I’m in support of the NATO mission to stop Slobodan Milosevic. I’m interested as to why you keep bringing it up as a negative action.
Geopolitics
- Thread starter Mciahel Goodman
- Start date
Overstates the role of nazis, perhaps, but all of that is factually correct. What's unhinged about it?
That's correct.
Overall, NATO is not a defensive alliance when it bombs countries on an offensive footing and has a history of such. I've stopped posting here and completely stopped reading the other thread, which was like an alternate reality thread the last time I looked, but consensus is, every day, moving closer to the majority of what was stated here throughout (proxy war, provocation, etc.).
1. US didn't stage a coup in Ukraine in 2014.
2. Yanukovych wasn't replaced by a puppet state.
3. That's a disgustingly manipulative way of describing war in Donbas that extremely conveniently ommits all of the Russian involvement.
4. Current government isn't run by Nazis.
5. Yanukovych embezzled tens of billions of dollars. Wonder why they only mentioned the fact that he's democratically elected and he supported Russia, but with current government being corrupt is the most notable feature despite being orders of magnitude less corrupt than Yanukovych.
6. No, they weren't caught with bioweapon labs in Ukraine. This also gets contested here?
They backed the Maidan Coup. Everyone knows this.
https://www.nbcnews.com/video/audio-of-leaked-nuland-conversation-162208835907
Depends on your perspective. Was replaced by American and European members of government who went along a neoliberal shock therapy line, typical of US coups like Chile.
Sort of agree on this point.
No, but there is obviously a sizeable neo-Nazi minority, currently in tunnels underneath the Avovstal steel works. The Far Right Sector and Azov and other groups have been topic of western expose for years prior to breakout of war and then became topics of rehabilitation.
Every Ukrainian president since 91 has been corrupt. Yanukovych was corrupt, too, agreed (so is Zelensky and so were all those who went before him).
I ignored that part because conspiracy theorists get sidetracked by it, but the US was absolutely operating "biolabs" in Ukraine. Whether they're benign or not, I don't know and don't really care.
So, all in all, basically every claim (except the Nazi one) has substance to it.
I am relieved that there are staff here who can actually read.
That's 0 out of 6. It's not a coup when a government falls because it tries to act against the will of the population re: regional alignment, it's just democracy.
It was a literal coup, though. The government was ousted via coup. Also, the split at the time was roughly 54-46 in terms of EU/EEA. Plus the American involvement. Whether you consider it an American coup or a Ukrainian coup, it was a coup (an American one imo, as per Nuland's audio).
Coup is accurate, though not without Ukrainian willingness. What came after was as much a puppet state as what went before. 3 is contentious. 4 is misstated, but wrong. 5 applies to all Ukrainian presidents. 6 is misinterpreted but again Nuland states that they were funding such in Ukraine (not "weapons", though).
I'd say 3/6 depending on your point of view.
While many Ukrainians suffered because of this war, I note there is no mention of the rampant racism of the Ukrainian authorities towards non white students who were trying to flee the country because of the war.
All sanitized to push a narrative.
Edit:
NATO itself was formed because the MIC needed to keep selling weapons after WWII.
The Russians were never our enemy.
All sanitized to push a narrative.
Edit:
NATO itself was formed because the MIC needed to keep selling weapons after WWII.
The Russians were never our enemy.
Ad 1, Ah, the classic jump from staging to backing, surely no-one will notice. Does Russia backing politicians and organizations in nearly every single European country mean that they are staging multiple coups at the same time in dozens of countries and should be reacted to accordingly?
Ad 2, What? Who were the Americans and European members of government that replaced Yanukovych and what exact similarities to Chile happened according to you? edit: Also, I have no idea how do you measure "puppetness" of a country, but Ukraine was much closer to a Russia puppet state under Yanukovych than it's West's puppet state under Poroshenko or Zelensky. It's not even close.
Ad 4, Being in the tunnel of Azovstal is not running the government even in part.
Ad 5, This is a meaningless truism. Every politician everywhere has been corrupt to a certain extent if you stretch the definition well enough. If anyone genuinely cares about corruption in Ukraine, ousting Yanukovich should be a massive reason to celebrate. He was basically in a league of his own there.
Ad 6, You asked about whether they are factual, not whether you care about them being factual. I can't really help you if biolabs and bioweapon labs are the same to you and you just don't care about the difference.
Last edited:
Does anyone except the Russians actually call it the Maidan Coup? Revolution is enough, it doesn't exactly automatically make it a good thing (even though this obviously was). Nor does it preclude the Americans supporting it.
People that support it call it a revolution or protests, people that don't call it a coup. Obviously whatever you call it has no bearing on what actually happened there and shouldn't be used for making any value judgements about it.
This has been discussed in depth on this forum.
Nuland announced the composition of the cabinet prior to the ousting of the government. Call it backing, support, or whatever, it's clear that there was American involvement, made even more clear by American state figures rushing to get to Kyiv during the coup. If it happened the other way around, with Lavrov on the leaked audio, we'd be calling it a Russian coup and everyone knows that.
Ukrainians themselves don't seem united in thinking it was a good thing. Some do, some don't. Probably much more popular now than it was at the time.
