5 ms·

I'm not going to comment on the other points because either we agree or I can see how different perspective can see things in those ways, but with Ukraine, U.S.

by meric 11y ago

I'm not going to comment on the other points because either we agree or I can see how different perspective can see things in those ways, but with Ukraine, U.S. had spent 5 Billion dollars on civil activism, sponsored by various American oil companies, prior to the "coup" which ousted the elected, legitimate Russian-friendly Ukraine government. Without such surreptitious interference from the U.S., Ukraine would be in a more prosperous and stable situation today. Russia would not be able to say "You ousted a legitimate government that was protective towards the interests of Russians in Ukraine, that is why we're taking over Crimea because that is what the people want.". Here is the video direct from Victoria Nuland's mouth, speaking at a Chevron and ExxonMobil sponsored conference[1]. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2y0y-JUsPTU#t=448 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2y0y-JUsPTU#t=448 Ukraine, along with Libya and Iraq are prime examples to demonstrate when the Americans tell you your country should be liberated so it becomes democratic, you should probably plan to move out.

guard-of-terra 11y ago
"Russian-friendly Ukraine government" Calling Yanukovich Russian-friendly is extremely naive. Russian officials saw him is Russian-friendly. He thought he is Russian-friendly. He wasn't Russian-friendly if you consider what he did and what friends do.
matthewbauer 11y ago
Wasn't Yanukovych voted out? I don't think US was involved militarily or otherwise. EU powers could have been supporting pro-EU protests, however. Libya certainly had serious civil unrest before receiving US support. But it certainly has been going in the wrong direction since the fall of the Gaddafi government.
- desdiv 11y ago
  The Ukrainian constitution requires a three-fourth majority vote to remove the president from office. The actual 2014 parliamentary vote only had 73% for his removal[0]. If you polled people in the west, at least 80% of them wouldn't be able to tell you that Yanukovych was removed illegally. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viktor_Yanukovych#constitutionality_of_the_removal_from_office https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viktor_Yanukovych#constitution...
Paradigma11 11y ago
The 5 Billion were foreign aid from 1992 onward. It includes money to the peace corps, HIV prevention, help with chernobyl and tuberculosis... during many different goverments. I doubt the US goverment is capable enough to finance and plan a coup of an not yet known goverment 20+ years in the future.
- meric 11y ago
  The U.S. propaganda machinery is very strong. Even as Joe Biden's son is now involved in Ukraine's gas companies[1] right after the coup, and along the 5 billion Victoria Nuland said U.S. spent on "democratic institutions", in front of Chevron and ExxonMobil flags, with half of Ukraine in tatters and gas rationings during bitter cold winters, people in the U.S. still think their government is a force for good in the country. Why help Ukraine with billions and not other countries that do not have gas/oil? [1] http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-echochambers-27403003 http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-echochambers-27403003
  - girvo 11y ago
    Aid and help are given to other countries that aren't oil-rich, though?
  - Paradigma11 11y ago
    What propaganda are you speaking of? Would you forbid private companies to hire whoever they like? Do you have a list of blacklisted persons like Joe Bidens son so that companies could easily check? Again the 5 billion was spent over a period of more than 20 years how is this relevant here? For a list of the many, many countries, most of them without oil, that US aid spends more money on: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_foreign_aid#Recipients https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_foreign_aid#Reci...
    - meric 11y ago
      Between 2009 and 2013, including when Mrs. Clinton was secretary of state, the Clinton Foundation received at least $8.6 million from the Victor Pinchuk Foundation, according to that foundation, which is based in Kiev, Ukraine. It was created by Mr. Pinchuk, whose fortune stems from a pipe-making company. He served two terms as an elected member of the Ukrainian Parliament and is a proponent of closer ties between Ukraine and the European Union.[1] Between donations from Ukraine oligarchs to Clinton foundation, Joe Biden's son involved in Ukraine gas corporations, the hundreds of millions spend by U.S. every year in Ukraine to "build democratic institutions", stories from recruited shooters planted in Euromaidan[2], here you are, saying U.S. officials are the good guys for the Ukrainian people. If that's not effective propaganda, I don't know what is. And if you think the above situation is fine and dandy, I think there's nothing else we can say to increase our agreement. I'm not the kind of person who would interfere with my neighbours family, because their children didn't get lunch money for school, so that I can buy their house at a foreclosure auction later in the year when they divorce, but if you're fine with the U.S. government doing that kind of behaviour, then I should not interfere with that, either. [1]http://www.wsj.com/articles/clinton-charity-tapped-foreign-friends-1426818602 http://www.wsj.com/articles/clinton-charity-tapped-foreign-f... [2]http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-31359021 http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-31359021
hackuser 11y ago
This is silly. The U.S. military did not invade Ukraine, the Russians did. The Russia government made that choice; it cannot blame it on someone else. > Russia would not be able to say ... On a much more minor point, the Russian government will find a way to justify whatever it wants to do. They are not waiting for the U.S. to somehow give them the right to do it; they don't care about or need any truth or facts. For example, like the good propagandists they are, they fabricated that entire fictional structure on a tiny kernel of truth and now even people on HN are repeating it. That is information power.

