Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

What changed since you wrote: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30464986

You seem to want to rewrite your position on this.



I don't really see how anything changed. The strategic criticality of the Ukrainian coast hasnt changed. The Russian position on NATO hasnt changed.

From day 1 of the invasion it seemed clear to me that their goal was not to occupy all of Ukraine but to "break" it and potentially to cleave off strategic pieces in negotiations and extract a promise of neutrality/demilitarization.


Your position does not pass the test of logic. There are much simpler ways to achieve that without risking any Russian lives.


Such as? With respect to NATO membership it was fairly plain that everything from asking nicely all the way up to 200,000 troops deployed on the border wasnt enough to deter either NATO or Zelensky.


You don't seem to understand the concept of Sovereignty, what other countries do is not up to Putin, and if they don't do what he wants that does not give him a right to invade or dictate terms.


I'm never said he did have a "right to invade". I'm just trying to explain, against MUCH resistance, why he did.

Because I think the real reason why this all happened A) matters rather a lot B) is being swept under the carpet.

NATO's (lack of) respect for Libya's sovereignty can perhaps explain why Putin didnt think that it would have much respect for Russia's sovereignty which is, in turn, why he didnt have much respect for Ukraine's.

No country respects the sovereignty of another when it feels threatened.


You seem to know Putin very well. Better than I think any outsider has a right to claim.

The real reason why this happened is utterly irrelevant, but you seem to be a bit stuck on that subject as though there is a possible justification to be found there.

> No country respects the sovereignty of another when it feels threatened.

There was no conceivable way in which Ukraine was a threat to Russia. Full stop.


He's always been a fairly plain speaker. We dont tend to always pay attention to what he says though. His rage in reaction to NATO's Libya incursion is pretty well documented even if we did ignore it.

It wasnt like he was unclear that pursuing NATO membership => invasion either.

>The real reason why this happened is utterly irrelevant

This is precisely the way to make this kind of thing happen again and again and again...


> He's always been a fairly plain speaker.

Are you from Russia?

> This is precisely the way to make this kind of thing happen again and again and again...

No, the way to make sure this won't happen again is to make sure that little tinpot dictators don't get their hands on nuclear arms. Apropos, North Korea...


“He's always been a fairly plain speaker.”

Putin: No plan for Ukrainian invasion. Western hysteria.

Fairly plan liar, that is…




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

Search: