

NATO websites hit in cyber attack over Crimea stance - testrun
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/03/16/us-ukraine-nato-idUSBREA2E0T320140316

======
rjzzleep
before everyone comes out with their russia hate here's old leaks of emails
from the udar party[1].

a lot of people predicted that meddling with ukraine would lead to another
split state, and that is precisely what we see unfolding.

it doesn't matter whether the west is right, or whether russia is right. the
immense complacency that has grown in european, and us leadership with total
disregard of russias interests is what brought the situation to the situation
we have right now. when we do things it's justified. when others do them
they're wrong.

what puzzles me, is that we're supposed to be on hacker news. people that
decompose, and extend other people's works on a day to day basis sit here, and
comment how it's "obviously" wrong to think putin is right. wait what?
normally there is a bunch of people criticizing lack of objectivity or
critical thought, but when it comes to territorial right, and sexism there is
only one way. and what others say is dismissed as propaganda.

the group that made a political coup in the ukraine with the support of the
west, to overthrow an elected leader - whether we like him or not is
irrelevant -, directly, or indirectly(with money, threat of sanctions, threat
of no economic cooperation), has now unanimously voted for creating a national
guard to fight terrorists[2]. the terrorists? what?

heres a map of crimea[4]. have you ever thought about geopolitics? did you
really think russia would completely distance itself from the situation? we
didn't. we kept fueling the conflict. what on earth makes you think we're
entitled to more than russia? what on earth made you think that russia
wouldn't take advantage of it's influence like we took on ours?

according to a german politician the words the founder of the svoboda party
were this: "Grab the guns, fight the Russian pigs, the Germans, the Jews pigs
and others"(sadly, i am not entirely sure what the sources of his speech are,
if you understand german you can listen to the speech here, he's been blasting
both russia, AND the western leadership[3]).

the leader of the anti government riots is now the Secretary of the National
Security and Defence Council of Ukraine. his deputy is the right sector leader
yarosh.

I don't really care whether your think the current ukrainian government has
legitimacy or not. that is your personal opinion, and may or may not be right.
it's not really for me to judge. but completely disregarding the facts, and
calling everyone that is not of your opinion a propagandatist or someone fed
by russian propaganda is disgusting.

is that really the level we are discussing things on?

[1] [http://pastebin.com/8mpTbTqY](http://pastebin.com/8mpTbTqY)

[2] [http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-
europe-26558288](http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26558288)

[3] [http://youtu.be/pXLy0NGW9sM](http://youtu.be/pXLy0NGW9sM)

[4] [http://mkalty.org/crimea/](http://mkalty.org/crimea/)

~~~
higherpurpose
I'm not saying Russia is wrong on everything, and for someone who really
dislikes US lately, it makes it very hard for me to try and be on US's side on
this again, but Russia really isn't making it easy for itself when the only 2
options in the referendum for Crimea secession are:

1) Would you like to join Russia now?

2) Would you like autonomy from Ukraine?

I mean, come on! Where's the "No, go away!" option? Russia isn't giving Crimea
a choice. It's forcing Crimea into a choice, that's only favorable to Russia.

Russia also didn't meet its quorum in Parliament when they decided to invade
Crimea, making it illegal by its own laws. So this makes it more like Putin's
own quest for more power, than "protecting Russia" or "giving Russia what's
theirs" (which Crimea isn't - we settled this a long time ago). You can't come
after decades and say "hey, you know that land that we lost decades ago? Yeah,
that's _ours_. Give it back!

This combined with tyrannical leaders' "egoes" are what have always made for
stupid and completely unnecessary wars.

~~~
kostyk
I believe it's 1) Would you like to join Russia 2) Would you like to stay in
Ukraine.

No?

~~~
kybernetyk
No, it's not. That's the joke about the "referendum". The options are: Split
from Ukraine and become part of Russia - or just split from Ukraine.

~~~
mladenkovacevic
Yeah that joke is part of the western propaganda that tries to distill
something not so simple into something that can be captured and made fun of in
internet-meme format. The options are:

"Are you in favor of the reunification of Crimea with Russia as a part of the
Russian Federation?"

And

"Are you in favor of restoring the 1992 Constitution and the status of Crimea
as a part of Ukraine?"

One option quite clearly is for joining Russia, while the other option quite
clearly is for staying within Ukraine, albeit with increased autonomy (the
loss of which in the past was hugely unpopular)

~~~
denis1
according to the 1992 constitution Crimea can declare independence and then
unite with Russia. How is that any different from 1?

------
TillE
Has anyone noticed all the bizarrely pro-Putin comments on English language
news sites over the past few weeks? I mean actually repeating Russian
propaganda which is completely contrary to reality. The Guardian is flooded
with this in every article on the subject.

It's weird, and I'm sure some of it is an actual orchestrated propaganda
effort, but I worry that a lot of it is just another instance of people being
knee-jerk contrarians.

~~~
romanovcode
Just don't forget that there is propaganda from both sides.

~~~
dm2
It has traditionally been illegal for the US to spread propaganda to US
citizens: [http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2011/mar/17/us-spy-
ope...](http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2011/mar/17/us-spy-operation-
social-networks)

But in 2013:
[http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2013/07/12/us_backs_...](http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2013/07/12/us_backs_off_propaganda_ban_spreads_government_made_news_to_americans)

There should be a law that requires the US government to put a notice on
anything that could be considered propaganda. Hopefully that would mean more
transparency, which is a good thing.

~~~
vetinari
Technically, it is not "US", it is "private companies" (media).

Just like with censorship. Plausible deniability, but getting their way
anyway.

------
morsch
There are two sides two every story. The average HN reader is very likely to
be in an echo chamber that by its own nature as well as by controlled
intervention spins a view against the Russian position. As am I. Certain
things feel so obvious to me and seemingly everyone else, I can't help being
suspicious. Of course the same is true for the other side.

------
dcc1
I suppose the Russians will be telling their people that the "West" did it
themselves in order to make Russia look bad, just like the "Ukranian" unmarked
fascist troops surrounded their own bases "for the laugh" and now want a part
of their country annexed.

Sigh

~~~
throwwit
Please don't bring politics into HN. Sigh

P.S. You need read the article, "Lungescu noted the statement by "a group of
hacktivists" but said that, due to the complexities involved in attributing
the attacks, NATO would not speculate about who was responsible or their
motives."

~~~
dcc1
Yes because there hasnt been any politically motivated cyber attacks on
countries within the Russian "sphere of influence" in the past /sarcasm

~~~
throwwit
I understood your original comment. It raised two polarizing political
hypotheticals based on childish cyber attacks, that even the attacked cannot
speculate on. It's just a website.

------
polack
It would be nice if the US/EU sanctions against Soviet includes cutting them
of the net. 99.99999% of everything thats comes over the wire from Russia is
just crap anyway. Don't get me wrong, there is a lot of good Russians out
there, but if you're a good Russian you don't stay in Russia.