by meric 11y ago

guard-of-terra 11y ago

"Russian-friendly Ukraine government" Calling Yanukovich Russian-friendly is extremely naive. Russian officials saw him is Russian-friendly. He thought he is Russian-friendly. He wasn't Russian-friendly if you consider what he did and what friends do.

matthewbauer 11y ago

Wasn't Yanukovych voted out? I don't think US was involved militarily or otherwise. EU powers could have been supporting pro-EU protests, however. Libya certainly had serious civil unrest before receiving US support. But it certainly has been going in the wrong direction since the fall of the Gaddafi government.

desdiv 11y ago
The Ukrainian constitution requires a three-fourth majority vote to remove the president from office. The actual 2014 parliamentary vote only had 73% for his removal[0]. If you polled people in the west, at least 80% of them wouldn't be able to tell you that Yanukovych was removed illegally. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viktor_Yanukovych#constitutionality_of_the_removal_from_office https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viktor_Yanukovych#constitution...

Paradigma11 11y ago

The 5 Billion were foreign aid from 1992 onward. It includes money to the peace corps, HIV prevention, help with chernobyl and tuberculosis... during many different goverments. I doubt the US goverment is capable enough to finance and plan a coup of an not yet known goverment 20+ years in the future.

meric 11y ago
The U.S. propaganda machinery is very strong. Even as Joe Biden's son is now involved in Ukraine's gas companies[1] right after the coup, and along the 5 billion Victoria Nuland said U.S. spent on "democratic institutions", in front of Chevron and ExxonMobil flags, with half of Ukraine in tatters and gas rationings during bitter cold winters, people in the U.S. still think their government is a force for good in the country. Why help Ukraine with billions and not other countries that do not have gas/oil? [1] http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-echochambers-27403003 http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-echochambers-27403003
- girvo 11y ago
  Aid and help are given to other countries that aren't oil-rich, though?
- Paradigma11 11y ago
  What propaganda are you speaking of? Would you forbid private companies to hire whoever they like? Do you have a list of blacklisted persons like Joe Bidens son so that companies could easily check? Again the 5 billion was spent over a period of more than 20 years how is this relevant here? For a list of the many, many countries, most of them without oil, that US aid spends more money on: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_foreign_aid#Recipients https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_foreign_aid#Reci...
  - meric 11y ago
    Between 2009 and 2013, including when Mrs. Clinton was secretary of state, the Clinton Foundation received at least $8.6 million from the Victor Pinchuk Foundation, according to that foundation, which is based in Kiev, Ukraine. It was created by Mr. Pinchuk, whose fortune stems from a pipe-making company. He served two terms as an elected member of the Ukrainian Parliament and is a proponent of closer ties between Ukraine and the European Union.[1] Between donations from Ukraine oligarchs to Clinton foundation, Joe Biden's son involved in Ukraine gas corporations, the hundreds of millions spend by U.S. every year in Ukraine to "build democratic institutions", stories from recruited shooters planted in Euromaidan[2], here you are, saying U.S. officials are the good guys for the Ukrainian people. If that's not effective propaganda, I don't know what is. And if you think the above situation is fine and dandy, I think there's nothing else we can say to increase our agreement. I'm not the kind of person who would interfere with my neighbours family, because their children didn't get lunch money for school, so that I can buy their house at a foreclosure auction later in the year when they divorce, but if you're fine with the U.S. government doing that kind of behaviour, then I should not interfere with that, either. [1]http://www.wsj.com/articles/clinton-charity-tapped-foreign-friends-1426818602 http://www.wsj.com/articles/clinton-charity-tapped-foreign-f... [2]http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-31359021 http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-31359021

hackuser 11y ago

This is silly. The U.S. military did not invade Ukraine, the Russians did. The Russia government made that choice; it cannot blame it on someone else. > Russia would not be able to say ... On a much more minor point, the Russian government will find a way to justify whatever it wants to do. They are not waiting for the U.S. to somehow give them the right to do it; they don't care about or need any truth or facts. For example, like the good propagandists they are, they fabricated that entire fictional structure on a tiny kernel of truth and now even people on HN are repeating it. That is information power.