Is Russia about to invade Ukraine? (1 Viewer)

[superchuck500]

Russia continues to mass assets within range of Ukraine - though the official explanations are that they are for various exercises. United States intelligence has noted that Russian operatives in Ukraine could launch 'false flag' operations as a predicate to invasion. The West has pressed for negotiations and on Friday in Geneva, the US Sec. State Blinken will meet with the Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov.

Certainly the Russian movements evidence some plan - but what is it? Some analysts believe that Putin's grand scheme involves securing Western commitments that NATO would never expand beyond its current composition. Whether that means action in Ukraine or merely the movement of pieces on the chess board remains to be seen.

VIENNA — No one expected much progress from this past week’s diplomatic marathon to defuse the security crisis Russia has ignited in Eastern Europe by surrounding Ukraine on three sides with 100,000 troops and then, by the White House’s accounting, sending in saboteurs to create a pretext for invasion.

But as the Biden administration and NATO conduct tabletop simulations about how the next few months could unfold, they are increasingly wary of another set of options for President Vladimir V. Putin, steps that are more far-reaching than simply rolling his troops and armor over Ukraine’s border.

Mr. Putin wants to extend Russia’s sphere of influence to Eastern Europe and secure written commitments that NATO will never again enlarge. If he is frustrated in reaching that goal, some of his aides suggested on the sidelines of the negotiations last week, then he would pursue Russia’s security interests with results that would be felt acutely in Europe and the United States.

There were hints, never quite spelled out, that nuclear weapons could be shifted to places — perhaps not far from the United States coastline — that would reduce warning times after a launch to as little as five minutes, potentially igniting a confrontation with echoes of the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis.

Russia Issues Subtle Threats More Far-Reaching Than a Ukraine Invasion

If the West fails to meet its security demands, Moscow could take measures like placing nuclear missiles close to the U.S. coastline, Russian officials have hinted.

www.nytimes.com

Blinken Will Meet With Russia as U.S. Pushes for More Diplomacy

Secretary of State Antony J. Blinken will meet with Foreign Minister Sergey V. Lavrov of Russia in Geneva on Friday as the United States warns that Russia could soon attack Ukraine.

www.nytimes.com

How to think about war in Ukraine

Start with the Ukrainians

snyder.substack.com

 

[LA - L.A.]

We've been over this multiple times. I'm not going to respond to people here who constantly insult me.

You just did.

Did you think calling me a racist, Nazi supporter, etc was going to get me to respond to you?

Maybe not calling you those things gets a response from you, but calling your posts stupid got you to respond.

 

[SaintForLife]

You just did.


Maybe not calling you those things gets a response from you, but calling your posts stupid got you to respond.

Do you think calling me a taliban/christian white nationalists will make me want to respond to your drivel?

 

[LA - L.A.]

Do you think calling me a taliban/christian white nationalists will make me want to respond to your drivel?

I've never called you a taliban/christian white nationalist. Please quote what I said that you interpreted as me calling you a taliban/christian white nationalist, so I can point out to you how I was not thinking or talking about you.

If you took something I said as me talking about you when I wasn't talking about you, then you made that connection, not me.

If you don't do the things I was talking about, then there's no good reason for you to think I was talking about you.

Christian taliban/christian white nationalist are not the only people that do what I was talking about, so even if you recognize you do some of the things I talked about, that still doesn't mean you are a christian taliban/christian white nationalist.

 

[SaintForLife]

I've never called you a taliban/christian white nationalist. Please quote what I said that you interpreted as me calling you a taliban/christian white nationalist, so I can point out to you how I was not thinking or talking about you.

If you took something I said as me talking about you when I wasn't talking about you, then you made that connection, not me.

If you don't do the things I was talking about, then there's no good reason for you to think I was talking about you.

