> As I know Euromaidan (protests in Ukraine's capital in 2013) has started because pro-Russian Ukranian president decided to cancel plans about integrating with

> As I know Euromaidan (protests in Ukraine's capital in 2013) has started because pro-Russian Ukranian president decided to cancel plans about integrating with EU, not because of some US involvement. It was a bit more complicated and chaotic than that, but you can't just brush aside US involvement as "inconsequential" like that because Euromaidan saw literal US Senators (McCain), and many other foreign nationals, interfere in the elections. In times where every random Russian doing something remotely shady in the US is instantly connected to the Russian government as some kind of "professional agitator" this whole reasoning seems quite a bit hypocrite. > It is like US foreign policy - they always have a good excuse to bomb some country and pretend to be the good guy saving people from a dictator. It indeed is, that's why many people think the US is in no position to be hysterical about "election interference". The cold war might have officially been over, but spheres of influence, and the mostly covert fight over them, still exist and persists to this day. In that context, it's a bit like the US playing the game all the time and mostly winning, but as soon as Russia manages to win a round, the US starts complaining how evil Russia is for playing the game in the first place.