*Well, at least one thing we can be sure of, now that Putin knows he can manipulate the stock market (like tRump did) by adjusting the Threat of Invasion Valve up or down, that he has surrogates trading stocks like fiends to get his net worth well north of $200B.
Cancel my subscription to the Resurrection
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
“I love Cal deeply. What are the directions to The Portal from Sproul Plaza?”
They were the ones talking about false flag operations & going into Alex Jones / conspiracy territory.
As opposed to you, who alleged a US coup in Ukraine without a shred of evidence.
Just so we're on the same page - the 2014 Maidan coup came after Ukraine President Yanukovich didn't sign an agreement for Ukraine to join the EU in late 2013. At the time, many in Western Ukraine wanted to be part of the EU, while many in the East wanted to maintain stronger economic ties with Russia, and didn't want to be in the EU.
The EU was offering <$1 billion in loans, and demanding the usual Neoliberal "austerity reforms" (lower taxes, lower wages, less gov't spending & services), while Russia was offering more loans, plus lower gas prices.
Urban university students & young adults were disappointed with Yanukovich's decision. Ukraine's entry into the EU meant the possibility of higher-paying jobs in other EU nations.
The U.S. and the EU were far from neutral observers in this process. For years, they've been pouring $billions into Ukraine, buying media & influence, and essentially 'selling' EU membership and greater alliance with the West/EU/U.S. to the Ukrainian people. Here's a summary of the foreign aid to Ukraine: https://www.foreignassistance.gov/cd/ukraine/2013/obligations/0 [Note: Some of this aid is a really prudent investment, like providing generous stipends for former-Soviet nuclear scientists, so they don't go work for ISIS. No argument with that. But look at all the grants for "governance" and "media", with their purpose/description redacted...]
The U.S. State Dept, the EU, and groups like the National Endowment for Democracy have also made huge investments in media and political influence, trying to woo Eastern European countries, including Ukraine, to join the West/EU/U.S. bloc. https://www.ned.org/region/central-and-eastern-europe/
In one of the more ironic statements I've seen, the NED still has this on their Central & Eastern Europe page:
Quote:
Thirty years after the collapse of the communist bloc, Europe's transitions remain under threat. Now most countries of central, eastern and southeastern Europe are experiencing a democratic decline that began a decade ago. Rising polarization, pervasive corruption, and weakened rule of law point to the deterioration of democratic processes and political institutions.
This is coming from an organization that openly supported the overthrow of a democratically-elected leader who made a decision they didn't like!
Finally, officials in the State Dept, NED, and many others were openly expressing their support for the Maidan coup. U.S. Senators John McCain (R-AZ) and Chris Murphy (D-CT) even took the stage, beside extreme right-wing Svoboda co-founder Oleh Tyahnybok:
There was clear financial support and encouragement for the Maidan uprising throughout the U.S. State Dept., the NED, and U.S./EU/Western media. And there's no doubt that right-wing neo-Nazi militias like Azov & Right Sector provided the armed support to complete the overthrow. What's unknown is whether Svoboda was an intermediary (probable), or if other middle-men were involved. AFAIK, that remains pretty well hidden -- which is normal for U.S.-supported overthrows of democratically-elected governments & heads of state.
I'm not saying that Putin is the 'good guy' here, and the U.S. is the 'bad guy'.
I'm saying that they're all 'bad guys', and there are no 'good guys' anywhere to be found.
Either meddling in the affairs of other nations is OK, or it isn't. I don't want my tax $$ going to the overthrow of democratically-elected governments, and I don't want other nations meddling in our affairs.
They were the ones talking about false flag operations & going into Alex Jones / conspiracy territory.
As opposed to you, who alleged a US coup in Ukraine without a shred of evidence.
Just so we're on the same page - the 2014 Maidan coup came after Ukraine President Yanukovich didn't sign an agreement for Ukraine to join the EU in late 2013. At the time, many in Western Ukraine wanted to be part of the EU, while many in the East wanted to maintain stronger economic ties with Russia, and didn't want to be in the EU.