All Things LGBTQ+

Didn't really see a place for this so I thought I would start a thread about all things LGBTQ since this is a pretty hot topic in our culture right nowhttps://www.cnbc.com/2021/06/17/supreme-court-sides-with-catholic-adoption-agency-that-refuses-to-work-with-lgbt-couples.htmlThe Supreme...

madaboutpolitics.com

 

[LA - L.A.]

All Things LGBTQ+

Didn't really see a place for this so I thought I would start a thread about all things LGBTQ since this is a pretty hot topic in our culture right nowhttps://www.cnbc.com/2021/06/17/supreme-court-sides-with-catholic-adoption-agency-that-refuses-to-work-with-lgbt-couples.htmlThe Supreme...

madaboutpolitics.com

In that post, I had not replied to a post you made and I did not mention you, because I was not thinking about you when I wrote that post.

Why do you think that I was talking about you? Do you do the things I was talking about in that post? If you don't, then there's no logical reason for you to think I was talking about you, when I wasn't talking to or about you.

 

[LA - L.A.]

They not wasting my money.

See...

I'm okay with the federal government using every cent of the taxes I pay to help defeat Russia's invasion of Ukraine. I even accept them wasting some of it.

The thing about the "not with my taxes" thought process is that very few people who think it know how much they actually pay in taxes and they don't know how much of their tax dollars are used to pay for what things.

I doubt anyone on this site has paid enough in taxes to have more than maybe $100.00 of the taxes they paid being spent on Ukraine.

 

[efil4]

Do you think calling me a taliban/christian white nationalists will make me want to respond to your drivel?

Who even cares? You don't reply. You just copy and paste.

You have no personal opinion. It's all spoon fed and you run around regurgitating.

That's it. That is all you do.

Then, when called out just how dumb, moronic or stupid your post is, you get all "snowflakey" and whine.

Sad stuff from a grown man. Real sad.

 

[SaintForLife]

Who even cares? You don't reply. You just copy and paste.

You have no personal opinion. It's all spoon fed and you run around regurgitating.

That's it. That is all you do.

Then, when called out just how dumb, moronic or stupid your post is, you get all "snowflakey" and whine.

Sad stuff from a grown man. Real sad.

Says the guy who claps like a seal at death and destruction, but isn't man enough to go fight on the front lines himself.

 

[DaveXA]

The same military bureaucracy that has failed an audit 6 years in a row? I'm not sure why you would defend their corruption and wasting our money.

This is the most ignorant thing you've said in this thread. Not that I expect better from you.

And another poster was absolutely right, you don't give 2 sheets about corruption.

 

[bird]

The same military bureaucracy that has failed an audit 6 years in a row? I'm not sure why you would defend their corruption and wasting our money.

Wasting our money…interesting concept. Do all monies that go into your home state get well spent? What about private sector contractors doing government work for any level of government? What about projects done under a certain dollar amount that allows for non-competitive bidding? What of escalation clauses?

Your issue can be summed up, it appears, in this manner:

Things that benefit me or that I like are good. Things that do not benefit me or that I don’t like are bad. Stop with the anti-war, military-industrial complex, peacenik bullschlitz.

 

[J-DONK]

This is the most ignorant thing you've said in this thread. Not that I expect better from you.

And another poster was absolutely right, you don't give 2 sheets about corruption.

None of these guys showed up the SC corruption thread. We even clowned on SFL for then spam posting about Menendez.

They are so transparent.

SFL also claims to be anti-war, does he ever talk about how amazing Jimmy Carter was as president?

Does SFL ever praise Biden for pulling out of the ME?

I've missed all those post.

We have at least two social conservative, fiscal libertarians on the board who happen to sound, and act exactly like Republicans. It's amazing.

 

[UriUT]

It's a hypothetical scenario and you guys can't even answer the question lol. That's very telling.

Multiple sources that the maiden isn't a coup...brought to you by the same people that said Saddam has WMD and was connected to 9/11, Trump was a Russian agent, 51 intelligence agents say the laptop was Russian disinformation, Hammas killed Isreali babies, Iraqi soldiers removed Kuwaiti babies from their incubators and left them to die, the Ghost of Kiev, up to the current laughable BS about the Havana Syndrome.

