Hacker News Reader

Comment by mathfailure | Hacker News Reader

It's different now, since at that time there were no weapons of total annihilation (and now there are quite some).

That's exactly why 'expansionist' regimes were ready to start some next war, being eager "to get some extra land" as a result of said war.

The current war is different: this is the war that started not out of appetite towards foreign lands, but, basically, out of primal fear, the fear concerning safety. The West was failing at self-reflection and was completely oblivious about their own actions being treated as crossing a real red line for Russia's safety.

You may scare a wandering bear away, but driving it into a corner is both stupid and fatal.

View on HN

Haha please describe the NATO invasion of Russia. This sounds entertaining.

Easy.

1. Crimea, Donetsk People's Republic, Lugansk People's Republic, Kherson Oblast, Zaporozhskaya Oblast are now parts of Russia.

2. NATO still thinks those are parts of Ukraine.

3. Some of NATO countries are now in talks about sending their troops to Ukraine.

> 1. Crimea, Donetsk People's Republic, Lugansk People's Republic, Kherson Oblast, Zaporozhskaya Oblast are now parts of Russia.

Not factually, nor legally.

Haha I was thinking you might describe the decisionmaking involved in having a multinational defensive alliance invade a nuclear power.

Instead you decided to use it as an opportunity to claim that the Russian-occupied territories should be internationally recognized. You're funny.

Interesting, but I don’t see it this way at all. The west talked Ukraine into giving up their nukes and said we’ll keep you safe. All that without NATO. But as time has ebbed, and Russia meddling in eastern Ukraine went largely ignored by the west, Russia grew emboldened and decided it could just invest in a history rewrite, an airing of past grievances, and an invasion.

If Ukraine had said “fuck no” from day one, “we’re keeping our stuff, we don’t trust any of you long term at that level”, it would be in interesting world we live in.

This narrative that NATO provoked Russia into this is non sequitur. A gaslight of grandeur.

I am sorry, but it looks like you are just uneducated about the facts and events that happened prior to Russia taking Crimea back. You should not just read some, but actually dig a bit, if you are really interested. I'm not here for a political debate really, I'm not buying into your baity (and wrong) arguments. I shared my idea about how tariffs might be a step that might actually prevent a nuke war and I just expand on said thought.

These are old and tired russian talking points. How exactly is russia, a nuclear power, threatened by Ukraine? They didn’t respond at all to Sweden and Finland joining NATO, despite Finland’s much larger land border with russia.

russia also annexed and occupied Crimea, and at the same time destroyed or stole the entirely of Ukraine’s Black Sea fleet. They moved their own nuclear weapons to CSTO partner state (and vassal) Belarus, pushing them closer to NATO borders.

no matter what justifications russia claims, their actions are what matter, they have no desire for any form of modern diplomacy. Do you remember how long they pretended Wagner mercenaries weren’t directly funded and supplied by the state?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com