The EU was offering <$1 billion in loans, and demanding the usual Neoliberal "austerity reforms" (lower taxes, lower wages, less gov't spending & services), while Russia was offering more loans, plus lower gas prices.
Urban university students & young adults were disappointed with Yanukovich's decision. Ukraine's entry into the EU meant the possibility of higher-paying jobs in other EU nations.
The U.S. and the EU were far from neutral observers in this process. For years, they've been pouring $billions into Ukraine, buying media & influence, and essentially 'selling' EU membership and greater alliance with the West/EU/U.S. to the Ukrainian people. Here's a summary of the foreign aid to Ukraine: https://www.foreignassistance.gov/cd/ukraine/2013/obligations/0 [Note: Some of this aid is a really prudent investment, like providing generous stipends for former-Soviet nuclear scientists, so they don't go work for ISIS. No argument with that. But look at all the grants for "governance" and "media", with their purpose/description redacted...]
The U.S. State Dept, the EU, and groups like the National Endowment for Democracy have also made huge investments in media and political influence, trying to woo Eastern European countries, including Ukraine, to join the West/EU/U.S. bloc. https://www.ned.org/region/central-and-eastern-europe/
In one of the more ironic statements I've seen, the NED still has this on their Central & Eastern Europe page:
Quote:
Thirty years after the collapse of the communist bloc, Europe's transitions remain under threat. Now most countries of central, eastern and southeastern Europe are experiencing a democratic decline that began a decade ago. Rising polarization, pervasive corruption, and weakened rule of law point to the deterioration of democratic processes and political institutions.
This is coming from an organization that openly supported the overthrow of a democratically-elected leader who made a decision they didn't like!
Finally, officials in the State Dept, NED, and many others were openly expressing their support for the Maidan coup. U.S. Senators John McCain (R-AZ) and Chris Murphy (D-CT) even took the stage, beside extreme right-wing Svoboda co-founder Oleh Tyahnybok:
There was clear financial support and encouragement for the Maidan uprising throughout the U.S. State Dept., the NED, and U.S./EU/Western media. And there's no doubt that right-wing neo-Nazi militias like Azov & Right Sector provided the armed support to complete the overthrow. What's unknown is whether Svoboda was an intermediary (probable), or if other middle-men were involved. AFAIK, that remains pretty well hidden -- which is normal for U.S.-supported overthrows of democratically-elected governments & heads of state.
I'm not saying that Putin is the 'good guy' here, and the U.S. is the 'bad guy'.
I'm saying that they're all 'bad guys', and there are no 'good guys' anywhere to be found.
Either meddling in the affairs of other nations is OK, or it isn't. I don't want my tax $$ going to the overthrow of democratically-elected governments, and I don't want other nations meddling in our affairs.
Maybe you can specify for me in this wall of text where exactly the US or any Western nation financed a "coup" against the Ukrainian government. Seems to me that all you've got here is evidence that the West spent some money/resources on trying to influence Ukraine to join an alliance with them. I'm sure the Russians did the same. But that is not the same as staging a "coup." That's just trying to influence geopolitics, as all powerful countries do. A coup is something else entirely.
I can believe that the US government would finance an overthrow of another government, because it's happened before. I can even more easily believe that some of the American money found its way indirectly to unsavory groups like neo-Nazi militias. But I'm not going to just accept a lot of circumstantial innuendo as evidence. Meanwhile, I have the evidence that Russia tried to do it. They literally sent their military in and conquered Ukrainian territory. That's clear as day. Get back to me when you have something like that.
I wanted to highlight this article, which actually was an interesting rundown, so thanks for that.
I also wanted to highlight this part:
Quote:
It's an overstatement to say, as some critics have charged, that Washington orchestrated the Maidan uprising. But there's no doubt US officials backed and exploited it for their own ends.
So it looks like the Jacobin author actually agrees with me. Do you want to walk back your claim that the US headed up this "coup" in Ukraine? Vocally supporting one that is already underway is a very different thing.
....he annexed Crimea. Did he do anything beyond that? No.
If Putin was going to expand Westward, he would've done it already.
