5 ms·

>we just backed a coup to overthrow Ukraine's pro-Russian government in 2014 You have been misinformed. The sovereign institution in Ukraine is the Verkhovna

by simonh 4y ago

>we just backed a coup to overthrow Ukraine's pro-Russian government in 2014 You have been misinformed. The sovereign institution in Ukraine is the Verkhovna Rada, the parliament, which overwhelmingly approved an association agreement with the European Union. Yanukovych refused to sign it, and after extensive popular protests in favour of the association agreement, on 22 February 2010 the parliament voted overwhelmingly to remove Yanukovych from office. Crucially he then issued an official statement of resignation. The constitutional situation is messy, for sure, but the guy resigned. He didn't have to do that, but he did. The fact he went crying to mommy in Moscow and then tried to un-resign himself is rather sad, but doesn't change the facts. >The reality is, the military industrial complex, which is in complete control of foreign policy, has been pushing for this for years So the military industrial complex in the USA have been pushing for Vladimir Putin to invade Ukraine. I'm not sure I understand how that works. Could you explain?

yucky 4y ago
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26079957 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26079957
- ceejayoz 4y ago
  The US had a preferred candidate and used their influence? Absolutely shocking, ground-shattering news. I sure hope no one else does that sort of thing in Ukraine.
  - user3939382 4y ago
    It goes beyond "preference" we have State Dept officials on tape having a conversation where they're hand picking the Ukrainian cabinet. Again, imagine what the US would do if we had a tape of Chinese officials picking out the top officials of Mexico. There is no way to paint the US as innocent here.
    - ceejayoz 4y ago
      They're expressing a preference for who winds up in the Cabinet, yes. There's no indication in that transcript they have anything other than diplomatic pressure and persuasion to make that preference a reality. Note phrashing like "I think your argument to him, which you'll need to make". The Russians will have had their corresponding preferences and influence campaigns, just as they did in US elections. (They may have even expressed them via dioxin, in Yushchenko's case.)
    - simonh 4y ago
      There was no coercion, no bribery, no extortion, they were giving advice to friendly politicians and offering support. What do you think diplomats do?
      - yucky 4y ago
        > What do you think diplomats do? Well, large parts of our diplomatic corps tend to foment and finance coup's around the world. We're pretty smart about it though, first we bring in the NGO's like The National Endowment for Democracy (and many others) which act as an outsourced part of our CIA, then we apply pressure from within. Our playbook is pretty well known by now. Or wait, how many coups do you think the US has actually been involved in since WWII? Then again, the fact that you claim the US uses no coercion means you're probably trolling and I fell for it, so well played.
        simonh 4y ago
        Of course the US uses coercion. There have been numerous appalling cases that are utterly deplorable, mostly during the Cold War, but we’re talking about Ukraine. They didn’t use any in Ukraine, they didn’t need to. As the overwhelming vote in the Ukrainian parliament in favour of the EU accords, and numerous elections and polls in Ukraine since demonstrated clearly.
        yucky 4y ago
        So which one is this an example of - not coercion or not bribery? Or not both: https://www.wsj.com/video/opinion-joe-biden-forced-ukraine-to-fire-prosecutor-for-aid-money/C1C51BB8-3988-4070-869F-CAD3CA0E81D8.html https://www.wsj.com/video/opinion-joe-biden-forced-ukraine-t...
- SideburnsOfDoom 4y ago
  https://www.thebulwark.com/what-really-happened-in-ukraine-in-2014-and-since-then/ https://www.thebulwark.com/what-really-happened-in-ukraine-i...
user3939382 4y ago
> You have been misinformed > popular protests in favour of the association agreement, on 22 February 2010 the parliament voted overwhelmingly to remove Yanukovych These "popular protests" were violent. The vote was at gunpoint, that's what makes it a coup. > the military industrial complex in the USA have been pushing for Vladimir Putin to invade Ukraine. I'm not sure I understand how that works. Could you explain? Sure. They lobby the legislative and executive branch to aggressively expand NATO, to send NATO trainers into a military on Russia's border, they lobby to have the US sabotage the Minsk accords, so that anti-Russian forces in Ukraine spend 8 years killing thousands of ethnic Russians in eastern Ukraine. It's like everyone taking the State Dept/arms industry bait on this conflict hasn't heard of the Monroe Doctrine. If another country did in Mexico 1/5th of what we've been doing in Ukraine for the past 15 years we would have turned Mexico into ashes.
- simonh 4y ago
  As I’ve already pointed out all the countries that joined NATO did so with overwhelming popular support. The vote in the Ukrainian parliament was entirely free. Bear in mind until then Yanukovych was party to the negotiations with the EU. His decision to refuse to ratify it came as a total shock, hence the protests in support of the parliament. The idea the parliament voted for the EU accord at gun point is absurd to the point of fantastical. Whose guns? The president was in charge of the army and police and he was pro Moscow. If there were any guns pointed, and there were, it was to try to prevent the pro western tide.

by simonh 4y ago

yucky 4y ago

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26079957 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26079957

ceejayoz 4y ago
The US had a preferred candidate and used their influence? Absolutely shocking, ground-shattering news. I sure hope no one else does that sort of thing in Ukraine.
- user3939382 4y ago
  It goes beyond "preference" we have State Dept officials on tape having a conversation where they're hand picking the Ukrainian cabinet. Again, imagine what the US would do if we had a tape of Chinese officials picking out the top officials of Mexico. There is no way to paint the US as innocent here.
  - ceejayoz 4y ago
    They're expressing a preference for who winds up in the Cabinet, yes. There's no indication in that transcript they have anything other than diplomatic pressure and persuasion to make that preference a reality. Note phrashing like "I think your argument to him, which you'll need to make". The Russians will have had their corresponding preferences and influence campaigns, just as they did in US elections. (They may have even expressed them via dioxin, in Yushchenko's case.)
  - simonh 4y ago
    There was no coercion, no bribery, no extortion, they were giving advice to friendly politicians and offering support. What do you think diplomats do?
    - yucky 4y ago
      > What do you think diplomats do? Well, large parts of our diplomatic corps tend to foment and finance coup's around the world. We're pretty smart about it though, first we bring in the NGO's like The National Endowment for Democracy (and many others) which act as an outsourced part of our CIA, then we apply pressure from within. Our playbook is pretty well known by now. Or wait, how many coups do you think the US has actually been involved in since WWII? Then again, the fact that you claim the US uses no coercion means you're probably trolling and I fell for it, so well played.
      - simonh 4y ago
        Of course the US uses coercion. There have been numerous appalling cases that are utterly deplorable, mostly during the Cold War, but we’re talking about Ukraine. They didn’t use any in Ukraine, they didn’t need to. As the overwhelming vote in the Ukrainian parliament in favour of the EU accords, and numerous elections and polls in Ukraine since demonstrated clearly.
        yucky 4y ago
        So which one is this an example of - not coercion or not bribery? Or not both: https://www.wsj.com/video/opinion-joe-biden-forced-ukraine-to-fire-prosecutor-for-aid-money/C1C51BB8-3988-4070-869F-CAD3CA0E81D8.html https://www.wsj.com/video/opinion-joe-biden-forced-ukraine-t...
SideburnsOfDoom 4y ago
https://www.thebulwark.com/what-really-happened-in-ukraine-in-2014-and-since-then/ https://www.thebulwark.com/what-really-happened-in-ukraine-i...

user3939382 4y ago

> You have been misinformed > popular protests in favour of the association agreement, on 22 February 2010 the parliament voted overwhelmingly to remove Yanukovych These "popular protests" were violent. The vote was at gunpoint, that's what makes it a coup. > the military industrial complex in the USA have been pushing for Vladimir Putin to invade Ukraine. I'm not sure I understand how that works. Could you explain? Sure. They lobby the legislative and executive branch to aggressively expand NATO, to send NATO trainers into a military on Russia's border, they lobby to have the US sabotage the Minsk accords, so that anti-Russian forces in Ukraine spend 8 years killing thousands of ethnic Russians in eastern Ukraine. It's like everyone taking the State Dept/arms industry bait on this conflict hasn't heard of the Monroe Doctrine. If another country did in Mexico 1/5th of what we've been doing in Ukraine for the past 15 years we would have turned Mexico into ashes.

simonh 4y ago
As I’ve already pointed out all the countries that joined NATO did so with overwhelming popular support. The vote in the Ukrainian parliament was entirely free. Bear in mind until then Yanukovych was party to the negotiations with the EU. His decision to refuse to ratify it came as a total shock, hence the protests in support of the parliament. The idea the parliament voted for the EU accord at gun point is absurd to the point of fantastical. Whose guns? The president was in charge of the army and police and he was pro Moscow. If there were any guns pointed, and there were, it was to try to prevent the pro western tide.