[HN Gopher] Belarusian regime's thugs shut down Imaguru, the cou...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Belarusian regime's thugs shut down Imaguru, the country's key
       startup hub
        
       Author : tosh
       Score  : 288 points
       Date   : 2021-04-21 08:35 UTC (14 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (techcrunch.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (techcrunch.com)
        
       | Jkae80_ wrote:
       | There are rumours that Belarus will become part of Russia
       | shortly. Putin just said that the West/United States crossed the
       | line and tried to murder Lukanseko. Upheaval is coming
       | https://twitter.com/ivan8848/status/1384815408495140865 So much
       | about the techcrunch article
        
         | wil421 wrote:
         | Account created 3 hours ago and only commented on this article
         | posting pro-Russian comments or just plain propaganda.
         | 
         | All this user did was put a _ at the end of his other Username
         | so they could comment more.
        
         | Solocomplex wrote:
         | Yep, bot account.
        
           | dang wrote:
           | Please don't break the site guidelines yourself, no matter
           | how bad another comment is or you feel it is.
           | 
           | https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
        
       | iyn wrote:
       | I've been following the situation in Belarus since last August
       | and it's really terrible. I admire how so many brave people look
       | death in the eye and still fight for freedom. I have friends
       | there and this allowed me to understand that there's so much
       | potential in Belarus -- there are so many talented, intelligent
       | people getting by in this adversarial environment. So sad to see
       | how Lukashenko's kleptocracy regime wasted so many years and
       | chances for a better future for millions of people.
       | 
       | Anyway -- you can help! Most of the communication, coordination
       | and crime-documenting happens on Telegram and the regime tries to
       | block access to this information. You can run Telegram Proxy
       | [0][1]. The installation is fairly straightforward, mostly setup
       | and forget. After setup you can register your proxy with
       | MTProxybot [2], so that people can learn about/use your proxy. If
       | you know people there, I also recommend setting up a private
       | proxy just for them (i.e. not registering with [2]) and sharing
       | over private communication channel (e.g. Signal), as the thugs
       | try to block proxies, so it's a cat-and-mouse game.
       | 
       | Edit: Added info about MTProxybot.
       | 
       | [0] https://core.telegram.org/mtproto/mtproto-transports
       | 
       | [1] https://github.com/TelegramMessenger/MTProxy
       | 
       | [2] https://t.me/MTProxybot
        
         | disabled wrote:
         | A banned book in Belarus, called "Paranoia", by Victor
         | Martinovich, captures the situation that Belarusians are in.
         | 
         | "In the summertime, in the Belarusian capital of Minsk, young
         | couples rent boats. They float, seemingly aimlessly, with the
         | current of the Svisloch River, until they find themselves under
         | a bridge. Then they row against the current for as long as they
         | can, hoping to find shelter from the sun and from prying eyes.
         | The premise of Belarusian writer Victor Martinovich's Russian-
         | language novel Paranoia is that this is impossible. As a police
         | state such as today's Belarusian dictatorship approaches
         | perfect control, someone is always watching. The young lovers
         | are watching each other, whether they understand this or not.
         | The only way to be safe in such a society is to abandon love,
         | but true solitude courts paranoia."
         | 
         | [1] New York Review of Books, "Paranoia" Review:
         | https://www.nybooks.com/articles/2010/10/28/darkest-belarus/
         | 
         | [2] Non-paywalled version:
         | https://archive.is/fTOcP#selection-647.0-651.318
        
           | vagrantJin wrote:
           | This sounds like an excellent read. Will definitely get my
           | hands on a copy. I don't know what it is about East European
           | authors' ability to explore the human condition with exacting
           | clarity.
           | 
           | Anyway, thanks for sharing.
        
             | disabled wrote:
             | They have a good command of language in general, and
             | especially when it comes to expression. In Slavic
             | languages, there are often a lot of words that have the
             | exact same meaning (compared to English or romance
             | languages), but you have to learn individually how to use
             | the right one to capture the moment best for your
             | situation. Also, at least for the Slavic language that I
             | speak (not a native speaker), it is clean, direct, and
             | concise with respect to communication and expression, in
             | comparison to English. The language I speak is much more
             | complicated than English, grammatically. It has 7
             | grammatical cases (all words), 7 tenses (all verbs), and 3
             | genders (all nouns and adjectives), which change the
             | conjugations of each of the words, whether they be a verb,
             | noun, or adjective. English has 3 grammatical cases, 12
             | tenses, and 1 gender (natural gender).
        
               | vagrantJin wrote:
               | Thanks for this detailed reply. The dots are starting to
               | connect. Will definitely dig into this rabbit hole. But
               | it does make me wonder whether the English translations
               | are doing the work justice. Like watching a dubbed series
               | misses a lot of depth because the words and their meaning
               | don't map exactly from one language to another. All we
               | get are _close enough_ translations.
        
               | bumblingmumbler wrote:
               | There's morphological complexity and then there's
               | semantic one. I grew up speaking one of Turkic and one of
               | Slavic languages. Morphology-wise, both of those are
               | massively more complicated as compared to English. But
               | English is way more analytically powerful/flexible. It
               | allows for constructions and frame of mind that are not
               | quite possible in non-analytic languages. For even more
               | dramatic example, consider math. The latter has barely
               | any morphology to speak of. But its expressive
               | flexibility is legendary if not unbeatable. Math famously
               | allows for generalizations that simply do not exist in
               | nature, just because reason/analysis allows for it.
               | 
               | It's also a matter of culture. For example, writing
               | overly long sentences in passive voice in Russian is
               | encouraged if not considered a mark of sophisticated
               | writing whereas in English it's a massive faux-pas.
               | Reading English I get the sense that meaning takes
               | precedence over syntactic complexity. I can see why
               | English might come off as, uhh, simple if one is used to
               | bloated prose and reading between the lines. In math
               | every word and sentence matters. I sense English strives
               | for that as well.
               | 
               | Besides, English handles morphological complexity by way
               | of syntax and massive semantic overloading of words.
               | 
               | Aside from logically vivid constructions and phrases, as
               | a nonnonative speaker of English, I really like
               | secondary/n-ary meaning to simple/common/"little" words
               | that we are typically not taught as ESL (or
               | EnglishAsNthLanguage). For example, I was delighted to
               | discover "we made it" = "we are successful", "we made
               | here on time" = "we got here on time", "we are making
               | good time" = "we are traveling faster than expected" etc.
               | I also love English constructions like "it's pretty
               | ugly", "it's little too much" etc :) Basically, anything
               | in English that doesn't have 1-1 equivalent in
               | Slavic/Turkic languages immediately perks up my
               | ears/eyes. Thankfully, there's a ton of that in English.
        
             | jacquesm wrote:
             | > I don't know what it is about East European authors'
             | ability to explore the human condition with exacting
             | clarity.
             | 
             | Most likely that they have lives that have a lot of stuff
             | happening in them besides consumption and education.
        
               | vagrantJin wrote:
               | Yeah. But there's just this ability to peer into and
               | through people with such wonderful detail. What joy!
        
         | Jkae80 wrote:
         | Yeah? Check out the involvement of NGO directly financed by the
         | West. What ever happened in Ukraine's coup orchestrated by the
         | West is not going to happen in Belarus. And that is a hard pill
         | to swallow for you people.
        
           | yurielt wrote:
           | lol who is you people what I ma baffled at your statement I
           | know the West has insiduous ties with what is happening in
           | there but how is it bad to register crimes yeah the west can
           | be degenerate and infuence things but Lukashenko seems to be
           | corrupt so how is people being able to talk in an app
           | something you criticize like this? Get a grip
        
           | ClumsyPilot wrote:
           | Lets imagine the coup is orchestrated by the West.
           | 
           | The guy currently in charge is corrupt and a murderer. Is
           | living in Belarus going to get worse without him?
        
             | ceilingcorner wrote:
             | Probably. Have you ever read about the West's involvement
             | with regime change?
             | 
             | Once, just once, can we stop and realize that being world
             | policeman isn't always a good move?
        
               | koonsolo wrote:
               | Europe isn't the world policeman. Most neighboring
               | countries want to join EU for good reason.
               | 
               | In Ukraines case, do you really think they don't want to
               | become more like any EU country? I know plenty of people
               | from Lviv. That 'coup' was not staged by 'the west', but
               | was a force within their own population that want a
               | better standard of life.
               | 
               | So please don't compare US involvement in any Middle east
               | country to the EU and their neighboring countries.
        
               | ceilingcorner wrote:
               | Just because a country wants to join the EU doesn't mean
               | the EU should send weapons and foment a civil war there.
               | It is scary and absurd that this needs to be said, yet
               | here we are. Arguing for starting a civil war because of
               | "freedom." Where have we heard this before?
               | 
               | Lviv/Western Ukraine is also very anti-Russia and has
               | been for a long time (pre-WW2). Ukraine is a very divided
               | country and there is more than one opinion on what to do.
               | If each region voted independently, you'd probably see
               | Ukraine split into two states, one aligning with the EU
               | and the other with Russia.
        
               | oldnews193 wrote:
               | > Lviv/Western Ukraine is also very anti-Russia and has
               | been for a long time (pre-WW2). Ukraine is a very divided
               | country and there is more than one opinion on what to do.
               | If each region voted independently, you'd probably see
               | Ukraine split into two states, one aligning with the EU
               | and the other with Russia.
               | 
               | For what it's worth, the Party of Regions, which used to
               | be in power until 2014 and which got voted into power by
               | South and East of Ukraine, won the 2012 elections with a
               | program featuring signing the Association Agreement with
               | the EU, visa waiver with the EU and joining the EU
               | market.
               | 
               | Anyhow, if the question "Would you rather be in a
               | political and economic alliance with the EU or with
               | Russia?" might have seemed divisive to some before 2014,
               | I'd think Russian aggression fixed that for good.
        
               | koonsolo wrote:
               | The election results don't support your argument: https:/
               | /en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elections_in_Ukraine#/media/Fi...
        
             | vkou wrote:
             | Think for a moment about how the United States would deal
             | with a Russian or Chinese coup in Canada, or Mexico, and
             | you'll get your answer.
        
             | avodonosov wrote:
             | By the west or not by the west, does not matter. Change of
             | government by uprising is likely to end up in instability,
             | civil war, etc.
             | 
             | But in the end, it is the ruler to blame, that he
             | undermines his legitimacy (by running elections in a way
             | that large part of the population does not trust it, etc),
             | thus motivating people to protest and either win with large
             | chances for instability or loose and get prison terms, etc.
        
             | ramtatatam wrote:
             | It might get worst if country gets into a war situation
             | like in Ukraine..
        
             | mschuster91 wrote:
             | > The guy currently in charge is corrupt and a murderer. Is
             | living in Belarus going to get worse without him?
             | 
             | If one goes by the example of what happened in Afghanistan,
             | Iraq or Libya, the answer is very well: yes, this could
             | happen.
             | 
             | Putsching away or otherwise deposing a regime is only _one_
             | step. Without a solid aftercare plan (like the Marshall
             | Plan after WW2) to empower democratic actors, the power
             | vacuum can have really really bad outcomes.
        
             | luckylion wrote:
             | I have no real dog in the fight, but the exact same
             | arguments were made about Iraq and Libya. They weren't
             | great places to live before removing the dictators, but
             | they were much, much worse afterwards.
             | 
             | Not saying that's the same in Belarus, but that argument by
             | itself doesn't hold water.
        
             | levosmetalo wrote:
             | List of countries where "the West" organized a coup against
             | a "corrupt murderer dictator" to establish "democratic
             | elected government":
             | 
             | - Ukraine - Syria - Libya - Georgia - Iraq - Iran -
             | Afghanistan - Yugoslavia - Venezuela - Cuba - ex-Yugoslavia
             | - Chile - ...
             | 
             | All those countries were devastated by the
             | "democratization". I would like to see one example where
             | that went good for the local population in general and
             | where that brought progress and prosperity.
        