Isn't that exactly what he's about to do??? Not sure how you can make him seem docile and merely looking after his navy when he's about to go full on into Ukraine. And for what?
He's not "about" to do anything of the sort. The only people who seem to think that an invasion is "imminent" are U.S. corporate media & the Biden administration. They were the ones talking about false flag operations & going into Alex Jones / conspiracy territory. And they're the only ones with a compelling financial interest in escalation & conflict.
They were the ones talking about false flag operations & going into Alex Jones / conspiracy territory.
As opposed to you, who alleged a US coup in Ukraine without a shred of evidence.
Maybe you can tell me why the U.S. and the National Endowment for Democracy spent $billions on pro-West/EU/U.S. propaganda, and why a NeoCon Deputy Secretary of State would be meeting with opposition leaders, including a right-wing neo-Nazi militia leader, two months before the actual coup:
Bear in mind that the protests in Kiev were going on for weeks, but Yanukovich remained in office. The NeoCons knew that it would take force to remove him, and the neo-Nazi militias, led by Oleh Tyahnybok & his Svoboda nationalist / neo-Nazi party, provided the force.
For today's NeoCons, dropping the possibility of Ukraine joining NATO is unthinkable. They see it as appeasement to Putin, and an abandonment of all the resources expended to bring Ukraine toward the West.
They were the ones talking about false flag operations & going into Alex Jones / conspiracy territory.
As opposed to you, who alleged a US coup in Ukraine without a shred of evidence.
Maybe you can tell me why the U.S. and the National Endowment for Democracy spent $billions on pro-West/EU/U.S. propaganda, and why a NeoCon Deputy Secretary of State would be meeting with opposition leaders, including a right-wing neo-Nazi militia leader, two months before the actual coup:
Bear in mind that the protests in Kiev were going on for weeks, but Yanukovich remained in office. The NeoCons knew that it would take force to remove him, and the neo-Nazi militias, led by Oleh Tyahnybok & his Svoboda nationalist / neo-Nazi party, provided the force.
For today's NeoCons, dropping the possibility of Ukraine joining NATO is unthinkable. They see it as appeasement to Putin, and an abandonment of all the resources expended to bring Ukraine toward the West.
Our NeoCon-led foreign policy is still to aggressively expand NATO Eastward, to bring Ukraine into NATO, and to challenge Putin.
That's not "defense." It looks a lot more like "offense."
And the question that no one asks: "How are you gonna pay for that?"
Oh no! They MET with some guys! They had TROUBLING TIES.
No s*** the West would like to have Ukraine in NATO. I'm sure they'd all like to have as many allies as possible. I already stated as much above. The US surely did try to influence the outcome of the revolution. And?
Here's what you still haven't demonstrated: the US staging a coup in Ukraine. Meanwhile, Russia invaded them and annexed their territory. I think I know which country has been on offense more often.
They were the ones talking about false flag operations & going into Alex Jones / conspiracy territory.
As opposed to you, who alleged a US coup in Ukraine without a shred of evidence.
Maybe you can tell me why the U.S. and the National Endowment for Democracy spent $billions on pro-West/EU/U.S. propaganda, and why a NeoCon Deputy Secretary of State would be meeting with opposition leaders, including a right-wing neo-Nazi militia leader, two months before the actual coup:
Bear in mind that the protests in Kiev were going on for weeks, but Yanukovich remained in office. The NeoCons knew that it would take force to remove him, and the neo-Nazi militias, led by Oleh Tyahnybok & his Svoboda nationalist / neo-Nazi party, provided the force.
For today's NeoCons, dropping the possibility of Ukraine joining NATO is unthinkable. They see it as appeasement to Putin, and an abandonment of all the resources expended to bring Ukraine toward the West.
Our NeoCon-led foreign policy is still to aggressively expand NATO Eastward, to bring Ukraine into NATO, and to challenge Putin.
That's not "defense." It looks a lot more like "offense."
And the question that no one asks: "How are you gonna pay for that?"
Oh no! They MET with some guys! They had TROUBLING TIES.
No s*** the West would like to have Ukraine in NATO. I'm sure they'd all like to have as many allies as possible. I already stated as much above. The US surely did try to influence the outcome of the revolution. And?
Here's what you still haven't demonstrated: the US staging a coup in Ukraine. Meanwhile, Russia invaded them and annexed their territory. I think I know which country has been on offense more often.
Anybody in the West who wants to have Ukraine in NATO has their head up their Cold Warrior azz. That's what got a bug up Putin's butt in the first place. I'm sure we'd have loved it if the Soviets had been talking of having Mexico join the Warsaw Pact.
I heard another so-called pundit (Senator from Iowa) say yesterday that "It says in the NATO Charter that any country is welcome to join!" These people must think it's still 1950... or 1960... or 1970. What if the NATO Charter said he had to jump off the Golden Gate Bridge? Would he do it?
Putin is certainly Villain #1 in all of this, but we're not helping. Honestly, all heads of state should be women: We'd have a lot less wars and threats-of-war. All the guys could just go out and drink and then the ones that want to fight could do that.
Maybe you can tell me why the U.S. and the National Endowment for Democracy spent $billions on pro-West/EU/U.S. propaganda, and why a NeoCon Deputy Secretary of State would be meeting with opposition leaders, including a right-wing neo-Nazi militia leader, two months before the actual coup:
Bear in mind that the protests in Kiev were going on for weeks, but Yanukovich remained in office. The NeoCons knew that it would take force to remove him, and the neo-Nazi militias, led by Oleh Tyahnybok & his Svoboda nationalist / neo-Nazi party, provided the force.
For today's NeoCons, dropping the possibility of Ukraine joining NATO is unthinkable. They see it as appeasement to Putin, and an abandonment of all the resources expended to bring Ukraine toward the West.
Our NeoCon-led foreign policy is still to aggressively expand NATO Eastward, to bring Ukraine into NATO, and to challenge Putin.
That's not "defense." It looks a lot more like "offense."
And the question that no one asks: "How are you gonna pay for that?"
Oh no! They MET with some guys! They had TROUBLING TIES.
No s*** the West would like to have Ukraine in NATO. I'm sure they'd all like to have as many allies as possible. I already stated as much above. The US surely did try to influence the outcome of the revolution. And?
Here's what you still haven't demonstrated: the US staging a coup in Ukraine. Meanwhile, Russia invaded them and annexed their territory. I think I know which country has been on offense more often.
The annexation of Crimea was Putin's response to the U.S.-backed coup. He wasn't willing to let the U.S. & NATO have his Western fleet in Sevastopol. If the coup hadn't happened, Putin would have no reason to annex Crimea. It wasn't some random aggressive action taken in a vacuum. It was for a specific reason.
Maybe you can tell me why the U.S. and the National Endowment for Democracy spent $billions on pro-West/EU/U.S. propaganda, and why a NeoCon Deputy Secretary of State would be meeting with opposition leaders, including a right-wing neo-Nazi militia leader, two months before the actual coup:
Bear in mind that the protests in Kiev were going on for weeks, but Yanukovich remained in office. The NeoCons knew that it would take force to remove him, and the neo-Nazi militias, led by Oleh Tyahnybok & his Svoboda nationalist / neo-Nazi party, provided the force.
For today's NeoCons, dropping the possibility of Ukraine joining NATO is unthinkable. They see it as appeasement to Putin, and an abandonment of all the resources expended to bring Ukraine toward the West.
Our NeoCon-led foreign policy is still to aggressively expand NATO Eastward, to bring Ukraine into NATO, and to challenge Putin.
That's not "defense." It looks a lot more like "offense."
And the question that no one asks: "How are you gonna pay for that?"
Oh no! They MET with some guys! They had TROUBLING TIES.
No s*** the West would like to have Ukraine in NATO. I'm sure they'd all like to have as many allies as possible. I already stated as much above. The US surely did try to influence the outcome of the revolution. And?
Here's what you still haven't demonstrated: the US staging a coup in Ukraine. Meanwhile, Russia invaded them and annexed their territory. I think I know which country has been on offense more often.
The annexation of Crimea was Putin's response to the U.S.-backed coup.
You keep calling this "US-backed" as if the whole thing is America's responsibility. Again, you have no basis for this.
Also, "America offered Ukraine an alliance so Russia invaded them" is not the defense of Putin you think it is.
They were the ones talking about false flag operations & going into Alex Jones / conspiracy territory.
As opposed to you, who alleged a US coup in Ukraine without a shred of evidence.
Maybe you can tell me why the U.S. and the National Endowment for Democracy spent $billions on pro-West/EU/U.S. propaganda, and why a NeoCon Deputy Secretary of State would be meeting with opposition leaders, including a right-wing neo-Nazi militia leader, two months before the actual coup:
Bear in mind that the protests in Kiev were going on for weeks, but Yanukovich remained in office. The NeoCons knew that it would take force to remove him, and the neo-Nazi militias, led by Oleh Tyahnybok & his Svoboda nationalist / neo-Nazi party, provided the force.
For today's NeoCons, dropping the possibility of Ukraine joining NATO is unthinkable. They see it as appeasement to Putin, and an abandonment of all the resources expended to bring Ukraine toward the West.
Our NeoCon-led foreign policy is still to aggressively expand NATO Eastward, to bring Ukraine into NATO, and to challenge Putin.
That's not "defense." It looks a lot more like "offense."
And the question that no one asks: "How are you gonna pay for that?"
Oh no! They MET with some guys! They had TROUBLING TIES.
No s*** the West would like to have Ukraine in NATO. I'm sure they'd all like to have as many allies as possible. I already stated as much above. The US surely did try to influence the outcome of the revolution. And?
Here's what you still haven't demonstrated: the US staging a coup in Ukraine. Meanwhile, Russia invaded them and annexed their territory. I think I know which country has been on offense more often.
Anybody in the West who wants to have Ukraine in NATO has their head up their Cold Warrior azz. That's what got a bug up Putin's butt in the first place. I'm sure we'd have loved it if there had been talk of having Mexico join the Warsaw Pact.
I heard another so-called pundit (Senator from Iowa) say yesterday that "It says in the NATO Charter that any country is welcome to join!" These people must think it's still 1950... or 1960... or 1970. What if the NATO Charter said he had to jump off the Golden Gate Bridge? Would he do it?
Putin is certainly Villain #1 in all of this, but we're not helping. Honestly, all heads of state should be women: We'd have a lot less wars and threats-of-war. All the guys could just go out and drink and then the ones that want to fight could do that.
Look, I don't think NATO needs to just admit anyone who wants in if their membership will cause more trouble than it's worth. But just talking to Ukraine or putting them on a track to maybe get there one day is a perfectly reasonable course.
The irony is that all of Putin's nonsense is actually driving the Ukrainian population further in favor of NATO membership, if polling is to be believed. He loves to blame the West, but he's exacerbating his own problems.
They were the ones talking about false flag operations & going into Alex Jones / conspiracy territory.
As opposed to you, who alleged a US coup in Ukraine without a shred of evidence.
Maybe you can tell me why the U.S. and the National Endowment for Democracy spent $billions on pro-West/EU/U.S. propaganda, and why a NeoCon Deputy Secretary of State would be meeting with opposition leaders, including a right-wing neo-Nazi militia leader, two months before the actual coup:
Bear in mind that the protests in Kiev were going on for weeks, but Yanukovich remained in office. The NeoCons knew that it would take force to remove him, and the neo-Nazi militias, led by Oleh Tyahnybok & his Svoboda nationalist / neo-Nazi party, provided the force.
For today's NeoCons, dropping the possibility of Ukraine joining NATO is unthinkable. They see it as appeasement to Putin, and an abandonment of all the resources expended to bring Ukraine toward the West.
Our NeoCon-led foreign policy is still to aggressively expand NATO Eastward, to bring Ukraine into NATO, and to challenge Putin.
That's not "defense." It looks a lot more like "offense."
And the question that no one asks: "How are you gonna pay for that?"
Oh no! They MET with some guys! They had TROUBLING TIES.