Traded a Russian puppet for an American puppet. That was the reading of those in the Donbas/Crimea. It's close depending on your bias. But take a look at various economic ministers appointed between 2014-2019, you'll find some Americans, some Eastern Europeans, and a Canadian iirc. World Bank/IMF orthodoxy with Chile as the model.
Never said they ran the government, but that there is/was a clear fascist minority at play.
Ignore "biolabs", "bioweaponlabs", because it seems pointless but there is substance to biolabs, whatever that means, verified by Nuland's testimony to Rubio.
Yeah, most of this, including points above, has been done to death, which is why I know which parts merit credence and which ones don't.
tl;dr the original points in the article all have some substance to it, but the source is (intentionally, I'd guess) framing it in the most provocative way: it's Chinese state media, so to be expected.
In other news, Kissinger gives his thoughts on longterm implications:
https://www.ft.com/content/cd88912d-506a-41d4-b38f-0c37cb7f0e2f
https://www.ft.com/content/cd88912d-506a-41d4-b38f-0c37cb7f0e2f
I asked a staff if it would be ok to post links and did not get a reply. Why I mentioned it.
None of those terms is staging and I was contesting the "staging" part of staging coup. Already mentioned above that I don't think it should matter for any value judgements whether you call it a coup or a revolution outside of propaganda purposes. Foreign support is obvious and Ukrainians would be idiotic to avoid getting it then, the possibility of Russian army suppressing the protests was a very real scenario then.
Maidan protests literally happened because of Putin forcing Yanukovych to go back on a promised and agreed trade deal with EU. Unless you can actually provide something specific and similar in scope that would suggest American puppetry, any symmetry suggestions are just ridiculous.
Also, why are we pretending that we still live in 2014? A lot of things happened and have been unearthed since then and the readings of Ukrainians have massively changed for legitimate reasons. And why democratic elections don't matter in elections when pro-western politicians are elected?
Post you called "factual" did and you contested my contesting of that. I don't mind expanding the discussion, but using this to avoid addressing original points is nasty.
Then stop suggesting bioweapon labs? "There is substance to biolabs" doesn't confirm anything specific, malicious or even that interesting and it's obvious why people justifying Russia always gravitate to the completely made up bioweapons.
If you know that most things I say lack credence why are you being as abstract as possible and swapping terms constantly?
Yes, the Americans supported the coup. We agree on that. Most would not bicker with "staging" given the context, but I'll run with "support".
Like the de factoization of Ukraine as NATO state post-Maidan? Shelling of the Donbas. Yeah, that's an American puppet state inasmuch as it was ever a Russian puppet state. Standard in a proxy state, though, with US/Russia each wanting to control it. The far right were also mobilizied in the ousting of that government, supported by the US. Good scholarship on that from Ivan Katchanovski who has opened his work up to free access. Covers the entire Maidan conflict.
As of right now, for instance, the US/NATO have war aims that exceed those of the Ukrainian government and such are being implemented because... Ukraine is a puppet/client/vassal state.
You can read a lot on the topic if you want. Lievan is well regarded, though.
Clarifying, not suggesting. The "bioweapon" claim emerges from the verified existence of "biolabs" which comes from both American and Russian record.
You called a set of disputed facts "unhinged" when the majority of them are either a matter of perspective or in fact proven. The Nazis in government and bioweapons aspect remain the only two you can disregard entirely, though it is true that the US supported neo-Nazi elements over and beyond the Ukrainian government (as reported over the years prior to the war).
The above is from 2019, but Cohen, and others, documented the fact that the US preferred to support the minority extremist element in Ukraine over and above the government. This is why Zelensky arrived on the contact line when elected, on a peace platform, and, after asking those right wing groups to stop the shelling was told to get back to Kyiv with a threat to his life made very clear.
It's not black and white. You dismiss much of it far too easily. You can dispute this or that part, but the claims are not without substance.
Definitely the last post I'm making in this thread
If you don't agree, you don't agree. The record is there, everyone can judge it for themselves.
Last edited:
It would require him actually having read the thread.
It seems there's plenty of folks who genuinely dislike the West and it's clouding their judgment. What Western countries did in the past does not excuse what the Russians are doing now.
And that goes both ways. Western nations themselves regularly get criticized too and often for valid reasons.
But I'll conclude by saying: give me the West all day long. I'm glad to live in the West instead of Putin's Russia and the CCP's everly increasing dystopian China with massive state surveillance.
And that goes both ways. Western nations themselves regularly get criticized too and often for valid reasons.
But I'll conclude by saying: give me the West all day long. I'm glad to live in the West instead of Putin's Russia and the CCP's everly increasing dystopian China with massive state surveillance.
Russia "supports" politicians and political organisations in nearly every single country in Europe, it doesn't mean that they stage anything when they get into power or accomplish something. Obviously the implication of a primary actor is completely different here, but sure, let's pretend that you didn't press for it deliberately. Also you do know that you could support everything you say if you just listed those disgusting ways by which US supported the coup, but for some reason you just leave it at that and never want to go into specifics of why this coup was so bad and externally driven.