This isn't for you, but for anyone else who cares. My post did have the answer to your ridiculous question. One needs only apply a little critical thinking to reach it. And have a little self-awareness to realize that I was directly pointing out the hypocrisy behind the question. The problem is, as a conspiracy theorists, one must think that he is the smartest in the room. Only he sees the truth and that everyone else are all sheep. When presented with facts, conspiracies are presented as a counter argument, and the facts that were presented are the real conspiracies. The trouble with that process of thinking is that no one else can be correct, and the ever deeper rabbit hole is the only truth. Therefore, it's pointless to have any proper discussion with conspiracy theorists as more and more holes are dug.

Take this precious post for example.

The reality is that, after two decades of eastward Nato expansion, this crisis was triggered by the west's attempt to pull Ukraine decisively into its orbit and defence structure, via an explicitly anti-Moscow EU association agreement. Its rejection led to the Maidan protests and the installation of an anti-Russian administration – rejected by half the country – that went on to sign the EU and International Monetary Fund agreements regardless.



Someone posted this article in the comment of the above post on X. It's interesting to read now and how the US war propaganda follows the same scrip:

The way wars are reported in the western media follows a depressingly predictable pattern: stage one, the crisis; stage two, the demonisation of the enemy's leader; stage three, the demonisation of the enemy as individuals; and stage four, atrocities. At the moment we are at stages two and three: efforts to show that not only Osama bin Laden and the Taliban are fanatical and cruel but that most Afghans - even many Muslims - are as well. We are already through stage one, the reporting of a crisis which negotiations appear unable to resolve. Politicians, while calling for diplomacy, warn of military retaliation. The media reports this as "We're on the brink of war", or "War is inevitable".

News coverage concentrates on the build up of military force, and prominent columnists and newspaper editorials urge war. But there are usually sizable minorities of citizens concerned that all avenues for peace have not been fully explored and although the mainstream media ignores or plays down their protests, these have to be dampened down unless they gain strength.

We now enter stage two of the pattern - the demonisation of the enemy's leader. Comparing the leader with Hitler is a good start because of the instant images that Hitler's name provokes. So when George Bush Sr likened Iraq's takeover of Kuwait with the Nazi blitzkrieg in Europe in the 1930s, the media quickly took up the theme. Saddam Hussein was painted as a second Hitler, hated by his own people and despised in the Arab world. Equally, in the Kosovo conflict, the Serbs were portrayed as Nazi thugs intent on genocide and words like "Auschwitz-style furnaces" and "Holocaust" were used.

The crudest approach is to suggest that the leader is insane. Saddam Hussein was "a deranged psychopath", Milosevic was mad, and the Spectator recently headlined an article on Osama bin Laden: "Inside the mind of the maniac". Those who publicly question any of this can expect an even stronger burst of abuse. In the Gulf war they were labelled "friends of terrorists, ranters, nutty, hypocrites, animals, barbarians, mad, traitors, unhinged, appeasers and apologists". The Mirror called peace demonstrators "misguided, twisted individuals always eager to comfort and support any country but their own. They are a danger to all us - the enemy within." Columnist Christopher Hitchens, in last week's Spectator article, Damn the doves, says that intellectuals who seek to understand the new enemy are no friends of peace, democracy or human life.

The third stage in the pattern is the demonisation not only of the leader but of his people. The simplest way of doing this is the atrocity story. The problem is that although many atrocity stories are true - after all, war itself is an atrocity - many are not.

Take the Kuwaiti babies story. Its origins go back to the first world war when British propaganda accused the Germans of tossing Belgian babies into the air and catching them on their bayonets. Dusted off and updated for the Gulf war, this version had Iraqi soldiers bursting into a modern Kuwaiti hospital, finding the premature babies ward and then tossing the babies out of incubators so that the incubators could be sent back to Iraq.

