News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Russia’s ‘slow-motion Chernobyl’ at sea. Parent comment

Re:Russia’s ‘slow-motion Chernobyl’ at sea by Retric on Wednesday September 02, 2020 @10:38AM (#24353707)
The US has a history of handling territory back after invasions, which makes people less nervous. China’s invasion /annexation of Tibet for example made everyone on it’s borders very concerned.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Russia’s ‘slow-motion Chernobyl’ at sea by simonebrunozzi on Wednesday September 02, 2020 @11:39AM (#24354263)
> The US has a history of handling territory back after invasions

Really?

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Russia’s ‘slow-motion Chernobyl’ at sea by evgen on Wednesday September 02, 2020 @12:07PM (#24354575)
No they keep it, which is why the US presidential elections are so very contentious in the US swing states of France, Germany, Belgium, Netherlands, Austria, Italy, Japan, South Korea, Micronesia, Papua New Guinea, Solomon Islands, and the Philippines.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Russia’s ‘slow-motion Chernobyl’ at sea by newen on Wednesday September 02, 2020 @10:43AM (#24353748)
Instead, they just plant military bases in the country and set up a puppet government that supports the US. Amounts to the same thing.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Russia’s ‘slow-motion Chernobyl’ at sea by Retric on Wednesday September 02, 2020 @10:59AM (#24353897)
In the short term perhaps. However, I doubt many people consider Germany a puppet of the US. Japan for example has the 5th most powerful military in the world.

‘Amusingly,‘ Cuba has a US base and a rather antagonistic relationship. However, long term many countries like US bases because money flows in one direction from that base into the local economy. It’s the same reason so many bases exist across the US.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Russia’s ‘slow-motion Chernobyl’ at sea by martin_a on Wednesday September 02, 2020 @11:12AM (#24354012)
> However, I doubt many people consider Germany a puppet of the US.

As a sidenote from a German: This is somewhat delicate and often talked about in German population. Not really happening in media, but I think everybody has his stance on this and some pros or cons. Anyway it's not easy for Germans.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Russia’s ‘slow-motion Chernobyl’ at sea by sam_lowry_ on Wednesday September 02, 2020 @11:45AM (#24354317)
Charles de Gaule forced US troops out some 50+ years ago, so they settled mostly in Germany. In the coming years, US will relocate 12,000 troops from Germany to Belgium, because Germany wants them out.

Now Belgium has the NATO HQ, SHAPE and the 12,000 extra US solders, in addition to many thousands already present on its soil.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Russia’s ‘slow-motion Chernobyl’ at sea by newen on Wednesday September 02, 2020 @11:38AM (#24354256)
Yes, it's similar to the situations in Japan and South Korea where the US has what are essentially US supporting puppet governments in power. It's impossible for these countries to kick the US military bases out of their lands.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Russia’s ‘slow-motion Chernobyl’ at sea by selimthegrim on Wednesday September 02, 2020 @11:44AM (#24354314)
The Philippines did.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Russia’s ‘slow-motion Chernobyl’ at sea by newen on Wednesday September 02, 2020 @12:08PM (#24354580)
Because a volcano destroyed the bases. Not because the Philippines forced the US to leave.

Edit: And so what if bases are easy to rebuild? I'm talking about the politics of the matter. The US didn't want to spend money on rebuilding the base, so they didn't. The decision had nothing to do with the Philippines government. Which is my whole point. The Philippines government couldn't have kicked the US bases out if they wanted to.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Russia’s ‘slow-motion Chernobyl’ at sea by valuearb on Wednesday September 02, 2020 @01:27PM (#24355542)
Bases are easy to rebuild.
[ Parent | on HN ]