[untitled]

7 comments

What is there to discuss of substance? Do you want to discuss this conflict from strategic, or tactical point of view? Comparatively, lets say to the Shock and Awe attack on Iraq, Syria, or NATO in Yugoslavia, or any other? Do you want to discuss the legality of things from international point of view, and how that law itself is enforceable only selectively? Should we discuss it from which point of view (USA, Europe, or Russia, China)? Can you even argue coherently the legitimate interests in this conflict of each of these global players with factual clarity? Im not sure there much to discuss, and whether the talk about WW3 is pure exaggeration.

However, I do see clear benefit for online site avoiding radicalization of opinions based on utterly incomplete and what ever else skewed information is available.

robtaylor4 anni fa

War in Europe or a lightly amusing bug report closed off after 15 years?

dinamic4 anni fa

Exactly

eino4 anni fa

There is a big discussion here https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30450336

guidovranken4 anni fa

HN employs algorithms to automatically downrank sensitive political topics (flamewar detector).

scim-knox-twox4 anni fa

> What is top3 on HN right now:

> * Indian chess sensation * Nuclear-fusion reactor * NewPipe

How does it mean that "nobody cares about Ukraine"?

Friday_4 anni fa

I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones.