> In Austria, Chancellor Karl Nehammer stated that “of course we will take in refugees, if necessary”. Meanwhile, just last fall and in his then-role as interior minister, Nehammer was known as a hardliner against resettling Afghan refugees in Austria and as a politician who insisted on Austria’s right to forcibly deport rejected Afghan asylum seekers, even if that meant returning them to the Taliban. “It’s different in Ukraine than in countries like Afghanistan,” he told Austrian TV. “We’re talking about neighborhood help.”
But he wants the entire world to get involved in this "neighborhood war."
Black and brown countries should take note of this conflict very seriously. Western imperialism never died. The West is perfectly okay with black on black and brown on brown violence. It is only in the case of black/brown on white or white on white violence that they interfere with such ferocity.
> Its about the contrast of men in track suits throwing rocks and climbing fences versus women with children.
He is openly talking about neighborhood help. All the media reports are full of "they look like us," "blue eyes" and "blond hair."
I am not passing moral judgment on his choices; cultural incompatibility will eventually lead to conflict. I am simply pointing out the hypocrisy of demanding that the whole world join the "isolate Russia" project while simultaneously claiming that it is a neighborhood affair.
Perhaps you do not realize this but when you live in homogeneous community, differences on other dimension amplify. Saying that they look like us might simply mean that people should put other prejudices aside.
An alternative take would be that the West is more okay with 3rd-world country violence rather than 1st-world country violence (like Ukraine). It happens to be the case that all countries that have recently seen conflict without significant US intervention were both brown and 3rd-world.
I would assume that if the Saudis, Indians, Israelis, or others were to see this same type of conflict, you'd see a much greater US commitment. If we instead jump on every conflict that arises, we'd be stuck in regional conflicts in 3rd-world countries forever.
Already ongoing. We know which sides everyone has picked.
> Indians
We have been targeted by Pakistan-based terrorists for forty years and tens of thousands of people have been murdered. No one bothered to do anything. Instead, Pakistan was promoted to a strategic ally after 9/11 because white people died.
We have fought two wars with China. It is a mortal enemy, nuclear power and occupies Indian territory. But when we conducted nuclear tests in 1998 to develop a deterrence, sanctions were imposed on us. When China killed 20 of our soldiers in 2020 - they were bludgeoned to death with barbwire-wrapped clubs - the advice from the world was to peacefully resolve the problem.
Edit: it looks like your account has been using HN primarily, if not exclusively, for political and ideological battle. That's not allowed here, regardless of what you're battling for. It's not what this site is for, and it destroys what it is for. Therefore I've banned the account.
If you don't want to be banned, you're welcome to email hn@ycombinator.com and give us reason to believe that you'll follow the rules in the future.
Edit: since you've been using HN primarily for political flamewar, repeatedly breaking the site guidelines, and have ignored our requests to stop, I've banned the account.
If you don't want to be banned, you're welcome to email hn@ycombinator.com and give us reason to believe that you'll follow the rules in the future.
Edit: it looks like your account has been using HN primarily, if not exclusively, for political and ideological battle. That's not allowed here, regardless of what you're battling for. It's not what this site is for, and it destroys what it is for. Therefore I've banned the account.
If you don't want to be banned, you're welcome to email hn@ycombinator.com and give us reason to believe that you'll follow the rules in the future.
West has demonstrated the ability to coalesce massive, unprecedented, response to illegal wars was always possible, but they simply do not care enough about non-white people. Even now, shaming, condemning and pressuring neutral countries for importing wheat or gas to feed and heat their own. Seems like even non-white diaspora in the west are seeing past the charade.
>This isn't "white on white violence", and it is racist to cast it in such terms.
This is how conflicts are framed when black people are involved in the US. "white on white crime" sounds like a fair description even if it's a somewhat vague term.
But he wants the entire world to get involved in this "neighborhood war."
Black and brown countries should take note of this conflict very seriously. Western imperialism never died. The West is perfectly okay with black on black and brown on brown violence. It is only in the case of black/brown on white or white on white violence that they interfere with such ferocity.