               | VincentEvans wrote:
               | I don't know about all these other countries, but I am
               | Belarusian (though living abroad now) and it's not some
               | mysterious forces that are forcing us to change
               | leadership. I don't personally know anyone in my circle
               | of Belarusian acquaintances who doesn't think it
               | should've been over for Lukashenko decades ago, and that
               | he is a corrupt, self-dealing, mini-despot.
        
               | caskstrength wrote:
               | > - Ukraine - ...
               | 
               | > All those countries were devastated by the
               | "democratization".
               | 
               | I'm not sure what you mean by "devastated". Software
               | development jobs market is flourishing and my friends
               | from other industries are not doing that bad either. Are
               | you watching/reading Russian news sources by any chance?
        
               | levosmetalo wrote:
               | It's a fucking war there, people are sent to war to kill
               | and to get killed. GDP in Ukraine is ~3,5k$ per year.
               | 
               | Your software developer friends are just outliers there.
        
               | throwaway894345 wrote:
               | > GDP in Ukraine is ~3,5k$ per year.
               | 
               | I don't know what to make of this comment; it's certainly
               | wrong by a wide margin. The entire country's GDP cannot
               | be less than I take home per paycheck. I thought maybe it
               | was per-capita GDP, but the 2021 IMF estimate is $13k--
               | almost 4x your figure. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Li
               | st_of_countries_by_GDP_(PP...
        
               | sergeykish wrote:
               | That's value of GDP (nominal) per capita, year 2019. 2021
               | estimate is $3,984 [1]. Not much, yes, but that's in post
               | USSR country that's fighting eighth year Russia
               | agression.
               | 
               | PPP is purchasing power parity.
               | 
               | [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_
               | GDP_(no...
        
               | vincnetas wrote:
               | And i'm pretty sure that Donbas (separatist region) is
               | receiving weapons not from the west. So in Ukrainian
               | scenario i'm nor sure who has destabilised that region.
               | By the way if you look at Ukrainian GDP over time it
               | shows growth over past years.
        
               | koonsolo wrote:
               | Ukraine is a big country. When you look at the part close
               | to Russia, yes, that is a warzone. When you look at
               | places like Lviv... warzone??? Yeah right, you can just
               | travel there buddy.
               | 
               | Then you also get which country is doing the
               | destabilization, and it sure as hell isn't the EU.
        
               | bobthechef wrote:
               | > Then you also get which country is doing the
               | destabilization, and it sure as hell isn't the EU.
               | 
               | That's a pretty simplistic view of how international
               | politics and geostrategy is played.
               | 
               | ATO expansion is undesirable to Russia and counter to
               | agreements made between Russia and NATO. Russia has also
               | been testing Western responses to its salami incursions
               | beginning with Abkhazia and now Ukraine. The most it has
               | gotten so far are sanctions (probably better than a full
               | scale war at this point, but longer term this tactic may
               | not succeed as Russia keeps chewing away). American
               | meddling and financing of Euromaidan to topple Yanukovych
               | and shake up Ukrainian politics is what opened the door
               | to Russian pretexts to invade a country whose borders are
               | not only an unstable Soviet construct (culturally
               | speaking), but which plays an important territorial role
               | in Russian security (control of Crimea allows control of
               | the Sea of Azoz).
               | 
               | You can probably add NordStream II to the mix, but that's
               | more about gaining the upper hand over Central Europe in
               | cooperation with Germany, hence the farce of EU unity,
               | and in this case, where energy security and its
               | geopolitical consequences are concerned.
               | 
               | Thus the need for a Central European bloc that can
               | withstand the grind of American/Western and Russian
               | cultural and geopolitical tectonics. The Three Seas
               | Initiative is ostensibly supposed to accomplish this,
               | exploiting American backing, at least in the beginning.
               | Belarus had historically been oriented toward this center
               | of gravity until the 19th century. The Belarusian
               | opposition certainly leans in the historical direction
               | and the only other alternative is Russian vassalage. This
               | Central European bloc incidentally would function like a
               | buffer that would also serve the security interests of
               | Europe in general.
        
               | baybal2 wrote:
               | > That's a pretty simplistic view of how international
               | politics and geostrategy is played.
               | 
               | I see how profound is your sophisticated understanding of
               | high art of geopolitics...
               | 
               | > counter to agreements made between Russia and NATO.
               | 
               | Do you see Russia keeping to any agreement it had with
               | NATO now?
               | 
               | What I see is politicians of NATO member countries
               | running around Putin like headless chicken, trying to
               | decipher some "tough geopolitical riddle," while the
               | later laughs, and keeps sending them his KGB agents.
        
               | chupasaurus wrote:
               | > longer term this tactic may not succeed as Russia keeps
               | chewing away
               | 
               | As for last decade, Russia keeps chewing away itself
               | since the real income declines each and every year while
               | capital runs away.
        
               | koonsolo wrote:
               | >> Then you also get which country is doing the
               | destabilization, and it sure as hell isn't the EU.
               | 
               | > That's a pretty simplistic view of how international
               | politics and geostrategy is played.
               | 
               | So EU is sending soldiers to the eastern front of Ukraine
               | to fight??? It's well known among Ukrainians who is doing
               | the fighting over there.
               | 
               | Ukraine democratically decides to prefer EU over Russia,
               | maybe all parties need to live with that.
        
               | oldnews193 wrote:
               | > Ukraine democratically decides to prefer EU over
               | Russia, maybe all parties need to live with that.
               | 
               | Russia has been opposing the expansion of NATO for
               | decades, and Ukrainian politicians at different moments
               | were aiming to join NATO (rather than signing memorandums
               | not to join NATO). I suppose, we Ukrainians can be upset
               | at how unfair it is that our sovereignty is not
               | respected, but that won't earn us any more agency.
               | Russians are the ones with the nukes, overwhelmingly
               | stronger military and with opinions on the matter, so
               | maybe we've got to be smarter about how we navigate
               | through challenges ahead of us.
        
               | sergeykish wrote:
               | You are free to relocate to occupied territories.
        
               | matkoniecz wrote:
               | > That's a pretty simplistic view of how international
               | politics and geostrategy is played.
               | 
               | It is pretty clear that Russia invaded another country,
               | they are the country is doing the destabilization.
               | 
               | Additional info may be useful to get more detail, but it
               | is not changing basic facts.
               | 
               | > ATO expansion is undesirable to Russia and counter to
               | agreements made between Russia and NATO.
               | 
               | ATO expansion? Counter to which agreements?
               | 
               | (I guess this agreements are similar that Ukraine got
               | about integrity of it territory)
        
               | caskstrength wrote:
               | > It's a fucking war there, people are sent to war to
               | kill and to get killed.
               | 
               | For me it is "here". The fact that for you it is "there"
               | makes me think that you should talk more to actual people
               | that are living in the countries you mentioned in
               | previous post instead of lecturing them over internet
               | with copy/paste of Russian propaganda "news" pieces.
               | 
               | Besides, it might be a novel concept for you, but here we
               | have an actual elections. People can always vote for some
               | Russian puppet (Medvedchuk, for example) and "join"
               | Russia. I guess majority thinks that "fucking war" is
               | better alternative in this situation.
               | 
               | > GDP in Ukraine is ~3,5k$ per year.
               | 
               | Your point being? It is not like Ukraine was some rich
               | local Eastern European Switzerland until sneaky CIA/Soros
               | sponsored NGOs "destabilized" it.
               | 
               | > Your software developer friends are just outliers
               | there.
               | 
               | Are you intentionally omitting my next sentence?
        
               | andonceagain wrote:
               | I envy your tenacity fighting against ill-intentioned
               | HNers.
               | 
               | I was born in one of those countries mentioned by
               | @levosmetalo above and the common running joke was too
               | "People in internet say revolution is sponsored by CIA,
               | but I'm still waiting for my paycheck!" and that was
               | coming from people that were _truly_ putting themselves
               | out there.
               | 
               | Anyway, I don't care (sadly) for having an identity on HN
               | anymore, several times I created a user in good faith
               | only to be downvoted to oblivion discussing these
               | matters. Yes, I know, I shouldn't be commenting on those
               | threads. I can't help it, I grew up in a place awfully
               | destroyed by communist.
        
               | chupasaurus wrote:
               | The joke is very alive in Russia.
        
               | levosmetalo wrote:
               | > For me it is "here". The fact that for you it is
               | "there"
               | 
               | Sure, and I know some people for whom it was also "here"
               | and now it's "there" because they can't live any more in
               | their hometown because of war. For you guys "here" in
               | Kiev Donbas is also "there".
               | 
               | > Besides, it might be a novel concept for you, but here
               | we have an actual elections. People can always vote for
               | some Russian puppet (Medvedchuk, for example) and "join"
               | Russia. I guess majority thinks that "fucking war" is
               | better alternative in this situation.
               | 
               | And that's why Ukraine will never be a prosperous
               | country, as long as you consider a "fucking war" a better
               | alternative to anything.
               | 
               | The majority has been brainwashed by "western" propaganda
               | to hate everything Russian, to the point it would rather
               | have "fucking war" against their ex citizen in Donbas and
               | Crimea instead of letting them choose where and how they
               | want to live. Those guys in Donbas and Crimea also had
               | elections and referendums, not worse than those in
               | Ukraine, and they decided they don't want to live with
               | someone who is denying them basic human rights based on
               | the wrong ethnicity. Would you rather kill them all than
               | let them go? And since you want to kill all the ethnic
               | Russians why are you surprised that Russia won't let you
               | do it?
               | 
               | NATO is happy to have war against Russia or Russian
               | allies to the last Ukrainian solder and civilian.
        
               | caskstrength wrote:
               | > Sure, and I know some people for whom it was also
               | "here" and now it's "there" because they can't live any
               | more in their hometown because of war.
               | 
               | I also hope that Russia withdraws their military and
               | financial support for terrorists who prevent your friend
               | from going home. However, it seems Russia wants further
               | confrontation and is now amassing significant military
               | presence in that region, so we won't have much choice in
               | that matter.
               | 
               | > For you guys "here" in Kiev Donbas is also "there".
               | 
               | Not really. For most of the people in other parts of
               | Ukraine who are under constant risk of being conscripted
               | the Donbas is very much "here".
               | 
               | > And that's why Ukraine will never be a prosperous
               | country, as long as you consider a "fucking war" a better
               | alternative to anything.
               | 
               | Commendable sentiment. I would also prefer a peaceful
               | world for all of us.
               | 
               | > The majority has been brainwashed by "western"
               | propaganda to hate everything Russian
               | 
               | I'm a Russian speaker with some Russian ancestry. Please
               | tell me more how I "hate everything Russian".
               | 
               | > to the point it would rather have "fucking war" against
               | their ex citizen in Donbas and Crimea instead of letting
               | them choose where and how they want to live.
               | 
               | There is no Iron Curtain anymore. People who want to live
               | in any other country (including Russia) are obviously
               | free to do so.
               | 
               | > Those guys in Donbas and Crimea also had elections and
               | referendums, not worse than those in Ukraine
               | 
               | They are not recognized intentionally and and were
               | conducted by occupying military personnel. Overall, we
               | both know that "our town votes to join another country"
               | is not how it works anywhere. Just ask Chechen people how
               | it went for them, if you would like to know how Russia
               | deals with such issues.
               | 
               | > they decided they don't want to live with someone who
               | is denying them basic human rights based on the wrong
               | ethnicity
               | 
               | This is just old Russian propaganda trope "Bloodthirsty
               | Ukrainian Nazis want to genocide Russian-speaking
               | people". Overall, I never felt that my rights were denied
               | to me due to language of choice or my obviously Russian
               | surname.
               | 
               | > Would you rather kill them all than let them go?
               | 
               | Have you stopped beating your wife?
               | 
               | > And since you want to kill all the ethnic Russians why
               | are you surprised that Russia won't let you do it?
               | 
               | So you started your message with incredibly pacifist
               | statement "will never be a prosperous country, as long as
               | you consider a "fucking war" a better alternative to
               | anything" and end it with approving of Russian aggression
               | under flimsy pretext that they are preventing some
               | imagined genocide of ethnic Russians? I sense double
               | standards here.
               | 
               | > NATO is happy to have war against Russia or Russian
               | allies to the last Ukrainian solder and civilian.
               | 
               | This is factually incorrect. Obama repeatedly denied
               | lethal weapon sales to Ukraine during active phase of the
               | conflict [1]. The main objective for European politicians
               | also seems to be some fake outrage about Russia's actions
               | to put a show for their electorate while continuing
               | business as usual behind closed doors [2]. If anything,
               | "NATO" would happily give whole Ukrainian territory to
               | Russia in order to end costly sanctions, if they could
               | somehow manage to do so without war, refugees and overall
               | humanitarian disaster (with obvious exception of Poland
               | and Baltic states who are fully aware that they could be
               | next).
               | 
               | [1] https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-31013452 [2]
               | https://www.politico.eu/article/angela-merkel-joe-biden-
               | nord...
        
