Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | aguaviva's comments login

The US, especially, seems to by trying to help Ukraine win, but not win so hard that Russia collapses,

My sense is it's not that they don't want Ukraine to win that hard -- they just (very reasonably) don't see how anyone can expect that to reasonably happen within any meaningful time frame.

So they fall back on the next-best alternative, that Ukraine not lose, as a sibling commenter already pointed out. Much more definable, and infinitely more achievable -- if there's a broadly shared understanding (and consensus reality) in place as what that would necessarily entail.

Only problem is -- there's still been a lot of noise among those who run things in the US/West about pretending to believe in the former ("Ukraine must simply win") as a stated goal. Leading inevitably to reduced confidence in what the US/West says, and to the further erosion of public discourse as we're seeing here.


But Russia collapses if it's pushed out of Ukraine.

No, it just goes back into its corner with its tail between its legs for a while, like all colonial powers do. Whenever they choose to enmesh themselves in conflicts that are definitely not existential to them, or even in their coldly calculated rational interests.

Just like the French, the British, and the US have all done, and as it has itself done, countless times (and quite recently).


The USA has 700 military bases world wide

128 actually.

The 700-1000 numbers are disinformation, but people like to copy-paste them around endlessly, anyway.


And people write nonsense books about nonsense topics all the time.

Technically neither Russia nor Ukraine are in war with each other.

Then the "technical" distinction is obviously irrelevant.

That's why officially it's called "Special Military Operation"

And the official justification is pure hogwash, of course. The real reason they call it that is simply, and obviously, to mess with your head.


Prohibiting Russian language usage which is mother tongue for majority of population of Ukraine etc.

The Russian language is not prohibited in Ukraine, and it is not, by any stretch, "the mother tongue for [the] majority population of Ukraine."


Russian military was already in Crimea.

They had a lease at, and were restricted to a specific military base there.

They were definitely not "in the Crimea", in terms of the peninsula at large, as you are perfectly aware. To suggest, in response to someone pointing out the 2014 invasion, that it's "not really" an invasion because they were "already in the Crimea" -- is just weird semantic head games.


How many nuclear states have been invaded in the past 80 years? Aside from Ukraine invading Russia's Kursk oblast last summer, the answer is a big fat zero.

The answer is Israel was subject to a full-scale invasion in 1973, despite having nuclear weapons since 1966. There have been regular border skirmishes between India and Pakistan since long after they both went nuclear. We also have Argentina's seizure of the Falkland Islands in 1982.


Israel didn't, and still hasn't, claimed to possess nuclear weapons. While it now is widely believed they do, that is far less of a deterrent. It's also worth noting that the US, one of Israel's closest allies and possessing arguably the best intelligence apparatus in the world, was not aware that Israel had the bomb until 1975, it's extremely doubtful the surrounding arab states knew earlier.

None of the conflicts between India and Pakistan since either of the powers got Nuclear weapons (1974 and 1998, respectively) could be reasonably characterized as invasions.

The Falkland islands are a British overseas territory. They are self governing, but the UK is responsible for their defense and foreing affairs. Classic protectorate. Obviously invading the Falklands is very different from invading the UK.


What matters is that the Falkland islands are considered to be a part of UK's sovereign territory.

There has not been much of a question surrounding Israel's nuclear capability since the Apollo Affair: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo_affair

I guess you could look at their non-admission as evidence to the contrary, but it's not like they're selling enriched uranium as a souvenir to tourists at Ben Gurion international.


The claim that Russia should consider NATO expansion irrelevant to its security is pure gaslighting.

And even more precisely: it's a claim that absolutely no one makes.


This appears to be one sheriff pushing a personal agenda.

Unfortunately it's not - there's a whole "child safety" department behind them, ready with a "safety plan" and even an app that they're going force the poor kid to install. This kind of stuff doesn't happen without the coordination of external bodies, and decades of societal shift in favor of this kind of control-oriented parenting (and blind faith in technical solutions toward this end), also at institutional levels:

  A few days later, DFCS presented Patterson with a "safety plan" for her to sign. It would require her to delegate a "safety person" to be a "knowing participant and guardian" and watch over the children whenever she leaves home. The plan would also require Patterson to download an app onto her son's phone allowing for his location to be monitored. (The day when it will be illegal not to track one's kids is rapidly approaching.)
Against this backdrop - it's quite likely the Sheriff wasn't pushing her own agenda at all, but simply following the procedures provided by her department.

I don't know if that's true. the assistant DA refused to drop the charge, and the compromise that they offered was some CPS-based safety plan.

but the ADA who owns the case could drop the charge tomorrow and it all goes away.

and Sheriffs don't prosecute or dismiss charges, they simply take them to the DAs and supply evidence. someone called them and said there was a kid walking alone and they looked abused, and the sheriff took it to the courts and DAs.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: