3 ms·

The Russians could make the same argument of the US meddling in Ukraine, before Crimea happened. Nato denies it, but from their perspective it can make sense. P

The Russians could make the same argument of the US meddling in Ukraine, before Crimea happened. Nato denies it, but from their perspective it can make sense. Perhaps they only perceived it that way when the US got involved in the Maidan protests. That said, wrong perception is sometimes an excuse.

throwaway894345 5y ago
What kind of meddling did the US do that is on the same level as a full-scale invasion? Moreover, while it’s flat-out ridiculous to argue that the US and Russia are in the same ballpark in terms of harm to Europe (or anyone else), we don’t need to fixate on this comparison as though there is a dichotomy.
- raxxorrax 5y ago
  You don't have to compare the steps they took, you have to think about what the US would do if Russia gets involved in elections in Mexico or Canada.
  - throwaway894345 5y ago
    Why? The US doesn't get involved in European elections (so your hypothetical doesn't even make sense), but that's besides the point. What does the US have to do with whether or not Europe gets its energy from Russia? Europe doesn't have to choose to put its energy supply in the hands of Russia or US, there are other suppliers and diversification is a really good alternative.
    - LargoLasskhyfv 5y ago
      They don't need to, because they have the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantik-Br%C3%BCcke https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantik-Br%C3%BCcke and other similary undemocratic institutions influencing the shit out of anything via side-channel attacks.
      - throwaway894345 5y ago
        I skimmed your link, but I didn't see anything damning or undemocratic. Where are the Lukashenko-esque dictators that the US installed in Europe? Which dissidents have the US assassinated on EU soil?
        LargoLasskhyfv 5y ago
        Are you dumb, or what? I've written they don't need to because they have other means, which at the end of the day amounts to 'the same shit, but different' for the influenced vasall states.
        throwaway894345 5y ago
        You wrote: > They don't need to, because they have the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantik-Br%C3%BCcke https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantik-Br%C3%BCcke and other similary undemocratic institutions influencing the shit out of anything via side-channel attacks. Which clearly says that the US has "undemocratic institutions" influencing Europe, but the link doesn't support the idea that the A-B is antidemocratic (there's nothing inherently "antidemocratic" about fostering international partnership and cooperation).
        LargoLasskhyfv 5y ago
        Look...I may be naive, but if you have institutions which push policies, empower candidates beyond the scenes, via whichever circles, then this is undemocratic, or otherwise called 'framing', 'setting the goal posts' to 'game' the rules into your favour. Or cheating, or fraud, or whatever. Which means candidates prepared that way, and then presented as the only option(s) to give the deceived masses the illusion of choice is simply a lie. edit: Of course this is not exclusive to the US, let's just say they lead the market of political BS, k?
        throwaway894345 5y ago
        > if you have institutions which push policies, empower candidates beyond the scenes There's nothing in your article that suggested that the organization in question was some sort of propaganda arm of the US government, and there's nothing undemocratic about advocating for one's interests. You might not agree with the advocacy, but "democracy" doesn't demand agreement. > Of course this is not exclusive to the US, let's just say they lead the market of political BS, k? I don't buy this at all. There are nations with actual propaganda departments, state-run censorship, bot nets, etc who actually directly attempt to influence elections. Like all other countries, the US does advocate for its own interests abroad--this is called "diplomacy" and it's generally the least-bad kind of advocacy. However, unlike other countries, the US does possess a lot of clout (the world depends on America in large part for security and prosperity, however loath we are to admit that America or Americans serve a useful purpose).
  - scythe 5y ago
    Why go as far as Mexico? Russia has influenced, and continues to influence, elections in the United States.
sergeykish 5y ago
Show me US invasion forces in Ukraine. Democracy support is not meddling. RF has done a lot of harm to Ukraine even before 2014. Euromaidan was a response against RF puppet Yanukovych. RF has used gas prices to influence election results. Leonid Kuchma who has built oligarchy regime elected with the help of Kremlin. His opponent, Viacheslav Chornovil, was killed. It is mafia. And in RF mafia has got its own state.

throwaway894345 5y ago

What kind of meddling did the US do that is on the same level as a full-scale invasion? Moreover, while it’s flat-out ridiculous to argue that the US and Russia are in the same ballpark in terms of harm to Europe (or anyone else), we don’t need to fixate on this comparison as though there is a dichotomy.

raxxorrax 5y ago
You don't have to compare the steps they took, you have to think about what the US would do if Russia gets involved in elections in Mexico or Canada.
- throwaway894345 5y ago
  Why? The US doesn't get involved in European elections (so your hypothetical doesn't even make sense), but that's besides the point. What does the US have to do with whether or not Europe gets its energy from Russia? Europe doesn't have to choose to put its energy supply in the hands of Russia or US, there are other suppliers and diversification is a really good alternative.
  - LargoLasskhyfv 5y ago
    They don't need to, because they have the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantik-Br%C3%BCcke https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantik-Br%C3%BCcke and other similary undemocratic institutions influencing the shit out of anything via side-channel attacks.
    - throwaway894345 5y ago
      I skimmed your link, but I didn't see anything damning or undemocratic. Where are the Lukashenko-esque dictators that the US installed in Europe? Which dissidents have the US assassinated on EU soil?
      - LargoLasskhyfv 5y ago
        Are you dumb, or what? I've written they don't need to because they have other means, which at the end of the day amounts to 'the same shit, but different' for the influenced vasall states.
        throwaway894345 5y ago
        You wrote: > They don't need to, because they have the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantik-Br%C3%BCcke https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantik-Br%C3%BCcke and other similary undemocratic institutions influencing the shit out of anything via side-channel attacks. Which clearly says that the US has "undemocratic institutions" influencing Europe, but the link doesn't support the idea that the A-B is antidemocratic (there's nothing inherently "antidemocratic" about fostering international partnership and cooperation).
        LargoLasskhyfv 5y ago
        Look...I may be naive, but if you have institutions which push policies, empower candidates beyond the scenes, via whichever circles, then this is undemocratic, or otherwise called 'framing', 'setting the goal posts' to 'game' the rules into your favour. Or cheating, or fraud, or whatever. Which means candidates prepared that way, and then presented as the only option(s) to give the deceived masses the illusion of choice is simply a lie. edit: Of course this is not exclusive to the US, let's just say they lead the market of political BS, k?
        throwaway894345 5y ago
        > if you have institutions which push policies, empower candidates beyond the scenes There's nothing in your article that suggested that the organization in question was some sort of propaganda arm of the US government, and there's nothing undemocratic about advocating for one's interests. You might not agree with the advocacy, but "democracy" doesn't demand agreement. > Of course this is not exclusive to the US, let's just say they lead the market of political BS, k? I don't buy this at all. There are nations with actual propaganda departments, state-run censorship, bot nets, etc who actually directly attempt to influence elections. Like all other countries, the US does advocate for its own interests abroad--this is called "diplomacy" and it's generally the least-bad kind of advocacy. However, unlike other countries, the US does possess a lot of clout (the world depends on America in large part for security and prosperity, however loath we are to admit that America or Americans serve a useful purpose).
- scythe 5y ago
  Why go as far as Mexico? Russia has influenced, and continues to influence, elections in the United States.

sergeykish 5y ago

Show me US invasion forces in Ukraine. Democracy support is not meddling. RF has done a lot of harm to Ukraine even before 2014. Euromaidan was a response against RF puppet Yanukovych. RF has used gas prices to influence election results. Leonid Kuchma who has built oligarchy regime elected with the help of Kremlin. His opponent, Viacheslav Chornovil, was killed. It is mafia. And in RF mafia has got its own state.