Baby Jesus cries when you tell lies like that.
US staged a coup in Ukraine – here’s why and how
The truth about the coup in Ukraine is that it hasn’t benefited anyone other than the warmongers.
What’s the official narrative about the events in late 2013 and early 2014 in Kiev, Ukraine? There was the spontaneous and peaceful Euromaidan “revolution” by the great freedom-loving people, which forced the corrupt Ukrainian President to flee the country, right? Not so simple. There are many intriguing facts about geopolitics, 70 years of U.S. meddling in Ukraine, and covert regime-change operations.
U.S. meddling
First, objectively speaking, it’s curious that a U.S. Senator (John McCain) and the U.S. Assistant Secretary of State (Victoria Nuland) repeatedly attended political protests in another country. Oh, Nuland is also the wife of a prominent warmongering Neocon, Robert Kagan; and she’s also the one who famously said, “F*ck the E.U.” while discussing the future of Ukraine.
In the picture below, McCain is standing on the stage next to Oleh Tyahnybok, the leader of the far-right group called Svoboda, which uses a not-so-subtle logo that combines “N” and “Z.” Get it?
<continued>
Russia has no special right to move through other nations’ territory. It’s not a “blockade” to close that territory to Russia.
I think launching nukes at Ukraine is a far bigger “mission creep” than anything I mentioned.
A youtube video as a source? Really?The USA, using the CIA and the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), along with other NGOs fomented the "Color Revolution" that led to the coup toppling the duly elected government. As always, Victoria Nuland shows up in this quagmire. In fact, she's was caught on tape discussing who her puppet for running Ukraine will be.
And we all know that libertarians have to act alike.I have met quite a few 'libertarians' and I must say that your pro war/interventionist viewpoints are completely opposite from 99% of them!
Russia has no special right to move through other nations’ territory. It’s not a “blockade” to close that territory to Russia.
I think launching nukes at Ukraine is a far bigger “mission creep” than anything I mentioned.
Russia has no special right to move through other nations’ territory. It’s not a “blockade” to close that territory to Russia.
I think launching nukes at Ukraine is a far bigger “mission creep” than anything I mentioned.
We get it. You loathe America.Did America have a "special right" to invade Iraq? Does America have a special right to bomb, launch drone strikes, or send special forces to fight in Pakistan, Yemen, Syria, Somalia, Niger, or Libya?
Russia is intervening in a civil war in a nation next to them. It's not America's problem of what happens in Ukraine, other than the NeoCon warmongers started the civil war to begin with. We have no strategic interest in what happens in Ukraine, nor are we the policeman of the world. The solution is to facilitate a ceasefire in Ukraine, not to continue to escalate fighting to satiate the desire of NeoCons to fight Russia (a country that isn't a conventional military threat to us).
The USA, using the CIA and the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), along with other NGOs fomented the "Color Revolution" that led to the coup toppling the duly elected government. As always, Victoria Nuland shows up in this quagmire. In fact, she's was caught on tape discussing who her puppet for running Ukraine will be.
I have met quite a few 'libertarians' and I must say that your pro war/interventionist viewpoints are completely opposite from 99% of them!
A youtube video as a source? Really?
And we all know that libertarians have to act alike.
Who administered that oath?They used to take an oath condemning 'the INITIATION of force/coercion'. Now, many of them [not q] appear to be nothing more or less than 'Republicans who smoke dope!
Did America have a "special right" to invade Iraq? Does America have a special right to bomb, launch drone strikes, or send special forces to fight in Pakistan, Yemen, Syria, Somalia, Niger, or Libya?
Russia is intervening in a civil war in a nation next to them. It's not America's problem of what happens in Ukraine, other than the NeoCon warmongers started the civil war to begin with. We have no strategic interest in what happens in Ukraine, nor are we the policeman of the world. The solution is to facilitate a ceasefire in Ukraine, not to continue to escalate fighting to satiate the desire of NeoCons to fight Russia (a country that isn't a conventional military threat to us).