The story, improbable from the start, was first reported by the Daily Telegraph in London on September 5 1990. But the story lacked the human element; it was an unverified report, there were no pictures for television and no interviews with mothers grieving over dead babies.

That was soon rectified. An organisation calling itself Citizens for a Free Kuwait (financed by the Kuwaiti government in exile) had signed a $10m contract with the giant American public relations company, Hill & Knowlton, to campaign for American military intervention to oust Iraq from Kuwait.

The Human Rights Caucus of the US Congress was meeting in October and Hill & Knowlton arranged for a 15-year-old Kuwaiti girl to tell the babies' story before the congressmen. She did it brilliantly, choking with tears at the right moment, her voice breaking as she struggled to continue. The congressional committee knew her only as "Nayirah" and the television segment of her testimony showed anger and resolution on the faces of the congressmen listening to her. President Bush referred to the story six times in the next five weeks as an example of the evil of Saddam's regime.

In the Senate debate whether to approve military action to force Saddam out of Kuwait, seven senators specifically mentioned the incubator babies atrocity and the final margin in favour of war was just five votes. John R Macarthur's study of propaganda in the war says that the babies atrocity was a definitive moment in the campaign to prepare the American public for the need to go to war.

It was not until nearly two years later that the truth emerged. The story was a fabrication and a myth, and Nayirah, the teenage Kuwaiti girl, coached and rehearsed by Hill & Knowlton for her appearance before the Congressional Committee, was in fact the daughter of the Kuwaiti ambassador to the United States. By the time Macarthur revealed this, the war was won and over and it did not matter any more.

Analysis: The disinformation campaign

The way wars are reported in the western media follows a depressingly predictable pattern: stage one, the crisis; stage two, the demonisation of the enemy's leader; stage three, the demonisation of the enemy as individuals; and stage four, atrocities.

www.theguardian.com

It has neither facts nor evidence. It's an accusation from Russia's perspective of grievances and theirs alone. One that if JDonk's and my posts on NATO were considered, the whole argument from this post should be laughed to oblivion. It's not NATO's belligerence, but rather Putin's Russia that is the real aggressor no matter how evil the conspiracy theorists tries to paint the US.

The lack of self-awareness is present here in this post:

Trump criticized NATO and the countries who weren't paying their fair share while he was President and Putin didn't attack a NATO country.

Putin didn't attack a NATO country! That is why Ukraine sought NATO's umbrella! As did Georgia. And with great prescience, so did the Baltic states, Poland, Romania, and all those eastern European states, which, btw, none were attacked by Russia. But to Putin's credit, and SFL's cheerleading, Putin started unprovoked wars in both Georgia and Ukraine but somehow for the uncritical thinkers, it's NATO's <cough> belligerence <cough> that's at fault? But...get this...the US is the great evil when it started an unprovoked war in Iraq, yet the same cannot be said of Russia? HUH????

To the accusation that the evil US started the coup in Ukraine, I'm willing to bet, SFL doesn't have a clue about the events leading up to the Maidan, and relies on people like Greenwald to tell him what to think.

For anyone interested, Netflix has an on the ground eyes view of the whole Maidan.

Winter on Fire: Ukraine's Fight for Freedom (2015) ⭐ 8.3 | Documentary, History, War

1h 42m | Not Rated

www.imdb.com

It's great, and the bravery and sacrifice of these Ukrainians are gut wrenching.

So a simple timeline leading up to the Maidan for those who cares. In the 2000s, the Orange Revolution ushered in a sense of optimism in Ukrainians. After bitterly demonstrating in the streets much like the Maidan, they reversed a truly stolen election. They forced new elections, which a more liberal minded candidate won (/s did someone say coup?). However, due to corruption, loftier unkept promises, etc, Ukraine's economy and overall situation didn't improve. Yanukovych eventually takes power, but the Ukrainian urge for change never subsided. A good portion of the population wanted closer ties to the EU and root out corruption. So after years of negotiations, a deal with the EU was struck. However, fearing losing his hegemony in Ukraine, Putin secretly approached Yanukovych with a proposal. He offered billions, and days after, Yanukovych reneges on the EU deal. This sparked a confrontation with his parliament, and sparked pro-eu student demonstrations. To ease tension, the US stepped in and offered a compromise. This is where the conspiracy theorists come in with Putin's egging. Nuland offered Yanukovych an option where the prime minister would be appointed from a list of names from the opposition. The phone call when Nuland discussed possible candidates was release (with high probability that the Russians was behind it). So with little nuance thinking, this is the hill that these conspiracy theorists fight on....that the US actively plotted a coup when none of that happened. Yanukovych two days after accepting that proposal, decided to flee. The parliament quickly voted to condemn him.

So if anyone wants to know what a real coup manufactured by a foreign entity is, read up on the African coup belt. I suspect this is the real reason why Macron has recently been more active against Putin and Russia.

edit: Circling back to that ridiculous question, trying to pin the US to Putin's Russia perspective. Yes, China is trying to subvert US hegemony in Central and South America. They have heavily poured in billions to many of those countries in those region. That is China exerting it's soft power, much as the US does. It's not a freaking coup!!!

 

[SaintForLife]

This isn't for you, but for anyone else who cares. My post did have the answer to your ridiculous question. One needs only apply a little critical thinking to reach it. And have a little self-awareness to realize that I was directly pointing out the hypocrisy behind the question. The problem is, as a conspiracy theorists, one must think that he is the smartest in the room. Only he sees the truth and that everyone else are all sheep. When presented with facts, conspiracies are presented as a counter argument, and the facts that were presented are the real conspiracies. The trouble with that process of thinking is that no one else can be correct, and the ever deeper rabbit hole is the only truth. Therefore, it's pointless to have any proper discussion with conspiracy theorists as more and more holes are dug.

The big problem is that you and many here use the corporate media for your "facts". The same corporate media that said Saddam has WMD and was connected to 9/11, Trump was a Russian agent, 51 intelligence agents say the laptop was Russian disinformation, Hammas killed Isreali babies, Iraqi soldiers removed Kuwaiti babies from their incubators and left them to die, the Ghost of Kiev, the BS about the Havana Syndrome.

Take this precious post for example.


It has neither facts nor evidence. It's an accusation from Russia's perspective of grievances and theirs alone. One that if JDonk's and my posts on NATO were considered, the whole argument from this post should be laughed to oblivion. It's not NATO's belligerence, but rather Putin's Russia that is the real aggressor no matter how evil the conspiracy theorists tries to paint the US.

I've posted multiple people confirming NATO was why Putin invaded Ukraine including the NATO Secretary General and US officials like Fiona Hill.

We also have a 2008 leaked cable from current CIA director William Burns warned that Ukraine membership in NATO was the “brightest of all redlines for the Russian elite (not just Putin).”
Link to the leaked cable:

Cable: 08MOSCOW265_a

wikileaks.org

Let me guess, you will claim that leaked US cable was really created by Putin.

The lack of self-awareness is present here in this post:


Putin didn't attack a NATO country! That is why Ukraine sought NATO's umbrella! As did Georgia. And with great prescience, so did the Baltic states, Poland, Romania, and all those eastern European states, which, btw, none were attacked by Russia. But to Putin's credit, and SFL's cheerleading, Putin started unprovoked wars in both Georgia and Ukraine but somehow for the uncritical thinkers, it's NATO's <cough> belligerence <cough> that's at fault? But...get this...the US is the great evil when it started an unprovoked war in Iraq, yet the same cannot be said of Russia? HUH????

To the accusation that the evil US started the coup in Ukraine, I'm willing to bet, SFL doesn't have a clue about the events leading up to the Maidan, and relies on people like Greenwald to tell him what to think.

For anyone interested, Netflix has an on the ground eyes view of the whole Maidan.

Winter on Fire: Ukraine's Fight for Freedom (2015) ⭐ 8.3 | Documentary, History, War

1h 42m | Not Rated

www.imdb.com

It's great, and the bravery and sacrifice of these Ukrainians are gut wrenching.

So a simple timeline leading up to the Maidan for those who cares. In the 2000s, the Orange Revolution ushered in a sense of optimism in Ukrainians. After bitterly demonstrating in the streets much like the Maidan, they reversed a truly stolen election. They forced new elections, which a more liberal minded candidate won (/s did someone say coup?). However, due to corruption, loftier unkept promises, etc, Ukraine's economy and overall situation didn't improve. Yanukovych eventually takes power, but the Ukrainian urge for change never subsided. A good portion of the population wanted closer ties to the EU and root out corruption. So after years of negotiations, a deal with the EU was struck. However, fearing losing his hegemony in Ukraine, Putin secretly approached Yanukovych with a proposal. He offered billions, and days after, Yanukovych reneges on the EU deal. This sparked a confrontation with his parliament, and sparked pro-eu student demonstrations. To ease tension, the US stepped in and offered a compromise. This is where the conspiracy theorists come in with Putin's egging. Nuland offered Yanukovych an option where the prime minister would be appointed from a list of names from the opposition. The phone call when Nuland discussed possible candidates was release (with high probability that the Russians was behind it). So with little nuance thinking, this is the hill that these conspiracy theorists fight on....that the US actively plotted a coup when none of that happened. Yanukovych two days after accepting that proposal, decided to flee. The parliament quickly voted to condemn him.

So if anyone wants to know what a real coup manufactured by a foreign entity is, read up on the African coup belt. I suspect this is the real reason why Macron has recently been more active against Putin and Russia.

edit: Circling back to that ridiculous question, trying to pin the US to Putin's Russia perspective. Yes, China is trying to subvert US hegemony in Central and South America. They have heavily poured in billions to many of those countries in those region. That is China exerting it's soft power, much as the US does. It's not a freaking coup!!!

Omg, you lecture me on me not having a clue while you linked to a propaganda documentary that whitewashed the role of the far right and Nazis. Lol

The Oscar-nominated Netflix documentary Winter on Fire: Ukraine’s Fight for Freedom presents viewers with a story of everyday citizens facing down brutal riot police controlled by Ukraine’s then-President Viktor Yanukovych, backed by Russian President Vladimir Putin. The colorful array of activists, artists, scarf-wrapped babushki, bearded priests and fresh-faced students makes it appear as if Ukraine’s people from all walks of life in participated in the Maidan uprising. But some are missing—neo-Nazis, who were edited out.

...Indeed, the instrumental role of far-right groups was acknowledged by journalists and analysts in publications as diverse as The Guardian, the BBC, Reuters, and The National Interest. Even Hannah Thoburn—a commentator who’s authored numerous articles in support of Maidan—has noted that Winter on Fire failed to mention “that far-right nationalist groups were very involved in the fighting.”

..The far right’s absence from Winter on Fire becomes even more glaring when compared with other documentaries about Ukraine. Maidan: Tonight Tomorrow, which received a positive review in The New Yorker, managed to include the far right, despite being less than nine minutes long, while Masks of the Revolution, a French film, focused solely on the role of ultranationalists during and after Maidan. (Ironically, the Ukrainian government attempted to prevent France from airing the latter film because they claimed it “creates misconception.”)

Without the neo-Nazi groups, Maidan would not have succeeded in overthrowing Ukraine’s elected president—the titular “winter on fire” would have sputtered out. And yet the film makes no mention of them. (A frame-by-frame scrutiny revealed some background flashes of flags and insignia, an interviewee wearing a scarf with Bandera’s image, and two scenes with Tyahnybok milling about in the background, but none of this would hold any meaning for an American viewer.) The fact that Evgeny Afineevsky, the film’s director, chose to ignore the very factor that made his film possible is astonishing.