               | minipci1321 wrote:
               | > NATO is happy to have war against Russia or Russian
               | allies to the last Ukrainian solder and civilian.
               | 
               | I think this devalues your all other arguments. Where it
               | comes from?
        
               | dfadsadsf wrote:
               | Software development market in Ukraine is flourishing
               | because its completely decoupled from local economy with
               | most people working in outsourcing companies. Hardly
               | definition of success.
               | 
               | Country is in the middle of frozen civil war. GDP per
               | person in Ukraine is still below 2013 and is half of GDP
               | per person in Belarus.
               | 
               | Change in government need to come from within - not
               | imposed by outsiders. Very few cases when
               | revolution/regime change led to even ok outcome.
               | 
               | Besides problem with living in middle income soft
               | authoritarian countries is mostly middle income and not
               | authoritarian part. That's the reason there is so much
               | focus on corruption in protests - people just want more
               | benefits/free money and assume that all money are stolen
               | by corrupt government when in reality there is just not
               | that much money in the country. Obviously regime change
               | does not reduce corruption nor expand size of economy so
               | all recent revolutions just made situation worse for
               | common people.
        
               | stablenode wrote:
               | It's amazing how every time Ukraine is mentioned in a
               | thread, a poster (from Mukhosransk or some such place)
               | suddenly appears to tell everyone about the virtues of
               | living in an authoritarian petrostate.
        
               | andonceagain wrote:
               | Well, to be fair, @caskstrength has had his account for
               | 12 months already (karma: 150). Yours has only been
               | created for 8 months (karma: 16).
        
               | stablenode wrote:
               | Thanks @andonceagain (created 29mins ago, karma: 2). I
               | always wondered is the view of the Laptev Sea as
               | depressing as they say?
        
               | stablenode wrote:
               | Hey @andonceagain (created 1 hour ago, karma: 5), you
               | didn't answer to my reply
               | 
               | 'Thanks @andonceagain (created 29mins ago, karma: 2). I
               | always wondered is the view of the Laptev Sea as
               | depressing as they say?'
               | 
               | Don't be rude - I'm fascinated to know more about the
               | subarctic regions of a wannabe superpower. You can reply
               | from your real account: no shame in it.
        
               | odshoifsdhfs wrote:
               | Mine has 900 and this is my 3rd or 4th. I'm as western
               | european as possible (literally living in the most
               | western country in europe). My last 5 or so years, most
               | of my social circle has been Ukranian, Belarussian and
               | Russian people. My neighbour here in Portugal is
               | Ukrainian and my family knows her for over 20 or so
               | years.
               | 
               | 95%+ of shit I hear about these countries is from
               | US/Western europeans that know little more than what they
               | learned in CoD and some Holliwood movies and making these
               | ideological thoughts. They have good and bad things, good
               | and bad people, but the view from '1st world countries'
               | towards them is silly and it would be even funny if some
               | of these countries and people weren't going through these
               | difficulties
        
               | stablenode wrote:
               | @odshoifsdhfs: Well, I hate to quibble, but it's actually
               | 'Belarusian' (just one 's', you see). I've lived in
               | Western Europe (UK) nearly all my life and I'm afraid I
               | disagree with you fundamentally: '95%' of the people in
               | 'the West' are quite indifferent to the broader region of
               | Eastern Europe, but never in my life have I encountered
               | the kinds of chauvinistic attitudes even approaching
               | those I encountered from Russians. To give you an
               | example: 'govori po-chelovecheski' (in Russian -
               | literally 'speak like a human being') -- can you believe
               | this s**t? Also 'US/Western Europeans' aren't living in
               | tinpot dictatorships with aspirations to annex
               | territories from their neighbours -- a slight, but
               | important difference, which to my mind excuses any
               | ignorance of the region and its politics.
        
               | odshoifsdhfs wrote:
               | Sorry about the typo, mainly because in my language we do
               | use the two 's' (Bielorussia) so sometimes my brain and
               | typing have a mismatch.
               | 
               | As for 'chauvinistic' things, I can agree with you there,
               | as well as having very anti LGBT and racist tones in
               | their speeches (I had to 'teach' a Russian friend that
               | calling people niggers out loud in a cafe isn't
               | acceptable here).
               | 
               | But I can also say, a lot of Italians or Portuguese (and
               | others as well) have similar thoughts, but they just know
               | how to hide it enough (you have no idea how much faggot
               | or nigger or the likes is used in normal conversation
               | within family/friends conversations here, but just not
               | spoken to third parties because they are afraid of
               | judgement/consequences) while Russians tend to be more
               | outspoken (mainly because it isn't seen such as taboo
               | there to be anti-lbgt/black people)
               | 
               | But two things that are my personal opinion. A lot of
               | this is mainly due to their internal culture, and when
               | they are exposed to others (black people or gay people)
               | they understand very well that what was ingrained there
               | isn't the reality. And second, they have (at least the
               | ones I know), changed 180 degrees in a very short time
               | about those ideas and behaviours when their 'eyes get
               | opened' compared to local western europeans that still
               | blame the black from Africa for everything that is wrong
               | in their country (or nowadays, gypsies))
               | 
               | I am not trying to defend russians or ukrainian people
               | (which in the context of these posts they are probably on
               | different sides of the debate), but that the ideas we (or
               | most) have from that part of the world is quite wrong.
               | Yes, you had russians that talked to you like that, and I
               | know good friends that left Russia because they couldn't
               | stand LBGT persecution and Putin's 'strong man' politics.
               | There are always various faces to the same coin (I
               | know!).
        
               | caskstrength wrote:
               | > Software development market in Ukraine is flourishing
               | because its completely decoupled from local economy with
               | most people working in outsourcing companies. Hardly
               | definition of success.
               | 
               | I'm not working for outsourcing company.
               | 
               | > Country is in the middle of frozen civil war. GDP per
               | person in Ukraine is still below 2013 and is half of GDP
               | per person in Belarus.
               | 
               | So why do you think people have not elected some pro-
               | Russian politician? Or asked Yanukovich to come back so
               | we could all go back to glorious-high-GDP-2013 times? In
               | fact, it seems that significant part of population of
               | Belarus (with their high GDP and all) are starting to see
               | drawbacks in that arrangement instead. Really makes you
               | think, huh?
               | 
               | > Change in government need to come from within - not
               | imposed by outsiders. Very few cases when
               | revolution/regime change led to even ok outcome.
               | 
               | This is very presumptuous from your side. I remember a
               | lot of people going each evening after day of coding in
               | cushy software company office to participate in
               | revolution in 2014, risking their freedom and life. In
               | fact, "People in internet say revolution is sponsored by
               | CIA, but I'm still waiting for my paycheck!" was a common
               | joke back at those days, so please spare me your
               | condescension.
               | 
               | >Besides problem with living in middle income soft
               | authoritarian countries is mostly middle income and not
               | authoritarian part. That's the reason there is so much
               | focus on corruption in protests - people just want more
               | benefits/free money and assume that all money are stolen
               | by corrupt government when in reality there is just not
               | that much money in the country. Obviously regime change
               | does not reduce corruption nor expand size of economy so
               | all recent revolutions just made situation worse for
               | common people.
               | 
               | Revolution of Dignity started as a reaction to Yanukovich
               | backpedaling on association agreement with the European
               | Union under Russian pressure. You might want to educate
               | yourself on the subject before patronizing us stupid poor
               | people from "soft authoritarian countries".
        
               | batter wrote:
               | "Country is in the middle of frozen civil war." This
               | alone can tell a lot about storyteller. Nice try :)
        
               | oytis wrote:
               | Former Yugoslavia countries are doing pretty well
               | actually. Genocides has been stopped, nations were able
               | to establish their own countries, none of them returned
               | to a dictatorship, all have democratically elected
               | governments. Definitely better than before.
        
               | hulitu wrote:
               | And the economy was destroyed. Definitely better than
               | before.
        
               | Mediterraneo10 wrote:
               | You have things backwards. It was an economic decline
               | that helped to motivate the collapse of Yugoslavia. If
               | things in Yugoslavia had stayed as nice as in the 1960s
               | and early 1970s -- the era of the _vikendica_ and middle-
               | class holidays in Bali, -- nationalist grievances might
               | not have gained ground.
        
               | oytis wrote:
               | That's a bold claim. It was a communist dictatorship
               | first - not sure if there is a reasonable way to compare
               | GDP of a communist country with a normal country. Then
               | there was an endless civil war - that's hardly good for
               | economy too.
               | 
               | Today these are quite comparable to other Eastern
               | European countries. Croatia has a larger GDP per capita
               | than Romania, Montenegro is somewhere in Turkey's league,
               | Serbia is pretty poor, but still much better than Belarus
               | and Ukraine.
        
               | levosmetalo wrote:
               | And still a big number of people that remember Yugoslavia
               | will tell you they lived better, it was less crime,
               | better education, less poverty, less inequality, more
               | actual freedom.
               | 
               | Btw, the war and genocides are a result of "the west"
               | messing up there. If "the west" wasn't so eager to
               | destroy Yugoslavia none of the war and genocides would
               | happen.
        
               | powerapple wrote:
               | The problem is that West is not helping them enough. Try
               | finishing Iraq first before getting into other places.
               | Building Iraq will take more time than bombing Iraq. It
               | will need sending money instead of extracting oil. The
               | problem is that, no, that's not what people want. You
               | only want Sadam to go and don't care about anything else.
               | The media, the NGO, the activists just move on to next
               | target because it is always easy to pointing out a
               | problem than fixing a problem.
        
               | puszczyk wrote:
               | What about Poland, the Baltic States, Czechia and
               | Slovakia, Hungary? Also devastated? I'm sure we'd do much
               | better with our friends in Moscow calling the shots.
        
               | boomboomsubban wrote:
               | Calling the Revolutions of 1989 a "Western coup" seems
               | wrong. And blindly stating it's better to be a puppet of
               | the West than Russia is not really backed up by history
               | and ignores the turmoil of any transition period.
        
               | b0rsuk wrote:
               | Poland is currently circling the drain in toilet. The
               | regime that gained power in 2015 did so with the help of
               | Russia* and is covertly pro-Russian (watch their actions,
               | not their words). It's no longer a democracy but an
               | informational autocracy - like Venezuela, Russia,
               | Ecuador, Peru, Malaysia, Hungary.
               | 
               | * Marek Falenta imported coal from Russia and owes A LOT
               | of money to Russian raw resource companies. The
               | restaurants where the illegal wiretapping took place were
               | set up by Russian raw resource companies.
               | * "Obcym Alfabetem - Jak ludzie Kremla i PiS zagrali
               | podsluchami" (Grzegorz Rzeczkowski)       * "Macierewicz
               | i jego tajemnice" (Tomasz Piatek)       * "Rydzyk i
               | Przyjaciele" (Tomasz Piatek)       *
               | https://oko.press/pis-wciaz-rzadzi-bo-zyjemy-w-
               | informacyjnej-autokracji/ (Anna Mierzynska)
               | 
               | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nFydXPLCpL8
        
               | pjc50 wrote:
               | Yugoslavia was not destroyed by the West, it was
               | destroyed by Serbian nationalism and a set of ancient
               | racial and religious hatreds.
        