No s*** the West would like to have Ukraine in NATO. I'm sure they'd all like to have as many allies as possible. I already stated as much above. The US surely did try to influence the outcome of the revolution. And?
Here's what you still haven't demonstrated: the US staging a coup in Ukraine. Meanwhile, Russia invaded them and annexed their territory. I think I know which country has been on offense more often.
Anybody in the West who wants to have Ukraine in NATO has their head up their Cold Warrior azz. That's what got a bug up Putin's butt in the first place. I'm sure we'd have loved it if there had been talk of having Mexico join the Warsaw Pact.
I heard another so-called pundit (Senator from Iowa) say yesterday that "It says in the NATO Charter that any country is welcome to join!" These people must think it's still 1950... or 1960... or 1970. What if the NATO Charter said he had to jump off the Golden Gate Bridge? Would he do it?
Putin is certainly Villain #1 in all of this, but we're not helping. Honestly, all heads of state should be women: We'd have a lot less wars and threats-of-war. All the guys could just go out and drink and then the ones that want to fight could do that.
Look, I don't think NATO needs to just admit anyone who wants in if their membership will cause more trouble than it's worth. But just talking to Ukraine or putting them on a track to maybe get there one day is a perfectly reasonable course.
There is no fast track because the Ukraine joining NATO is dead. The US, France and Germany oppose among others.
From WAPO
"Western powers even if never in agreement, or fully committed, to letting Ukraine in dangled the hope of access to those rarefied clubs for years. Now even the distant chance that existed before of Ukraine joining NATO or the E.U. is quickly evaporating.
U.S. and European leaders stopped short of giving Putin what he has publicly demanded a firm promise that Ukraine will never join NATO. But they have acknowledged no immediate plans to let Ukraine in, largely citing lingering problems with corruption and a weak rule of law that haven't helped its case to join the West's premier clubs. Washington and major European powers have also said they will not send ground forces to defend Ukraine against the Russians something they would have had to do if Ukraine was part of NATO. The E.U., under the bloc's rules of collective defense, would have also been bound to respond had Ukraine joined its 27-member union. Boxed into an impossible position with neither membership card, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky this week edged closer to acknowledging reality. Ukraine's years-long goal of joining NATO, he conceded Monday, could be little more than "a dream." On Wednesday, the New York Times reported that the Ukrainian leader was even weighing a possible referendum that could keep his country from joining NATO, acquiescing to a key Putin demand."
They were the ones talking about false flag operations & going into Alex Jones / conspiracy territory.
As opposed to you, who alleged a US coup in Ukraine without a shred of evidence.
Maybe you can tell me why the U.S. and the National Endowment for Democracy spent $billions on pro-West/EU/U.S. propaganda, and why a NeoCon Deputy Secretary of State would be meeting with opposition leaders, including a right-wing neo-Nazi militia leader, two months before the actual coup:
Bear in mind that the protests in Kiev were going on for weeks, but Yanukovich remained in office. The NeoCons knew that it would take force to remove him, and the neo-Nazi militias, led by Oleh Tyahnybok & his Svoboda nationalist / neo-Nazi party, provided the force.
For today's NeoCons, dropping the possibility of Ukraine joining NATO is unthinkable. They see it as appeasement to Putin, and an abandonment of all the resources expended to bring Ukraine toward the West.
Our NeoCon-led foreign policy is still to aggressively expand NATO Eastward, to bring Ukraine into NATO, and to challenge Putin.
That's not "defense." It looks a lot more like "offense."
And the question that no one asks: "How are you gonna pay for that?"
Oh no! They MET with some guys! They had TROUBLING TIES.
No s*** the West would like to have Ukraine in NATO. I'm sure they'd all like to have as many allies as possible. I already stated as much above. The US surely did try to influence the outcome of the revolution. And?
Here's what you still haven't demonstrated: the US staging a coup in Ukraine. Meanwhile, Russia invaded them and annexed their territory. I think I know which country has been on offense more often.
Anybody in the West who wants to have Ukraine in NATO has their head up their Cold Warrior azz. That's what got a bug up Putin's butt in the first place. I'm sure we'd have loved it if there had been talk of having Mexico join the Warsaw Pact.