Who administered that oath?
Yeah, I know we're dealing with 30 different kindsa special here, but sometimes you gotta ask anyway.Note: the guy you are debating with is someone who can’t blame Germany for invading Poland and starting WW2 and instead blames the United States.
I support the defense of Ukraine. That is not being “pro-war”.
Should I instead support sitting by and doing nothing if Russia nukes another country?
Note: the guy you are debating with is someone who can’t blame Germany for invading Poland and starting WW2 and instead blames the United States.
Here's what the Libertarian Party's platform says:
"3.1 National Defense
We support the maintenance of a sufficient military to defend the United States against aggression. The United States should both avoid entangling alliances and abandon its attempts to act as policeman for the world. We oppose any form of compulsory national service.
3.3 International Affairs
American foreign policy should emphasize peace with all nations, entangling alliances with none. We would end the current U.S. government policies of foreign intervention including military and economic aid; tariffs; economic sanctions; and regime change....
^^^^
AGAIN, what I said was that wars are very complicated things with MANY causal factors.
When did I claim to the a member of the capitalist Libertarian Party?
So we should never see you only mention “US provocation” when talking about the cause of the Ukraine War, right?
Why are you deflecting away from the topic? Can you not address it?
Russia is not “intervening in a civil war” and we can tell because they are conducting a land grab, wanting to annex about half of the country.
We absolutely have a strategic interest in making sure countries don’t start throwing around nuclear weapons.
Your tag reads big "L" not little 'l'. For example, I am a 'democrat' and a 'republican', certainly not a member/supporter of the stinking Democrat or Republican parties.
When someone in my family is raising hell, cavorting with scumbags, leading the scumbaggery, etc., FIRST AND FOREMOST my concern/responsibility is to correct the actions of my family member!.. duh...
Why do YOU always 'deflect away' when someone clearly exposes your hypocrisy? Can you not address it?
Why are you deflecting away from the topic? Can you not address it?
Russia is not “intervening in a civil war” and we can tell because they are conducting a land grab, wanting to annex about half of the country.
We absolutely have a strategic interest in making sure countries don’t start throwing around nuclear weapons.
I'm not deflecting from the topic. You are supporting a "do as I say, not as I do" mentality to not only criticize Russia, but support a proxy war against them. I'm just point out that if a neutral observer looked at the actions of America and the actions of Russia, they are very similar (although America's military actions have been on a much larger scale). Those who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.
Of course Russia is intervening in a civil war. Victoria Nuland led the Obama regime's Color Revolution in Ukraine in 2014, toppling the duly elected government. The reason for Nuland's rath was that the then Prime Minister, Viktor Yanukovych, rejected Obama's entrees to move Ukraine into both the EU as well as pivot towards NATO participation. Yanukovych's government instead decided to not only remain neutral, but maintain Ukraine's historic ties with Russia. After the Obama regime's Color Revolution coup, a shooting civil war broke out in Ukraine. Ukrainians in the eastern region (Donetsk and Luhansk regions) demanded autonomy (or independence) from Nuland's puppet regime.
Because of the actual shooting civil war, there was eventual negotiations to end the fighting. These were called the Minsk Agreements (Minsk I and Minsk II). Under the agreements, amongst the terms was that a ceasefire was to be enacted, constitutional reform was to be implemented in Ukraine with specific mention of Donetsk and Luhansk autonomy, and elections held in that region. Sadly, the military strikes from both sides never ended.
What, specifically, is our national security interest in Ukraine. While a nuclear attack is clearly something that anyone with common sense wants to avoid, why is it America's problem (beyond our obligations to go to the UN as per the Budapest Memo) if Zelinsky's forces get nuked? After all, we don't have a defensive treaty with Ukraine (and I've previously specified how Ukraine isn't in our national security interest). In your opinion, is the US obligated to intervene if any country (not just Russia) uses nuclear weapons? What happens if nuclear weapons are used elsewhere in the world, such as a potential fight between Pakistan and India (both nuclear armed nations)?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?