               | bobthechef wrote:
               | What _ancient_ racial hatreds? The Serbs, Croats, and
               | Bosnians are practically the same ethnic group! The
               | difference is religious!
        
               | Koshkin wrote:
               | To be fair, there's also Albanians (Kosovo). Still, not
               | sure if 'racial' applies though.
        
               | jholman wrote:
               | Japan? South Korea? Just brainstorming, here.
        
               | boomboomsubban wrote:
               | The US propped up murderous dictators in both, more
               | explicitly in South Korea but they also helped a war
               | criminal entrench the LDP in Japan. Their shift to
               | democracy happened much later and was not the result of a
               | Western coup.
        
               | publicola1990 wrote:
               | Also Taiwan.
        
               | rafaelm wrote:
               | I can speak for Venezuela, and the corrupt murderer
               | dictator party has been in power for just over 20 years.
               | The country was completely ruined by the "corrupt
               | murderer dictator" without any input from "the West".
        
               | unnouinceput wrote:
               | I would not call US sanctions "without input from the
               | West"
               | 
               | https://www.state.gov/venezuela-related-sanctions/
        
               | stadium wrote:
               | Pretty sure sanctions didn't start until after they
               | nationalized (stole) the major foreign owned companies.
        
             | arthur_sav wrote:
             | I don't know, ask all the Arab Spring countries. In the
             | history of regime changes by the West and by West i mean
             | US, it has never really worked out. In fact, it always
             | destabilises the countries.
             | 
             | Not supporting the current regime, just saying history has
             | proven West supported coups don't work.
        
               | ipaddr wrote:
               | History has proven west supported coups mostly work.
               | 
               | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_involvement
               | _in...
               | 
               | From Costa Rica to South Korea to Japan to modern Iraq to
               | Egypt in 1952 to Lebanon etc..
               | 
               | Iran didn't work out. Some of the central American
               | operation didn't work out. Cuba didn't. But things are
               | not static either. Things have a habit of working out
               | given a longer timescale.
        
               | HideousKojima wrote:
               | Libya didn't work out. And if the West had succeeded in
               | Syria, the groups that would have taken control would
               | have been much worse than Assad (though there's the ever
               | so tiny chance that there could have been an independent
               | Kurdistan, so that would have been a silver lining I
               | guess?)
        
               | ipaddr wrote:
               | Look at the list I provided. There are dozens and dozens
               | of successful cases and a handful of failed ones.
               | 
               | The failed ones are recent which means the outcome has
               | the potential to change in time.
               | 
               | Would an 80% success rate over the last hundred years
               | change your perspective?
        
               | FpUser wrote:
               | >"Would an 80% success rate over the last hundred years
               | change your perspective?"
               | 
               | People who live in those places rightfully do not give a
               | flying fuck about westerner's perspective. They care
               | about being killed, maimed, displaced, robbed of the
               | source of income etc. etc.
               | 
               | I can only imagine what would happen if you stood in
               | front of them and tried to explain your stats.
        
               | worik wrote:
               | I do not think the point was that the successful Western
               | backed coups produced a good, better, or desirable
               | result.
               | 
               | Additionally I am not convinced that a independent
               | Kurdistan would be a good idea.
               | 
               | I know Abdullah Ocalan has come under the influence of
               | Murray Bookchin, and has had some very progressive ideas
               | about how the politics of the Middle East should be
               | structured. But in the event of the establishment of
               | Kurdistan there is no good reason to believe it would be
               | any less of a dictatorship than Iran, Turkey, or Dog help
               | us, Syria.
        
               | baybal2 wrote:
               | > I don't know, ask all the Arab Spring countries.
               | 
               | > Not supporting the current regime, just saying history
               | has proven West supported coups don't work.
               | 
               | I see you omit the fact that regimes felled by Arab
               | Spring were all darlings of the West, with exceptions of
               | Libya, and Syria.
               | 
               | It's true however that Western policy making in regards
               | to the "our bastards'" is a tragicomedic history of
               | failure, after failure.
        
         | varispeed wrote:
         | What are the legal ramifications of running such proxy? For
         | instance, if a group of people coordinate a criminal activity
         | and it is proven that they used the proxy to communicate? Could
         | owner of such proxy become liable?
        
           | proxysna wrote:
           | None, but if cops think that you are liable you will be
           | persecuted. There were instances when having a contract with
           | a lawyer would be interpreted as if you were intending to
           | break the law [0]. So you can imagine how little evidence
           | will be required.
           | 
           | [0] https://news.tut.by/society/700543.html
        
           | HappyDreamer wrote:
           | In a dictatorship, it doesn't matter so much if you use it in
           | a legal way or not -- what matters, is instead if the
           | dictator _does not like it_ (or if he likes it).
           | 
           | If you use such a proxy in a completely legal way, but that
           | the dictator thinks might make him lose his power, then he
           | can make up fake charges against you and put you in prison.
        
           | DyslexicAtheist wrote:
           | depends on many factors, e.g. which country you live in
           | whether there are extradition agreements with the foreign
           | country, whether you are a native of the country you live in,
           | whether there are exclusions of certain acts in your country
           | etc.
           | 
           | Not "shitting where you eat" (never do something that is a
           | crime in your own country) is basic opsec but the details are
           | usually a lot more complex.
        
         | baybal2 wrote:
         | > Anyway -- you can help!
         | 
         | The best way to help them now is to send arms, but that if of
         | course if you can get them through the border.
         | 
         | Belarus knows that they can't trust army drafted from regular
         | men, and that's why the army was sent off to seal the borders,
         | while the special police monsters are let to keep doing their
         | atrocities inside cities.
         | 
         | The West is also unwittingly facilitates this by keeping
         | shutting down attempts to get arms to Belarus from Balkans.
         | 
         | It's now in the news, but Poland, a NATO member, has already
         | shut a third attempt to get arms to the country, despite Warsaw
         | itself being the one initiating this with Belarus opposition.
        
           | baq wrote:
           | you really think having a civil war right around the corner,
           | practically on the other side of the fence, is something any
           | country wants to have? not to mention having an armed
           | rebellion means putin's intervention is guaranteed and then
           | belarus just becomes another federal district.
        
             | baybal2 wrote:
             | > you really think having a civil war right around the
             | corner, practically on the other side of the fence, is
             | something any country wants to have?
             | 
             | If you don't want a civil war on the other side of the
             | fence, _go and win it._
             | 
             | With current discord in the Belorussian armed forces,
             | double digit desertion rate, broken command chain, even the
             | smallest NATO armies can easily plough though them.
             | 
             | Your bigger problem will be the militarised special police,
             | paramilitaries, and secret services, which are in fact,
             | bigger, and better armed, and trained than the standing
             | military (this is the same situation you have across all
             | Eastern Bloc btw.)
        
               | baq wrote:
               | i'm sure all Belarusans would love to have two foreign
               | armies marching through their homeland, both with words
               | of liberation on their standards.
        
               | DyslexicAtheist wrote:
               | this argument is akin to somebody just having kidnapped
               | my family while despite me knowing where the kidnappers
               | live being told I should not gun up but "come up with a
               | peaceful plan" (perhaps hit the kidnappers with a leaflet
               | campaign).
        
               | buran77 wrote:
               | That's _exactly_ what a hostage rescue should be like
               | until there 's no other option: negotiations, the
               | peaceful plan.
               | 
               | So you know where the kidnappers live? You grab your
               | shotgun to get them "Rambo style". Best case only the
               | kidnappers get injured or killed. Worst case you and your
               | family get killed.
               | 
               | It feels like too many people simply cannot go past the
               | basic reaction "I find it may be a threat > shoot to
               | kill". I find this a failure in education.
               | 
               | And while it may turn out at some point that for Belarus
               | there was simply no other option, it still doesn't
               | justify jumping straight to it. Just a bit of common
               | sense can already tell you that the most likely outcome
               | is that civilians will get killed by the thousands and
               | this time it will be "justified" as defending against
               | acts of war. Guns escalate everything. They may escalate
               | your power but they also escalate the response.
        
               | La1n wrote:
               | Except in this case it's not "your family". People here
               | are arguing for foreign intervention. Not everything that
               | happens in another country you don't agree with should be
               | solved with violent foreign intervention...
        
             | DyslexicAtheist wrote:
             | that's a bad-faith argument, it should instead be:
             | 
             | Do you really want to allow systematic killing of the
             | opposition by current un-elected criminals holding on to
             | power. Putin's intervention is not some kind of
             | "hypothetical future danger or milestone in theoretic
             | escalation" but has been fact since 1998.
             | 
             | Europe isn't going to do anything except sending their
             | thoughts and prayers and direct intervention by the US is
             | unthinkable (for now). Sending support (which includes
             | arms, and mercenaries) is the only way that can protect the
             | civilian population.
             | 
             | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belarus%E2%80%93Russia_relati
             | o...
        
               | ceilingcorner wrote:
               | No, starting a civil war is exactly the wrong thing to do
               | if you want to protect the civilian population.
        
               | DyslexicAtheist wrote:
               | that's pretty hyperbolic. it's not "starting a civil war"
               | it's leveling the playing field against those who are
               | already brutalizing the population.
        
               | baybal2 wrote:
               | You don't protect civilians by letting a mad genocidal
               | regime mow down unarmed people with machineguns.
               | 
               | The civil war is already de-facto going. People who tell
               | to do nothing make peoples' of Belarus suffer in agony
               | for longer.
               | 
               | Look at Yugoslavia. You would've been still seeing
               | Milosevic's smiling face from TV if not NATO, and EU not
               | only arming Bosnians, but forcing the conflict, and
               | bringing it to a boiling point.
               | 
               | Only then the crazed genocidal generals started to
               | actually feel... fear. And it was it what allowed for a
               | relatively bloodless ouster of Milosevic in 97.
        
           | iyn wrote:
           | I'm talking about an action that an individual can take. Is
           | it enough in the grand scale of things? No. Does it make a
           | positive difference in a day-to-day life for people in
           | Belarus? Yes it does (e.g. knowing where the local meeting is
           | happening, where the thugs are etc.). Can you do more?
           | Always.
        
             | baybal2 wrote:
             | Roughly speaking, $1m is enough to feed, and arm a force of
             | a 1000 with small arms only for 1 to 2 months, with men
             | under arms being responsible for their own livelihood
             | beyond basics.
             | 
             | That's a very small amount of time. And without a training,
             | and heavy arms, none will be a good match even against
             | Belarusian standing army.
             | 
             | The challenge is to use up money in the shortest, and most
             | impactful way possible. The longer men stay in the field
             | doing nothing, the more money is burned on canned food, and
             | toilet paper rather than diminishing enemy fighting power.
             | 
             | Yes, individuals can arm a significant amount of
             | volunteers, and even keep inflicting the damage for a few
             | weeks. A battalion of complete war rookies can do things if
             | it strikes first, attacks softer targets other than
             | standing military, and focus on high cost/opportunity
             | operations like enemy's command chain, and political
             | leadership.
             | 
             | But in the larger scheme of things, even $1m is a pocket
             | change on the scale of nation states, and completely pales
             | to what a military of even smallest European states can do
             | both force, and material wise.
             | 
             | Yes, get your politicians involved, get your state
             | involved. Even a third grade caucus can easily dish out 8
             | digit sums in US without even blinking.
        
               | inglor_cz wrote:
               | Two can play this game. Look at Podnistria or Donbas.
               | 
               | Belarus split between a Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth
               | 2.0 and a Totally-Not-Russian-Puppet-State, with several
               | thousand young men's graves in between, isn't any better
               | than Belarus today.
        