De facto NATO member that doesn't get the article 5 - the main point of being in NATO, sure. Did they ever mention broken ceasefires by separatists to inch into Donbas or Russian soldiers without insignia constantly ending up in Ukraine getting lost while accidentaly taking territory and the state of the regular Ukrainian army at that point? Oh and the fact that those far-right movements in government lasted for months and were voted out? Or did you just conveniently ignore those?
What the feck. Whether or not somebody is some sort of puppet is obviously dependant on whether they can implement their own goals when they are divergent from a bigger nation. Not on whether west disgustingly dares to have an opinion on what they would personally like to happen.
So massively exaggerating legitimate claims to the point where they say something completely different that would be unrecognisable from the substance alone is now called clarifying? I was trying to quote what you were saying precisely, but obviously this is way too much hassle when stuff like this is considered fine.
Also, unrelated to other points, but I forgot to ask - are you fine saying that those biolabs had any bearing on the decision to invade Ukraine or are you shyly fine with the original post implying this?
That's why you have to massively shift the goalposts with every single one.
Again, did he mention that multiple elections happened since then and they were voted out or did you conveniently leave it out?
Which is why every single claim requires hyperbole that is not supported by this substance or ignoring massive amounts of relevant context or otherwise it completely falls apart. Sure, that is how all legitimate claims work.
Last edited:
One would think this was blatantly obvious, but as we've seen in this thread, there are still some that disagree.
To be honest, I kind of wish I didn't read this thread now. Not great for blood pressure.
That's precisely why it was created - as a self-reinforcing alternate reality bubble that spares the main thread from getting derailed by the "what about the West" crew.
Your efforts are valiant, but if you get tired I don't think anyone would blame you.
Funnily enough Russians, North Koreans, extremist Hindu nationalists in India all hold the same sentiment about their own regimes and think the other sides are deluded. Everyone gets told by their regimes about how they are perfect.
I left the thread because it was nauseatingly pro US/NATO
Also why I posted the Chinese report link as a "Up Yours"
Which, ironically, is what the main thread became. Both are worth avoiding at this point.
Definitely the last post I'm making in this thread
Congrats to all who had under 3h!
To be fair, you have the second most posts in this self-reinforcing alternate reality bubble.
But also to be fair, you have a third of the #1 poster's posts.
He's got a point though. I'm an ethnic minority living in the UK and I'd rather be a minority here than in any of those places.
Atlhough I've definitely noticed more European exceptionalism since this war started, and the "we're better because we have democracy" sentiment is definitely annoying .
Yeah, it's totally irrational to suggest democracies are better systems of government than autocracies. I probably just oversee all the censorship, deportation, suppression, persecution etc. just in front of me.
I also respect your bravery. Posting such criticism in the Western world usually leads to imprisonment. I hope you used a VPN because if not we probably won't hear from you for a very long time. Stay strong.
That's because the topics posted here are of interest outside of day to day posts in the Russia/Ukraine thread.
I haven't visited the other thread after the first time i opened it which was a couple of months ago. You cannot undo years and years of one sided information in a jiffy. I've been on the internet since i was a kid in the early to mid 90's and the conventional wisdom was that with the internet people won't be easily fooled and brainwashed by governments. Today that idea has been obliterated with censorships, trolling, fake news being peddled not only by fringe twitter self proclaimed journos but also mainstream media and outright banning of divergent viewpoints all across the world. Anyone with a opposing viewpoint is a sellout now or a shill or a traitor, nuance has been flushed down the shitter.
Yeah, how awful of NATO-members to support Ukraine with weapons and other aid to defend itself against an invading aggressor.
For the sake of symmetry let's pretend that everything Russia does, USA does there just as bad. And when it doesn't let's pretend that it was US's fault in the first place.
The real enemy of the American people and Ukrainians are the politicians who have facilitated the operations of the MIC through NATO which needs to continue selling weapons.
The Russians were never the enemy.
All this has been explained above in various posts.
But I will link again.
https://peoplesparty.org/nato-ukraine/
The Russians were never the enemy.
All this has been explained above in various posts.
But I will link again.
https://peoplesparty.org/nato-ukraine/
Remember to cite that thing when you happen to interact with anyone from Ukraine.
Ah yes the Russians threatening with Nukes every 5minutes, commiting genocide in Ukraine but are not our enemy they're the good guys really!
I agree that the Russians are not the enemy. Thousands of young conscripts, comprised of a lot of ethnic minorities, are being forces to fight and die for a cause many of them don't believe in and for a country many of them don't feel a part of.
Their blood is on the Putin regime's hands too.
Their blood is on the Putin regime's hands too.
but they indeed don't - or rather - any agency they have is dependent on the great power alignment of the moment. the iraq war might have looked different if europe or russia or china were supplying it with data or weapons like nato gave to ukraine over 8 years and especially since the invasion. the reason the us couldn't fully succeed in vietnam has a lot to do with vietnamese resilience, but also massive amounts of soviet and chinese equipment. same with the soviets in afg. cuban sovereignty exists because a threat to it was about to lead to human annhiliation. and etc etc.