comment on a political thread on HN.

It might be less biased than some, but it does have bias.

If only that were true. But if you read Reuters enough you see they have a bent. Journalists always have a choice on at least which quotes and aspects to include

Though I admit they are rather good at pretending to be professional, except their ads.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com