               | baybal2 wrote:
               | One side will have the definite firepower advantage,
               | enough to deal with other be it puppet, not puppet or
               | whatever.
               | 
               | You choose what this side will be.
               | 
               | Russians have nothing in their coffers they can spare for
               | a puppet project when there will be a battle hardened
               | army a day away from Moscow.
               | 
               | It's the best way for NATO to put Russia on defensive. A
               | solid wall of steel from Baltic to Azov to seal it shut
               | from Europe.
        
               | inglor_cz wrote:
               | "It's the best way for NATO to put Russia on defensive. A
               | solid wall of steel from Baltic to Azov to seal it shut
               | from Europe."
               | 
               | Can you see the problem with NATO?
               | 
               | European countries are unlikely to finance the effort,
               | our armies are for the most part underinvested and their
               | deployment capacity very limited.
               | 
               | France has some capabilities, but it is also bogged down
               | elsewhere (Sahara), because the Islamist threat is more
               | acute for Paris than whatever Russia does.
               | 
               | USA and UK have two decades of nation building behind
               | them and whatever fighting spirit is left, is reserved
               | for a possible confrontation with China. Also, both of
               | them are naval powers, while Belarus is a landlocked
               | country. Not to say that they are unable to fight on
               | land, but it is a disadvantage for them.
               | 
               | If you like The Lord of the Rings, we are sort-of similar
               | to Gondor just prior to the war. Not enough power and
               | will to hold Mordor in a siege.
               | 
               | The good news is that Russia is fairly strained and it is
               | not a full Mordor either. More like a group of orc
               | chieftains from the Misty Mountains.
        
               | baybal2 wrote:
               | I very much see this very problem with NATO.
               | 
               | It's exactly because of this NATO's best move is to
               | commit to one defence line.
               | 
               | Even if depleted, and under invested. The power of EU
               | NATO members combined will be more than enough in this
               | scenario to hold a line with a few choke points in
               | between plains, and impassable forests.
        
               | inglor_cz wrote:
               | IDK. "Holding the line" scenarios in last 100 years
               | generally ended up badly for the defenders: expensive
               | _and_ ineffective. Modern wars are all about movement,
               | maneuver and sudden concentration of power in a spot
               | chosen by the attacker.
               | 
               | If the recent Nagorno Karabakh war is of any use as an
               | example, Russians and Russian-trained officers were
               | unable to hold their positions against killer drones.
               | Drones are cheap and their destruction in combat does not
               | fuel anti-war sentiments at home, unlike a stream of
               | coffins draped in flags.
               | 
               | But given that Russians are not stupid, they are probably
               | working on some anti-drone strategy as well.
        
               | baybal2 wrote:
               | Saying this, it's not a literal line of course, but a
               | meaningful strategic objective, and rough position for
               | offensive staging.
               | 
               | Yes, yes, yes. Long lines on warfare are an invitation
               | for a breakthrough by a more concentrated force, which is
               | what every Russian military textbook tells.
        
               | sudosysgen wrote:
               | The Anti-Drone strategy in Nagorno Karabakh would have
               | been airstrikes. But the rules of engagement were such
               | that this was not doable.
               | 
               | Beyond that, actual Russia support was very limited as
               | punishment for Armenia's reorientation. If this was a
               | full-scale war then the skies would have been full of
               | Su-35s swatting out the TB2s and killing drone operators.
        
               | baybal2 wrote:
               | The key to small drone efficiency is that they don't need
               | big airfields which can be bombed.
               | 
               | Instead the attacking force will be hard pressed finding
               | hundred separate drone teams hiding in bushes, and
               | forests on the frontline, while flying over enemy AA
               | themselves.
        
               | sudosysgen wrote:
               | There will be no enemy AA. There will be no enemy air
               | force. You do not understand the dynamics of this
               | conflict. Ukrainian AA is entirely inadequate and it's
               | airforce is a joke to Russia.
               | 
               | Beyond that, these drones are satellite-guided. You can't
               | control them from bushes and forests. The Bayraktar TB2
               | that did the vast majority of the damage in Azerbaijan
               | needs to take-off from an actual airfield, too.
               | 
               | What you might be referring to are loitering munitions.
               | Their issue is that they have pretty dumb guidance, so
               | all they are good at is going to predetermined GPS
               | coordinate or homing on radar. The solution is to overrun
               | their positions and use your airforce to shoot them down
               | if they do take-off. They are very slow. It can be
               | expensive to shoot them down but you only have to do so
               | until you overrun their 60km or so range, and for the
               | things in the danger zone you only have to use mobile
               | assets that cannot be targeted via GPS.
               | 
               | In small numbers and without actual drones to help with
               | jamming these loitering munitions are also quite
               | vulnerable to AAA.
               | 
               | There are some long-range loitering munitions, like the
               | IAI Harop. However they can only do radar-seeking
               | missions without a base station and actually do need a
               | base. Additionally munitions like the Harop have a very
               | large radar cross section from anything but the frontal
               | aspect and are thus very vulnerable to detection by
               | modern aircraft radar.
        
               | baybal2 wrote:
               | TB2 on sale has no satellite link.
               | 
               | TB2 Video is line of sight gigahertz link. Control, and
               | telemetry UHF which can get to 100km.
               | 
               | TB2 can launch from improvised strips with substantial
               | payloads.
               | 
               | A mobile catapult launch adapter was once advertised
        
               | sudosysgen wrote:
               | Some TB2 in Azerbaijan were operated by Turkey
               | essentially, but I take your point.
               | 
               | TB2 may be able to launch from improvised positions. But
               | it cannot land and resupply there. The weak point still
               | exists.
               | 
               | The elephant in the room is also that the TB2s will get
               | shot down by the Russian airforce. In Azerbaijan this did
               | not happen because Turkey was willing to protect
               | Azerbaijani airspace and the Armenian airforce is weak.
               | In Ukraine the roles are reversed.
        
           | koonsolo wrote:
           | So you give arms to a bunch of people, they kill a bunch of
           | people, and then you hope that the leader that arises from
           | all this blooshed is better than Lukashenko?
           | 
           | Good luck.
        
             | pvarangot wrote:
             | All this while still not making it easy for people that
             | don't want to live in that country from actually emigrating
             | to somewhere safe and with a government of their liking.
             | Yeah, the old "Hunger Games" approach for freedom
             | spreading.
        
             | DyslexicAtheist wrote:
             | context matters a lot.
             | 
             | the Belarusian security forces are not as loyal to the
             | Lukashenko regime as you think. They are all part of the
             | same social fabric, they have mothers, brothers sisters who
             | are among the population. The oppositions successful
             | unmasking of them has been a massive spanner in the
             | strategy of Lukashenko oppression.
             | 
             | What they are missing is being able to defend themselves
             | from Wagner group mercenaries who have absolutely no such
             | ties and couldn't care about who they kill. Sending
             | mercenaries and arms with a mission to take out the
             | Lukashenko regime while fighting the Russians who are
             | infiltrating the security forces would be the only
             | strategy.
             | 
             | Helping in other ways (from the comfort of an arm chair) is
             | possible but it means cracking down on off-shore banking
             | and money laundering (much of it takes place in Europe &
             | the US. Good luck.
             | 
             | That's pretty much how this has been working throughout the
             | history of the human race.
        
           | pjc50 wrote:
           | Turning Belarus into Yugoslavia is not going to improve the
           | situation.
           | 
           | > Warsaw being the one initiating this with Belarus
           | opposition.
           | 
           | ?
        
             | baybal2 wrote:
             | > Turning Belarus into Yugoslavia is not going to improve
             | the situation.
             | 
             | It will.
             | 
             | It's only because of massive amount of guns pointed at
             | Belgrade, and the previous civil war, you don't have
             | Slobodan Milosevic still smiling on you from TV now.
             | 
             | Arming Bosnians did more to crack the genocidal regime than
             | any NATO bombing. This is the fact.
        
           | superfist wrote:
           | First of all can you provide any credible sources that will
           | back your claims regarding Poland and its attempts to smuggle
           | weapons? This sound like pure lie to me. Second thing: "The
           | best way to help them now is to send arms" - this sounds like
           | Russian provocation. Sending weapon to Belarus will only
           | justify Russian miliary opperations in this country. So
           | either you don't know what are you saying or you are
           | instigator.
        
       | baybal2 wrote:
       | Shake that boat, provoke Kremlin, arm the populace, make Kremlin
       | bleed, and go broke.
       | 
       | The longer the Russia will be dragged into this war, the deeper
       | Putinisms' grave will be, and the less is the chance of Russia
       | ever growing big enough to threaten Europe.
       | 
       | I am totally for dragging Russia into a bloody war.
        
         | dang wrote:
         | > I am totally for dragging Russia into a bloody war.
         | 
         | What? Even in the hellish flamewar of this thread, that stands
         | out as beyond the pale. I appreciate your substantive comments
         | but you can't keep breaking the site guidelines like this.
         | Please stop it so we don't have to ban you again. See also
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26892864.
         | 
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
         | 
         | We detached this subthread from
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26887036.
        
           | baybal2 wrote:
           | Yep, Have to admit. I totally lost my nerve here.
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | rightbyte wrote:
         | > the less is the chance of Russia ever growing big enough to
         | threaten Europe.
         | 
         | > I am totally for dragging Russia into a bloody war.
         | 
         | Uhm, how about wishing for peace since Russia is allready big
         | enought to threaten Europe?
        
           | baybal2 wrote:
           | > Uhm, how about wishing for peace since Russia is allready
           | big enought to threaten Europe?
           | 
           | Of course it is, I can do the math. And exactly because of
           | that Europe should strive to bleed off Russia's reserves, and
           | firepower _while it still can._
           | 
           | If Europe lets Russia's massive armour advantage to continue,
           | no amount of airpower, nukes, "smart bombs," or whatever else
           | wunderwaffe will save them when 3-5 tank armies will pour
           | through Fulda gap.
        
             | wwtrv wrote:
             | And what exactly would Russia gain by invading Central
             | Europe? Even now they can barely afford maintaining their
             | occupation of Crimea.
        
               | baybal2 wrote:
               | Nothing, but that didn't stop Putin from his past
               | military misadventures.
        
         | pjc50 wrote:
         | Not while their nukes still work. We had all this discussion in
         | the 1960s, and the underlying reality of that potential war has
         | not changed. The "border area" has got a lot more chaotic -
         | Vienna is definitely the West, and Minsk definitely not, but
         | it's less clear how aligned everywhere in the middle is. But an
         | actual war would obliterate both sides.
        
           | baybal2 wrote:
           | > But an actual war would obliterate both sides.
           | 
           | No, it wouldn't. Europe 560M people, and the world's biggest
           | economy as a EU bloc.
           | 
           | Russia 139M people with only 20M of military age, of which
           | 1/3 fares from Caucasus, and other less than loyal ethnic
           | republics.
           | 
           | A Russian first strike on NATO block will take down 40M-50M
           | at maximum even if Russia will only target large population
           | centres.
           | 
           | The retaliation busts Moscow -- it's only economic, and
           | industrial centre, and that will be it for Russia.
           | 
           | It will however not guaranteed to win the following
           | conventional war, given Russian advantage in armour _if it
           | can strike first._
           | 
           | If Russian airforce, and AA will be gone before their armour,
           | the overwhelming manpower advantage of Europe will then win
           | the conventional war despite Russian armour advantage.
        
             | adventured wrote:
             | > Europe 560M people, and the world's biggest economy as a
             | EU bloc
             | 
             | The US has a far larger economy than the EU, there is now
             | roughly a $7 trillion gap there (IMF estimates for 2021 is
             | the US economy at $22.6 trillion; the EU will be around $15
             | trillion). The US economy is almost 50% larger than the EU
             | economy.
             | 
             | China in 2021 will formally surpass the EU in nominal GDP
             | size. It's fair to say it already has. IMF estimates peg it
             | at over $16.6 trillion for 2021 and that's probably an
             | undercount given how much economic market share they've
             | taken from the rest of the world during Covid (eg in
             | manufacturing and exports).
             | 
             | The US and China will continue to put economic distance
             | between themselves and the EU; the EU will fall further and
             | further behind. This trend has been underway for near 15
             | years now. Germany, France, Spain, Italy, Sweden, Greece,
             | Netherlands etc have all suffered intense net economic
             | stagnation since roughly 2007-2008, and that was prior to
             | Covid.
             | 
             | Did you know that even prior to Covid, Sweden's economy was
             | smaller inflation adjusted for 2019 than it was in 2008?
             | The same is true of Germany and the others as well.
        