I heard another so-called pundit (Senator from Iowa) say yesterday that "It says in the NATO Charter that any country is welcome to join!" These people must think it's still 1950... or 1960... or 1970. What if the NATO Charter said he had to jump off the Golden Gate Bridge? Would he do it?
Putin is certainly Villain #1 in all of this, but we're not helping. Honestly, all heads of state should be women: We'd have a lot less wars and threats-of-war. All the guys could just go out and drink and then the ones that want to fight could do that.
Look, I don't think NATO needs to just admit anyone who wants in if their membership will cause more trouble than it's worth. But just talking to Ukraine or putting them on a track to maybe get there one day is a perfectly reasonable course.
There is no fast track because the Ukraine joining NATO is dead. The US, France and Germany oppose among others.
Never said anything about a "fast" track, and I am talking about what discussions have happened historically. They certainly have talked about it.
Present circumstances make it very unlikely, agreed.
We can add Belarus to the list of countries that Putin has occupied against the will of the people. The Russian army isn't leaving. It never does, willingly.
To paraphrase the @WashPostPR slogan, hope for democracy dies in darkness. Without international attention, it is easier for autocrats like #Lukashenka to repress their country’s population and get away with it. 1/3
This article describes some of the effects of having Russian military in large numbers in Belarus. TLDR: It's not pretty, for the locals, the soldiers, the Russian army or Putin. 1/9https://t.co/Y0hkQGGz5c
Once Russia gets its troops in somewhere, they don't want to leave. This was the same issue in Crimea: rather than simply leave once Ukraine had a new government less favorable to Russia, they decided to just take over the place.
And no, I don't think any of this is NATO's fault. It's Putin's wildly disproportionate responses that are the problem. He's the bully.
We can add Belarus to the list of countries that Putin has occupied against the will of the people. The Russian army isn't leaving. It never does, willingly.
We can add Belarus to the list of countries that Putin has occupied against the will of the people. The Russian army isn't leaving. It never does, willingly.
This thread almost went a full week without TDS attempting to derail. Let's keep it focused on the Russia and the Ukrainian conflict. I am hoping that Biden, Putin, and Macron can stop the invasion with diplomacy.
This thread almost went a full week without TDS attempting to derail. Let's keep it focused on the Russia and the Ukrainian conflict. I am hoping that Biden, Putin, and Macron can stop the invasion with diplomacy.
Putin can stop the invasion by not ordering it. Why would you lump Putin in with the others when he is the sole aggressor here?
This thread almost went a full week without TDS attempting to derail. Let's keep it focused on the Russia and the Ukrainian conflict. I am hoping that Biden, Putin, and Macron can stop the invasion with diplomacy.
Putin can stop the invasion by not ordering it. Why would you lump Putin in with the others when he is the sole aggressor here?
Because I added Putin at the last minute. Here...
I am hoping that Biden and Macron can stop the Russian invasion with diplomacy.
tRump is still relevant for as long as he is laying pipe to run in 2024. If he retreats back to his private life, I will never mention him again, with the exception of court commentary during his active civil or criminal trials.
Cancel my subscription to the Resurrection
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
“I love Cal deeply. What are the directions to The Portal from Sproul Plaza?”
tRump is still relevant for as long as he is laying pipe to run in 2024. If he retreats back to his private life, I will never mention him again, with the exception of court commentary during his active civil or criminal trials.
Once Russia gets its troops in somewhere, they don't want to leave. This was the same issue in Crimea: rather than simply leave once Ukraine had a new government less favorable to Russia, they decided to just take over the place.
And no, I don't think any of this is NATO's fault. It's Putin's wildly disproportionate responses that are the problem. He's the bully.
Am I surprised? No, I am not. They're going to annex more of Ukraine based on this pretext.
Russian President Putin has recognized the independence of separatist regions in east Ukraine amid fears Moscow could launch an invasion. Putin urged lawmakers to sign treaties with Ukraine's rebel regions, enabling Moscow's military support for them. https://t.co/IcLDhbZY5c
By the end of 1942, in Reichskommissariat Ukraine alone, the SS employed 238,000 Ukrainians and only 15,000 Germans, a ratio of 1 to 16. Wikipedia
14th Waffen Grenadier Division of the SS (1st Galician) - Wikipedia
Bearister you get most things right and I am ususally in agreement with you... but you are way off on this one and it is bordering on offensive.
