[basetop]

I'd stopped consuming so much cable news, it can rot your brain. And why did you edit out "China's human rights may be even worse" from your comment? That's certainly something that is up for debate.

"English-speaking people"? What's that?

Russia does bad things. China does bad things. The EU does bad things. We do bad things. What's strange is the sudden hysteria and relentless propaganda directed towards china and russia in particular. It's not like Russia and China were saints before.

[_iyig]

>And why did you edit out "China's human rights may be even worse" from your comment? That's certainly something that is up for debate.

That comment didn’t seem relevant in hindsight. The article is only about Russia. Discussion of China’s human rights record would not be on-topic commentary.

[saiya-jin]

We in Europe have a very personal stake in this. The chance of China ever invading us is minuscule bordering to none, the same can't be said for Russia.

They've already done it in the past numerous times - I know damn well since I come from former Czechoslovakia. I have no kind word for a russians due to this, my parents and their whole generation have pretty horrible stories to tell and effects of their meddling and bloody direct invasion in 1968 are still felt these days. And they've done it recently (and still doing it while LOLing like nothing is happening) with Ukraine.

You don't need to consume cable news at all, I've stopped some 15 years ago. This is plain old history.

[azangru]

> They've already done it in the past numerous times - I know damn well since I come from former Czechoslovakia.

Czechoslovakia was a part of the Soviet Bloc, wasn't it? During the time of Cold War? With Soviet Union being, in effect the ruling center of the bloc and considering the rest of the Soviet countries its sphere of influence? I mean, it doesn't justify what Soviet Union did then, but what happened to Czechoslovakia couldn't have happened to France, or Sweden, or the UK.

Things are completely different now. Yes, even now, with the militaristic rhetoric on both sides rising to the Cold War-era level. There is no Soviet bloc. Russia is reduced in its ambitions to the level of a minor regional power.

As for Ukraine, it has the misfortune of sharing a border and a lot of common history with Russia; so much so that Russia still considers it its sphere of interest. With Western Europe things are completely different. Russia may have squabbles with Ukraine or perhaps even with Baltic states (unlikely, because they are members of NATO), but to conclude from that that other European countries are under the risk of Russian invasion is to misrepresent reality, I believe.

[saiya-jin]

> Czechoslovakia was a part of the Soviet Bloc, wasn't it?

Nope, we were a sovereign country, with socialistic/communistic government, but completely standalone. Same for Poland, Hungary, Romania etc.

[NeedMoreTea]

Sovereign nation under Soviet influence is how we, in the West, understand Soviet bloc. Completely standalone except for the Brezhnev Soviet invasion after the Prague Spring, when Dubcek tried to liberalise and remove some of the Soviet yoke.

Czechoslovakia, Romania and Poland were all Soviet Bloc - from a Western Europe understanding - not part of the USSR, but certainly subject to their regimen and control. Like being required to sell goods at below market to USSR.

[azangru]

Oh, it certainly wasn't part of the Soviet Union, if that's what you are referring to, but wasn't it part of some political configuration that made it possible for the Soviet Union to treat it as a satellite state and as a battleground of communist ideology against western democracy? Wikipedia, in the article on Soviet-Czechoslovakian relations[0], states that: "After February 1948 Czechoslovakia was firmly set into the Soviet sphere of influence."

Again, I am not arguing from any ethical perspective; I am not saying that the USSR had the right to do what it did; I am merely saying that a bit disingenuous to suggest that Western European countries, including modern-day Czech Republic or Poland, are under any risk of Russian invasion. Ukraine might be; but even that doesn't seem all that likely.

[0] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Czechoslovakia%E2%80%93Soviet_...

[CharlesColeman]

> I am merely saying that a bit disingenuous to suggest that...countries...are under any risk of Russian invasion. Ukraine might be; but even that doesn't seem all that likely.

The risk of Russia invading the Ukraine is 100%, because it already happened. The Russians even annexed part of it, to worldwide condemnation.

[azangru]

> The risk of Russia invading the Ukraine is 100%, because it already happened. The Russians even annexed part of it, to worldwide condemnation.

Oh, I meant in the future. The risk of lightning striking the same house, as it were. Admitting a historically conflicted piece of territory whose population at the time is reported to have been overwhelmingly pro-russian and to have felt slighted by the anti-russian revolutionary government, and which even went through the perfunctory motions of a referendum to add some semblance of legitimacy to the process, is a fairly confusing case, for which, of course, Russia has its own exculpatory narrative. I was thinking of something more clear-cut. A declaration of war, an open military confrontation, that sort of thing.

[stplsd]

What a nice example of subtle aboutism.

[skilled]

Well, actually, it's the government with your money that does bad things.

You are subscribed to the government and won't do anything about it. So, it's actually mostly your fault (society).

Until people decide this is not the way of life, this circle will continue until extinction.

[dTal]

I think it's a fine thing to take responsibility for your government. But it's a bit much to blame people for the government doing bad things with "their" money. It's not their picture on the money. There's no unsubscribe option on a tax return form. You can't opt out, and even in our Western democracies representation is... poor, to say the least. The distinction between a government and its population is not meaningless.

[azangru]

> and won't do anything about it

We vote. The only legal democratic tool to "do anything about it", isn't it? Only our vote is a minority one that doesn't count much.

And what the hell is "society", anyway? Given that, say, 70 percent of the population votes one way and 30 percent the other way, is there any fault with the 30 percent? Are they "society"?