               | baybal2 wrote:
               | Digits don't lie.
               | 
               | A lot has changed since just half a decade ago.
               | 
               | Unfavourable demographics.
               | 
               | What kind of world we are heading in? Just trying
               | imagining it is infuriating.
        
             | dfadsadsf wrote:
             | In 10 years after that war, Chinese military bases in
             | Moscow, Minsk and Paris will ensure European co-prosperity
             | sphere and harmonious development on the continent.
             | 
             | Seriously - you want to risk hot war between Europe and
             | Russia with millions in collateral losses because
             | Lukashenko put a few dozen people in prison and single
             | digit number of people died in protests? Do you also
             | advocate machine gunning jaywalkers?
        
               | baybal2 wrote:
               | > Seriously - you want to risk hot war between Europe and
               | Russia with millions in collateral losses because
               | Lukashenko
               | 
               | You have to understand, the risk of hot war between
               | Europe, and Russia has nothing to do with Lukashenko,
               | Yanokovac or any of those pissants. It's completely not
               | important, what's important is a power crazed mafia guy
               | sitting in Kremlin fortress, and starting West every day,
               | and night.
               | 
               | You can pretty much erase anything standing in between
               | Europe, and Russia on the map, and you will still have
               | the same problem.
        
               | FpUser wrote:
               | It is just too bad they stopped giving Rabies shots
               | preventively
        
             | HideousKojima wrote:
             | Europe would be almost wholly dependent on the US for
             | defense against Russia. Just 3 or 4 years ago Germany had
             | something like only ~10 fully operational fighter jets and
             | literally ZERO operational submarines. The situation has
             | improved slightly since then, but the military of most NATO
             | members is puny. France and Britain are probably the only
             | European nations that would provide any significant
             | military force.
        
             | pjc50 wrote:
             | > A Russian first strike on NATO block will take down
             | 40M-50M
             | 
             | I'm glad you agree with me on the obliteration.
        
               | baybal2 wrote:
               | 40M-50M losses in the most pessimistic scenario is not an
               | obliteration by any extent.
               | 
               | USA + EU = 1B people, and the strongest economic alliance
               | in the world. The only one capable of taking a hit like
               | that.
               | 
               | On other hand, it will be the enormous jolt to the entire
               | Western world to open eyes on the festering mess they let
               | happen on their watch.
               | 
               | It will unite, and solidify the Western alliance like
               | nothing else can, and will bring one more century of
               | Western world's global domination.
        
         | scaladev wrote:
         | You will be among the first volunteers to go to the frontline,
         | I presume?
        
           | hpoe wrote:
           | I wouldn't for a war with Russia, but I'd sign up in
           | heartbeat to take a gun to China. The CCP needs to be put
           | down, and any price is worth it.
           | 
           | Out children and our children's children will view us the
           | same way we view Chamberlin and his appeasement of Hitler if
           | we don't do something about their genocide now.
        
             | dang wrote:
             | > I'd sign up in heartbeat to take a gun to China
             | 
             | I'd send the two of you to bed without any supper for
             | posting such shameful tripe to this place. Please review
             | the site guidelines and stick to the rules so we don't have
             | to ban you--regardless of which country you have a problem
             | with, or how fond you are of grandiose rhetoric. See also
             | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26892834.
             | 
             | https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
        
         | vbezhenar wrote:
         | Only those who know nothing of war could wish for it to happen.
         | You're totally for dragging Russia into a bloody war until your
         | dear ones will be killed by this war. Remember that Russia
         | rockets are pointed all over the world and death of the human
         | civilization is one button press away, so even if you're
         | sitting in US, you're not safe.
         | 
         | Putin is not eternal. He's old man. He'll die soon. He'll
         | likely give up presidency earlier. If Putin is all you hate
         | about Russia, you just have to wait a little bit.
        
           | baybal2 wrote:
           | Do not wait. Act. Act to not to let his system survive him.
           | 
           | It's a better for the country to die, than to let Putinism
           | survive, and recover. If the world will let Putinism to come
           | back, it will come back in force, and with vengeance.
        
       | Jkae80 wrote:
       | Let's condemn Russia always always always but let's look away
       | from the US trying to create vassal states in Europe to
       | antagonize Russia. It's like hearing the brain-dead old George
       | Bush: United States/West good, Russia bad, very bad.
       | 
       | Let's see how many NGOs and US spies have been working to
       | undermine Belarus sovereignty. Even in Syria American politicians
       | accepted the fact that US supported directy terrorists who wanted
       | to subvert Assad. IF Assad was a criminal but a good friend of
       | the US interests, that would no problem. The US would not even
       | bother. Not to mention of course, Ukraine, where right wing Nazi
       | fascists are supported militarily by United states and Europe
       | (all the US's vassal states speak the same language)
       | 
       | By the way, techcrunch is a mouthpiece of the US based interests.
       | They did not notice that Lukashenko did not accept any "help"
       | from IMF or the WHO besides having been pressured heavily.
       | Opening up your country to IMF is like giving them your keys.
        
         | esperent wrote:
         | > techcrunch is a mouthpiece of the US based interests.
         | 
         | I haven't heard this before, where are you getting this claim
         | from?
        
           | etc-hosts wrote:
           | at the very least, the funders of Imaguru is the US State
           | Department
        
           | ohashi wrote:
           | From his bot master probably
        
             | dandanua wrote:
             | Nah, their neural network is trained to produce some random
             | sh*t that sound blamable and vicious. Didn't you heard the
             | stories about crucified boy by Ukrainian army in Donbass?
             | Russian state TV translate this kind of madness 24/7 for
             | years now. The war is imminent, it's just a matter of time.
             | It's impossible to dissipate that hate peacefully.
             | 
             | Also, all Russian society is living in a hateful state,
             | towards many things (their own government, immigrants,
             | West, etc.). This energy will be used for destruction, one
             | way or another, unfortunately.
        
               | dang wrote:
               | > all Russian society is living in a hateful state
               | 
               | Slurs like that will get you banned here, regardless of
               | which country you have a problem with. No more of this on
               | HN, please.
               | 
               | https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
        
               | baybal2 wrote:
               | A slur it is, but I have yet to see a more profound
               | understanding of state of the country.
               | 
               | A regime that masterfully plays hate, both from country's
               | own century long social self-immolation, and its own
               | spin.
               | 
               | The crux of the issue is very much that Kremlin plays,
               | and direct this bottomless reservoir of insecurity, and
               | anger, but even without it, the country's tragic fate
               | through whole modern history will keep moving it astray.
               | 
               | I telling people again, and again that in 1999 it were
               | people in their completely free will, and sane mind who
               | decided to elect a KGB official as a president.
               | 
               | For there to not to be Putin II, Putin III, Putin IV,
               | etc, this country's deep anguish must be extinguished.
               | How one does it, I don't know. Maybe there will need to
               | be a self-harm reduction course of nation state scale.
        
               | etc-hosts wrote:
               | >I telling people again, and again that in 1999 it were
               | people in their completely free will, and sane mind who
               | decided to elect a KGB official as a president.
               | 
               | Did you know the 1st George Bush used to run the US
               | Central Intelligence Agency?
        
               | sudosysgen wrote:
               | Putin was elected because Yeltsin had ruined the country
               | beforethen and he was the only credible alternative as it
               | was clear the US would never allow the Communists or
               | Socialists to take power. So the only choices left were
               | Yeltsin Yeltsin 2, and Putin. People understandanly chose
               | Putin as Yeltsin's policies were just done ruining
               | millions of lives.
               | 
               | It has nothing to do with hate. It has to do with the
               | fact that Russia was in ruins, and that Putin was the
               | only option that wasn't going to be interfered against
               | again. So people voted for Putin. You probably would have
               | done the same.
        
               | Nemrod67 wrote:
               | well then, didn't you hear about the policeman bludgeoned
               | to death with an extinctor by armed revolutionaries in
               | the US?
               | 
               | Disinformation is everywhere, always.
               | 
               | We as a Civilisation have to be able somehow to start
               | accepting that "idiots" and "deplorables" from any side
               | are just like us, humans....
        
           | Jkae80_ wrote:
           | Just because you have never heard it, does not mean it does
           | not exist. Look at how the article is written and you
           | understand it takes sides.
        
             | wnoise wrote:
             | The form of this argument is "you can ignore the argument
             | they make because they're biased, and you can tell they're
             | biased by the argument they make." That's clearly not a
             | valid inference.
        
         | dandanua wrote:
         | US and Russia are not the same at all. Just look what Russia
         | did to North Korea and what US did to South Korea. The Russian
         | power order is a cancer of the Earth.
        
           | dang wrote:
           | Please stop posting nationalistic flamewar to Hacker News.
           | It's not what this site is for, regardless of which country
           | you have a problem with.
           | 
           | https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
        
           | RicoElectrico wrote:
           | This. Russian state doesn't care about its own society
           | either. And people were conditioned to believe there's no
           | alternative.
        
           | sudosysgen wrote:
           | South Korea shortly after US occupation was _poorer and more
           | opressive than North Korea_.
           | 
           | Let that sink in.
           | 
           | Things changed when there was a local South Korean revolution
           | against the US-installed government.
           | 
           | Also, Russia did nothing to North Korea. That was the Soviet
           | Union. The two are quite different entities.
        
           | La1n wrote:
           | >what US did to South Korea
           | 
           | You know South Korea was a dictatorship for many after the
           | Korean War ended? The first dictator so loved by the US that
           | they flew him to Hawaii to live out his life when people
           | revolted against the regime. The second dictator got approval
           | from the US.
           | 
           | Yes, North Korea is bad, but after having 85% of buildings
           | and a larger proportional civillian death toll than Vietnam
           | or WW2, I find it not strange they turned into a closed off
           | dictatorship.
           | 
           | >Russian accusations of indiscriminate attacks on civilian
           | targets did not register with the Americans at all. But for
           | the North Koreans, living in fear of B-29 attacks for nearly
           | three years, including the possibility of atomic bombs, the
           | American air war left a deep and lasting impression. The DPRK
           | government never forgot the lesson of North Korea's
           | vulnerability to American air attack, and for half a century
           | after the Armistice continued to strengthen anti-aircraft
           | defenses, build underground installations, and eventually
           | develop nuclear weapons to ensure that North Korea would not
           | find itself in such a position again. ... The war against the
           | United States, more than any other single factor, gave North
           | Koreans a collective sense of anxiety and fear of outside
           | threats that would continue long after the war's end.
           | 
           | https://apjjf.org/-Charles-K--Armstrong/3460/article.pdf
        
             | lou1306 wrote:
             | Another case in point: Cuba, pre-Castro.
        
         | alehander42 wrote:
         | I really hope people realize that indeed both USA and Russia
         | mostly follow their own interests and don't see this as a
         | black/white thing: you see the russian sentiment and downvote
         | it, but don't see how equally biased the US one is.
         | 
         | And sadly HN and Reddit are usually political echo chambers for
         | geopolitics
        
           | scrollaway wrote:
           | I think a lot of people realize it, but at the end of the
           | day, the US' own interests more often align with Europe's
           | than Russian self interest does.
           | 
           | So it's more beneficial to let the US be selfish than Russia.
        