The atrocities committed by Hitler and Stalin on the Ukrainians made them the most subjugated and punished country in WWII. Ukrainian jews were the first to be killed by Hitler. The fact that some subset of an invaded and terrorized people are forced into service or ally with their conquerors (Stockholm syndrome) is not an indictment on the national character or mean they have it coming. The Ukrianians have had it over and over for centuries. As much or more than any other nation. The Holodomor is one of the great human tragedies widely not known by the West.
Are you calling the annexation of Crimea in 2014 an "invasion"?
The annexation was a response to the U.S.-backed coup that ousted Yanukovich and installed Yatsulyek(sp?). U.S. Deputy Secretary of State Victoria Nuland headed the operation, and arranged funding for Ukrainian neo-Nazi militias to provide the firepower needed to make it happen. All this was suspected, but finally revealed in the WikiLeaks documents & recordings. Nuland was famous for saying, "Yats [Yatsulyek] is our guy," and "F*** the EU!"
Putin wasn't going to simply hand over his entire warm-water navy, which is in Sevastopol (Crimea), to some U.S. puppet. So he annexed Crimea. Did he do anything beyond that? No.
If Putin was going to expand Westward, he would've done it already.
It's disheartening to see KGB propaganda misinformation take root in someone who seemingly is somewhat educated in the politics of the region, but entirely uneducated in the long term infiltration by Putin into Ukraine and the ways he has tried to puppet the nation and create false narratives and BS manufactured "Russian nationalism." Look at all these Russian speaking citizens after we ban the speaking of Ukranian, etc.
If the coup hadn't happened, Putin would have no reason to annex Crimea. It wasn't some random aggressive action taken in a vacuum. It was for a specific reason.
I don't even know where to begin with how ignorant that is. No reason to annex (it was an invasion!) Crimea? Are you kidding me? Have you been to Crimea or Ukraine or Russia? I have. What do you really know about the history and people and the long-standing reasons Russia would want Crimea?
Vladimir Putin doesn’t want me to be President. He doesn’t want me to be our nominee. If you’re wondering why — it’s because I’m the only person in this field who’s ever gone toe-to-toe with him.
Are you calling the annexation of Crimea in 2014 an "invasion"?
The annexation was a response to the U.S.-backed coup that ousted Yanukovich and installed Yatsulyek(sp?). U.S. Deputy Secretary of State Victoria Nuland headed the operation, and arranged funding for Ukrainian neo-Nazi militias to provide the firepower needed to make it happen. All this was suspected, but finally revealed in the WikiLeaks documents & recordings. Nuland was famous for saying, "Yats [Yatsulyek] is our guy," and "F*** the EU!"
Putin wasn't going to simply hand over his entire warm-water navy, which is in Sevastopol (Crimea), to some U.S. puppet. So he annexed Crimea. Did he do anything beyond that? No.
If Putin was going to expand Westward, he would've done it already.
It's disheartening to see KGB propaganda misinformation take root in someone who seemingly is somewhat educated in the politics of the region, but entirely uneducated in the long term infiltration by Putin into Ukraine and the ways he has tried to puppet the nation and create false narratives and BS manufactured "Russian nationalism." Look at all these Russian speaking citizens after we ban the speaking of Ukranian, etc.
He is "educated" in exactly the manner he claims: by rejecting all "corporate media" (meaning mainstream American and Western European sources) and getting his info from "alternate" sources only. What kind of media often rushes to fill that void? Foreign propaganda. Not always, but it can have an outsized sway in such spaces.
That's not to say that American media doesn't serve up propaganda. It does, and you should be wary of that. But you have to keep in mind that Russia, China, and other foreign adversaries produce plenty of propaganda themselves and learn how to tell the difference. You're not being an independent thinker if you just substitute one line of bulls*** for another.