         | temptemptemp111 wrote:
         | You're not going to get anywhere with the truth in this
         | environment (HN or similar). They're all amoral and they can't
         | comprehend what morality is... Everything is about their
         | communistic utopian future. That's why SF, the most progressive
         | & rich part of the USSA, has the most degeneracy &
         | homelessness. US doesn't have real elections but complaining
         | about places far from home allows them to yelp loudly with
         | their fingers in their ears. As someone who has been to the
         | places in question, the east is idyllic in comparison with the
         | western cities. Actually, the main problems in the east are
         | mostly left over trauma from last time they had communist rule.
         | Exit USSR, enter USSA ;)
        
       | varispeed wrote:
       | I wonder if Belarussians have become prisoners of their
       | geography, or more precisely their neighbour? If they removed
       | their dictator from office, then it may be very likely that
       | Russia will use the situation to do a land grab or finance
       | instability. If current dictator knows that, then perhaps in a
       | twisted way they want to keep status quo, so at least people can
       | live without fear of the civil war. This is of course
       | unsustainable. So what are their options? Could Belarus withstand
       | an attack from the East? I am sorry if that sounds ignorant - I
       | don't have much knowledge about that country.
        
         | wrinkl3 wrote:
         | This is basically what happened in Ukraine - they overthrew a
         | Russia-aligned dictator and had to deal with a Russian invasion
         | within months.
        
       | maratc wrote:
       | In Belarus, there are quite a lot of high-tech companies, many of
       | them very successful. At the same time, there aren't a lot of big
       | private enterprises (non-government-owned nor -affiliated) in
       | other areas.
       | 
       | The reason is simple: the regime cannot appropriate intellectual
       | property. If the thugs come and put a hi-tech company under
       | arrest, all they can "collect" is .. desktops and monitors. The
       | real value -- be that in code or in employees' heads -- cannot be
       | arrested, and the company can continue what they did under a
       | different cover (or from a neighboring country).
       | 
       | The regime understands that too, so they took a somewhat laissez-
       | faire attitude to hi-tech.
        
         | anovikov wrote:
         | Successful Belarusian high-tech companies are not in Belarus
         | (mostly in Cyprus, some in Lithuania or Poland - founders and
         | their families and some key people simply emigrated from
         | Belarus once they become successful). And Belarusian legal
         | entities just outsource for them. This is why they are usually
         | not raided: owners don't come over to Belarus much or at all
         | anymore, IP is owned offshore, and what is the benefit of
         | harassing workers?
        
           | maratc wrote:
           | See EPAM with 2,500 employees in Belarus. Do you know of any
           | other non-government entity with that amount of workers?
        
             | anovikov wrote:
             | EPAM is an American company. It's clients are in the US,
             | it's legal entity is in the U.S., and it makes profits in
             | the U.S. And founder is an American citizen.
             | 
             | Belarusian (as well as Ukrainian etc.) EPAM are just
             | outsourcing for the head office.
             | 
             | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EPAM_Systems
             | 
             | so just 2500 out of 41K people are in Belarus (while it is
             | from where it all started).
             | 
             | it makes no sense for Lukashenka harassing EPAM. So you do
             | it and they just move these 6% of heads to other country
             | offices.
        
               | maratc wrote:
               | This is irrelevant to my point, which is:
               | 
               | If you have a 2,500-strong manufacturing plant, the
               | government can come and take over your plant. If you have
               | a 2,500-strong bank, the government can come and take
               | over your bank. If you have a 2,500-strong property-
               | holding company, the government can come and take over
               | your company and your properties.
               | 
               | But if you have a 2,500-strong software development
               | center, the government cannot come and take over your
               | software development center. And this is why software
               | development centers strive in Belarus.
        
               | ramtatatam wrote:
               | I was very worried when I was reading about FSB entering
               | NginX offices in Russia. I think your statement might be
               | a bit too optimistic..
        
               | sam_lowry_ wrote:
               | And they got nothing out of it.
        
               | ramtatatam wrote:
               | To be honest - I don't know. I was thinking - can FSB, as
               | a result, inject some back-doors to NginX? I don't audit
               | every line of code of software I use, and I don't know if
               | situation like this would be easily spotted...
        
               | sam_lowry_ wrote:
               | Nginx is mostly open-source. If anything, NSA can inject
               | backdoors as well.
        
               | worik wrote:
               | I disagree.
               | 
               | They take over your software company, and put you in
               | jail.
               | 
               | Sure they do not get your IP, but you loose it.
               | 
               | I will hazard a guess that the software development
               | centres striving in Belarus are very careful to stay
               | entirely out of politics. Belarus is not a democracy.
        
               | cbnotfromthere wrote:
               | The comment you're replying to imply that the key persons
               | of that company AND the legal entity are outside Belarus.
               | Otherwise, as you clearly wrote, they would be at the
               | mercy of whatever happens in / with Belarus.
        
             | belatw wrote:
             | Epam has far few workers left in Belarus now. This past
             | summer they temporarily expatriated a significant
             | percentage of the company.
             | 
             | I manage about 40 engineers from EPAM. Before the troubles,
             | 5 were in ukraine and one in Russia (but he was supposed to
             | move to Minsk).
             | 
             | Now most of my team is working from Ukraine or Russia. A
             | few choose to take on-site gigs in Netherlands and were
             | replaced with more Belarussians in Ukraine. One of our team
             | disappeared entirely, presumed to be in prison but our TAMs
             | are downright cagey if we ever asked what happened to him.
             | 
             | EPAM is a good company, they saw the writing on the wall
             | and hustles to get their people to safety.
        
               | Nzen wrote:
               | What is a TAM, in this context ? It's clear this is some
               | administrative person, but not whether this is law
               | enforcement or a representative.
        
               | pianoben wrote:
               | "Technical Account Manager". An official point of contact
               | for a customer with a vendor, often responsible for some
               | amount of tech support as well as customer-relation
               | management.
        
             | proxysna wrote:
             | More like 8k+ when i worked there in 2017. Wiki page is
             | outdated.
        
       | anovikov wrote:
       | I really don't understand what are these protesters trying to
       | achieve. I like Belarus and spent years there. Hard to guess why
       | would anyone want to shake the boat and risk the country getting
       | annexed by Russia.
        
         | estaseuropano wrote:
         | that's fatalism, not realism. Change is possible still, but
         | admittedly much momentum and a big chance currently seems lost.
        
         | LatteLazy wrote:
         | Young people have been sold the promise that working hard and
         | getting educated means they can have a nice life. Now that
         | either needs to be fulfilled (cutting corruption, upsetting
         | Russia etc). Or the rest of the country needs to admit it was a
         | lie and watch all the young, educated, hard working people
         | leave for the west.
         | 
         | This isn't specific to Belarus, only the local details
         | (democracy, Russia etc) differentiate it from say Hong Kong or
         | brexit Britian really.
        
         | liaukovv wrote:
         | They want to have a say in their country's future.
        
           | anovikov wrote:
           | The choice is simple: Lukashenka or Putin. I'd pick
           | Lukashenka, at least some form of quasi-independent Belarus
           | is better than none at all. It is so patently obvious that no
           | non-manipulated Belarus will be allowed to exist... Just
           | because all country is Russian speaking - even to a bigger
           | degree than Crimea and is wholly owned by the Russian
           | propaganda reality tunnel.
        
             | [deleted]
        
             | postingawayonhn wrote:
             | You do realise that a lot of people in Russia want to get
             | rid of Putin too? And neither dictator will live forever,
             | both are in their late 60s.
        
               | T-A wrote:
               | 35% of Russians disapprove of Putin, according to this:
               | 
               | https://www.levada.ru/en/ratings/
               | 
               | 41% of Americans disapprove of Biden, according to this:
               | 
               | https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/biden-approval-
               | rating/
        
               | mariksolo wrote:
               | I personally don't have a ton of trust in polls like that
               | (referring to the Russian one). It is a strong claim to
               | make that Putin is more popular in Russia than Biden in
               | the US.
        
               | pjc50 wrote:
               | > both are in their late 60s.
               | 
               | Joe Biden (78) just replaced Donald Trump (74). Prince
               | Phillip died at the age of _99_. Putin has a long way to
               | go on natural lifespan.
        
               | myth_drannon wrote:
               | That's assuming Putin is alive and it's not just the 5
               | doubles we see.
        
               | ramtatatam wrote:
               | I'm reading about people wanting to get rid of Putin
               | since at least 2010, the sad reality 10 years later is
               | that he is still there...
        
               | viraptor wrote:
               | I don't think anyone who wants to get rid of Putin
               | expected a change on the same day and gives up if that
               | doesn't work. It will take time and a lot of work.
               | (Unless they want an assassination)
        
               | ramtatatam wrote:
               | Nobody says that expectation is to change the dictator
               | the same day, it's simple statement of fact, that it's
               | much easier said than done.
        
             | baybal2 wrote:
             | Alexander, do you live in Cyprus now? I want to have
             | meeting with you.
        
             | liaukovv wrote:
             | I don't believe those are the only choices.
        
               | trhway wrote:
               | Because of the history in those places, new Belarus will
               | immediately try to join EU and NATO. That is an option
               | which Russia will try to prevent. As history shows there
               | are some windows of opportunity for the things to go
               | either way. It seems that the major escalation is coming
               | in Donbass - Ukraine has beefed up the forces, and in
               | particular brought in the Turkish drones which (being
               | very successful against Russian made tanks and air
               | defenses) provided for the recent blitzkrieg in
               | Azerbaijan (and the very cake-in-the-face moment for
               | Russia who supported Armenia in that war), and Russia has
               | massed up large force on the Donbass border - which would
               | probably result in large involvement and losses for
               | Russia, and that may be the window of opportunity for the
               | things to quickly change. Of course it may also be a last
               | stand nothing to lose moment for Russia and it will just
               | force its way in Belarus.
        
               | liaukovv wrote:
               | Maybe in the face of growing russian agression nato will
               | relax it's rules.
        
               | lb1lf wrote:
               | -More likely, rules will toughen up.
               | 
               | The prime purpose of NATO is deterrence; no-one wants to
               | be forced into a shooting war - hence I expect NATO to be
               | very wary of accepting a member which may invoke article
               | 5 pretty much the moment the accession ceremony is over.
               | 
               | The Ukraine would have a much easier time getting into
               | NATO if relations with Russia were cordial; however, as
               | the mere act of exercising their sovereignty to join an
               | alliance of their choosing is sufficient to prevent
               | cordial relations with Russia...
               | 
               | The problem, obviously, being that Russia is not content
               | to be secure within its borders, but also desires to have
               | a say in the affairs of neighbouring countries (Which,
               | incidentally, makes these countries feel much less
               | secure, hence making them more eager to join alliances to
               | improve their lot, precisely the scenario Russia wishes
               | to avoid.)
               | 
               | Sigh.
        
               | maratc wrote:
               | > The Ukraine would have a much easier time getting into
               | NATO if relations with Russia were cordial
               | 
               | If relations with Russia were cordial, the Ukraine would
               | have no need to get into NATO to begin with. In that
               | ideal world, things would look different; we don't live
               | in that world, sadly.
        
               | baybal2 wrote:
               | > The prime purpose of NATO is deterrence
               | 
               | There is no point of deterrence when if Ukraine is gone,
               | and you have Russian tanks in Vienna in one week, Munich
               | the other, and the rest of Europe in a month.
        
               | sudosysgen wrote:
               | No, you will not. Russia cannot invade Vienna or Munich.
               | Germany, France and Italy are each powerful enough to
               | stall the Russian offensive. Russia will not even attempt
               | it.
               | 
               | Ukraine in comparison has a miserably weak military that
               | is strongly outdated compared to Russia.
        
               | baybal2 wrote:
               | You think so?
               | 
               | How much tanks does Germany have, and how much does
               | Russia?
               | 
               | I will do Googling for you.
               | 
               | 354 vs 12000
               | 
               | Russia's tank force biggest problem? Having more tanks
               | than pilots.
               | 
               | Half of this tank fleet is in long term storage for this
               | reason, and what's left half is in rather bad semi-
               | written-off condition.
               | 
               | If we let Russians to regain their breathe, it would not
               | take them long to restore them, and regain this enormous
               | military asset.
        
               | sudosysgen wrote:
               | You are incorrect.
               | 
               | Russia only has 3000 tanks in service. The rest are
               | mothballed. That's not half, that's 75+%.
               | 
               | Even looking in total, the vast majority of these "12
               | 000" tanks are in fact T-72s, 9000 of them. We already
               | know how T-72s fare against modern tanks.
               | 
               | For sure, 3000 decent MBTs is a formidable force. But
               | 3000 vs 1000 is not going to let Russia steamroll when
               | their air force is set-up for defence and not offense.
               | Even an advantage of 3:1 is not going to do you much good
               | when your opponent has absolute air supremacy.
               | 
               | A Russian offensive into Western Europe will _definitely_
               | get stalled, there is no question about it.
        
               | splistud wrote:
               | You have no concept of what it takes to project power
        
               | sudosysgen wrote:
               | The important thing about drone warfare campaigns is that
               | they are only successful if the enemy is unwilling to
               | challenge your air supremacy over your own territory.
               | 
               | This is the case in Ukraine right now and in the Nagorno-
               | Karabakh conflict. Russia is unwilling, right now, to
               | challenge all of Ukrainian airspace, and Armenia/Russia
               | was unwilling to challenge Azerbaijani airspace.
               | 
               | The moment this change is when the drone strategy is no
               | longer effective. Drones only work when you have air
               | supremacy over at least a staging area. When you do not,
               | then there is not much to do.
               | 
               | Also, Russia has it's own drones, which they are not
               | using because they are in the defensive position right
               | now.
               | 
               | If there is a prompt for a Russian advancement or if the
               | line becomes untenable, the drone-based strategies will
               | collapse and the conflict will turn unless Ukraine can
               | muster up something else. Simply put, Ukraine has no hope
               | at all of contesting air supremacy with Russia. It's air
               | force is incomparably worse, and drones have no anti-air
               | capacity.
               | 
               | But we are not there. Russia is nowhere near attempting a
               | full-scale invasion and hasn't, they limited themselves
               | to taking the Donbass and Crimea and defending it
               | strictly, more or less.
               | 
               | As for Russia in Armenia, there was not really any cake-
               | on-the-face. Russia's policy was to stand-by unless
               | Azerbaijan was threatening Armenia proper. Maybe Armenia
               | could have negotiated another arrangement had their
               | orientation been different, but as it stood Russia was
               | unwilling to do much at all in the NK conflict.
               | 
               | As it stands the balance of power is still overwhelmingly
               | in the favor of Russia and it is not close.
        
               | adventured wrote:
               | It's strange that any of this is up for discussion. If
               | Russia wants Ukraine, they're going to take it. Ukraine
               | has no ability to fight with Russia. NATO isn't going to
               | do anything directly (they'll push some weapons into
               | Ukraine, that's it).
               | 
               | What's going to happen is that Russia will slice Ukraine
               | at the Dnieper River and also take all of Ukraine's Black
               | Sea territory. That will include taking Odsesa and
               | Kharkiv. By taking the territory south of Odesa, they'll
               | get a large border with Moldova, and then they'll annex
               | Moldova at some point or otherwise entirely control it as
               | a puppet.
               | 
               | There is no scenario where this doesn't happen. When
               | Putin took Crimea, taking the rest of Ukraine's coastal
               | waters was an obvious and inevitable step. The only thing
               | left is timing, whenever Putin decides an ideal time to
               | do it is.
               | 
               | There's nothing the West can do to Russia at this point
               | to stop any of this and Putin knows that. No nation in
               | the West is going to war with Russia over these lands.
        
               | trhway wrote:
               | You like many is missing Turkey in your picture. There is
               | a lot of points to discuss. I'll just point that the
               | Azerbaijan airspace in the war zone was patrolled by
               | Turkish F-16s, so Armenia couldn't really fly anything
               | there to attack the drones. Given Turkish interest in the
               | Black Sea area happenings, their support for Georgia
               | leading to 2008, direct support for Azerbaijan in 2020,
               | kicking Russian butt in Syria and Libya in 2019/2020 (by
               | using the same drones) and the Ukraine's course toward
               | NATO and the Ukraine's open increasing military
               | cooperation with Turkey who is the most willing and
               | enthusiastic NATO member to kick Russian butt on Black
               | Sea ... - basically i see an Azerbaijan style scenario
               | coming to Donbass, only much more larger-scale and bloody
               | given the amount of Russian forces there.
        
               | sudosysgen wrote:
               | Turkey is not going to fight the Russian airforce in the
               | Donbass which is bolstered by the most advanced IADS and
               | modern jets with F-16s. It would be a horribly bad idea.
               | 
               | Turkey never fought Russia in Syria. They fought Assad's
               | government with some help from Russian irregulars, even
               | then they got stalled and recently had losses. Russia was
               | however unwilling to escalate and there were no air
               | battles, for example.
        
               | trhway wrote:
               | >most advanced IADS
               | 
               | that is the key point. Turkey mastered how to use drones
               | to kill Pantsir-S1 in Syria, and immediately applied that
               | in Libya and Azerbaijan with great success. Pantsir-S1 -
               | the first were brought to Donbass in August 2014 with the
               | tank battalions which hit near Ilovaysk - is what caused
               | Ukraine to stop using air force in Donbass. With
               | Pantsir-S1 advantage removed, the tank-based Russian
               | forces there would become much easy to deal with for
               | Ukrainian air force and especially for the high-precision
               | munition what is used from the Turkish drones.
               | 
               | >modern jets
               | 
               | Russia is really far from sending airforce there, while
               | Ukraine doesn't have much barriers for allowing the F-16
               | to fight there - as result the F-16s will appear there
               | earlier thus putting Russia in the position of the one
               | escalating conflict if Russia decides to bring the
               | airforce. And if Russia does decide to send the planes in
               | the outcome is far from obvious- while F-16 is older and
               | worse in direct dogfight than the modern Russian planes
               | it isn't that important as for the last 40 years
               | USSR/Russian planes were mostly shot down from stand-off
               | distance where NATO weaponry and situation awareness is
               | better.
        
               | fakedang wrote:
               | EU and NATO will not let Belarus in because of a long
               | standing agreement.
        
         | thecopy wrote:
         | Fair elections.
        
           | anovikov wrote:
           | This is a pipe dream. If someone who isn't a Putin handpicked
           | puppet gets elected, country will be taken over. Face
           | reality: even the Belarusian KGB people are trained in Moscow
           | (they don't have an academy of their own, just kept things
           | the way they were in Soviet times). It's just a facade of
           | independence. Whatever small bits of real independence exist,
           | are only there of Lukashenka's personal ambitions to "own"
           | the country - with him gone, nothing at all (and not even
           | opinion of majority of people who are Russian at heard and
           | see their independence as a historical fluke) will hold Putin
           | from formally annexing the country.
        
             | yxhuvud wrote:
             | It is a pipe dream until it isn't. And it isn't up to you
             | to decide when it stops being a pipe dream.
             | 
             | Do you realize that if everyone reasoned like you, then
             | there would be no elections anywhere but instead every
             | country would still be monarchies?
        
             | sam_lowry_ wrote:
             | Belarusian KGB has an academy on its own, and it existed
             | since after WWII: https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%98%D0%B
             | D%D1%81%D1%82%D0%B8...
             | 
             | KGB office in Minsk was always quite big and powerful in
             | Soviet times.
             | 
             | Fun fact 1: head of FSB Patrushev studied in that academy.
             | 
             | Fun fact 2: Lee Harvey Oswald lived in Minsk under KGB
             | control for a few years.
        
             | baybal2 wrote:
             | > If someone who isn't a Putin handpicked puppet gets
             | elected, country will be taken over
             | 
             | If they get killed, then no. The dead don't win elections,
             | even rigged ones.
        
             | liaukovv wrote:
             | Cynicism and learned helplessness is the environment in
             | which dictators thrive. You have to fight it.
        
               | inglor_cz wrote:
               | To make a point from a different perspective: some
               | environments / countries / regions are so FUBARed by
               | decades of bad governance that emigration is a much, much
               | easier way out than trying to change the system from
               | within and possibly risking prison, beating to death,
               | serious consequences for your family etc. Cynicism and
               | learned helplessness are just a description of what
               | people actually live in there.
               | 
               | Of course, then you have zombie regimes holding to power
               | forever, because people who would challenge them most
               | effectively are outside the country. Iran, Russia etc.
               | 
               | Navalny returned to Russia precisely because he did not
               | want to be seen as yet another emigree who utters advice
               | from abroad. He will pay with his life for that courage
               | and other people will think twice before becoming the
               | next anti-regime icons.
               | 
               | Authoritarian states are very good at intimidating
               | _people_. What they cannot usually control is the
               | _economy_ , that is a major weakness in their armor. That
               | is one of the reason why China concentrates so much on
               | economic development.
        
         | lampe3 wrote:
         | Thats russian/lukaschenko propaganda...
        
       | dang wrote:
       | All: when you take a thread like this further into political
       | flamewar, here is what we end up with: " _all $country1 society
       | is living in a hateful state_ ", " _I am totally for dragging
       | $country2 into a bloody war_ ", and " _I 'd sign up in heartbeat
       | to take a gun to $country3_".
       | 
       | Is that the kind of community you want to be part of? If so,
       | please find a different one. If no, please don't take HN threads
       | further into political or nationalistic flamewar. It's shameful.
       | It would count as violence too, if internet forums weren't such
       | teapots.
       | 
       | No more of this, please--where by "this" I mean _any_ vector
       | pointing to that hellish reductio, not just the ones that
       | actually get there. What to do instead: have thoughtful, curious
       | conversation. If you can 't have thoughtful, curious
       | conversation, please don't post until you can.
       | 
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
        
       | corporateshil1 wrote:
       | Warmonger say jump, HNs been in the air.
        
         | Solocomplex wrote:
         | Your grammar is strange...
        
       | avodonosov wrote:
       | Now I know what was our key startup hub.
       | 
       | So far no-one is arrested, they simply denied to lease the office
       | space. Hopefully it will stop at that.
       | 
       | Probably other IT people who joined the "Coordination Council"
       | will face consequences too.
        
       | avodonosov wrote:
       | > whose husband died in jail after standing at elections in
       | opposition to the Lukashenko regime.
       | 
       | What?
       | 
       | He was in prison in 2004-2006, but died in 2014.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | etc-hosts wrote:
       | Imaguru was started by United States Agency for International
       | Development.
       | 
       | The Minsk site has some corporate tenants.
       | 
       | Opposition groups held some meetings in the space.
       | 
       | I'm sure this is why Belarus gov shut it down.
        
       | gritzko wrote:
       | See it this way. Those corrupt "regimes" are simply making the
       | money. Similarly, toppling those regimes is a highly profitable
       | activity. There is an often cited claim: when Yanukovich was
       | toppled in Ukraine, >$30bn disappeared overnight. The new
       | "Western aligned" government did not even produce a coherent
       | version of those events in 7 years. The most credible thing they
       | say: he moved it out to Russia, in cash, on trucks. Probably,
       | they are satisfied with the outcome? And that is just one episode
       | of the ongoing saga. Always keep this perspective in mind. (To me
       | personally, it really helps to ignore clownish geopolitical
       | speculations.)
        
       | jakozaur wrote:
       | I guess a lot of software engineers will continue to move aboard.
       | Next door Poland got generous visa schema and hungry for tech
       | talent with low cost of living. Salaries are getting close to
       | Western countries.
       | 
       | 1. If you are from Belarus you can get "humanitarian visa" for 10
       | euro, that gives you one year of work permit with no strings
       | attached and no job offer priori.
       | 
       | 2. Still getting regular work visa is very easy for software.
       | 
       | 3. Having any grandparent with Polish origin grants you
       | equivalent of green card. Given history this is quite common and
       | not so expensive to proof with right lawyer.
        
         | myth_drannon wrote:
         | It's already happening, our Polish team is half Russians,
         | Ukrainians living in Poland.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-04-21 23:02 UTC)