Another gross distortion in Winter on Fire is its presentation of Maidan as an independent phenomenon free of Western interference. While the film makes much of the ties between the Yanukovych government and Moscow, it portrays the protest movement as spontaneous, grassroots, and, above all, beholden to no foreign interests. Visiting American politicians appear in a single ten-second scene when they, according to the intertitle, “meet with Yanukovych in order to find a diplomatic solution to the current crisis.”

Evidence, however, demonstrates that America’s role during the winter turmoil of 2013–14 was more quarterback than arbiter. The most telling example of this comes via an intercepted phone call between US Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland and Washington’s ambassador to Ukraine, Geoffrey Pyatt. During the call, Nuland and Pyatt sound like two senior managers hashing out corporate restructuring, with Nuland instructing Pyatt on which Ukrainian leader should be appointed prime minister, how to sideline the UN and the EU in negotiations, and the best strategy for making Ukraine land “jelly side up,” as an enthusiastic Pyatt described it.

The call, which was leaked on February 4, 2014, was not the first time Nuland and Pyatt were deeply involved in Maidan. On December 11, 2013, the pair made a highly publicized tour of the barricades handing out cookies to protesters. Three days later, Senator John McCain flew in to speak to the crowds; McCain and Senator Chris Murphy shared the stage with Svoboda leader Tyahnybok. Both visits were filmed by Ukrainian and Western press, yet are absent from the documentary. Understandably, the involvement of senior US government officials working to land Ukraine “jelly side up” interfered with the “everyday people, teachers, doctors, street cleaners” narrative of Winter on Fire.

The Heartbreaking Irony of ‘Winter on Fire’

The Oscar-nominated documentary, like much Western coverage of Ukraine, presents the West with a mythical, whitewashed version of the Maidan “revolution.”

www.thenation.com

To top it off we also have a US Senator saying how involved we were in Ukraine in regards to the coup and the new government. Maybe Putin made a deep fake video and this really isn't Murphy.

 

[DaveXA]

The big problem is that you and many here use the corporate media for your "facts". The same corporate media that said Saddam has WMD and was connected to 9/11, Trump was a Russian agent, 51 intelligence agents say the laptop was Russian disinformation, Hammas killed Isreali babies, Iraqi soldiers removed Kuwaiti babies from their incubators and left them to die, the Ghost of Kiev, the BS about the Havana Syndrome.

I've posted multiple people confirming NATO was why Putin invaded Ukraine including the NATO Secretary General and US officials like Fiona Hill.

We also have a 2008 leaked cable from current CIA director William Burns warned that Ukraine membership in NATO was the “brightest of all redlines for the Russian elite (not just Putin).”
Link to the leaked cable:

Cable: 08MOSCOW265_a

wikileaks.org

Let me guess, you will claim that leaked US cable was really created by Putin.

Omg, you lecture me on me not having a clue while you linked to a propaganda documentary that whitewashed the role of the far right and Nazis. Lol

The Oscar-nominated Netflix documentary Winter on Fire: Ukraine’s Fight for Freedom presents viewers with a story of everyday citizens facing down brutal riot police controlled by Ukraine’s then-President Viktor Yanukovych, backed by Russian President Vladimir Putin. The colorful array of activists, artists, scarf-wrapped babushki, bearded priests and fresh-faced students makes it appear as if Ukraine’s people from all walks of life in participated in the Maidan uprising. But some are missing—neo-Nazis, who were edited out.

...Indeed, the instrumental role of far-right groups was acknowledged by journalists and analysts in publications as diverse as The Guardian, the BBC, Reuters, and The National Interest. Even Hannah Thoburn—a commentator who’s authored numerous articles in support of Maidan—has noted that Winter on Fire failed to mention “that far-right nationalist groups were very involved in the fighting.”

..The far right’s absence from Winter on Fire becomes even more glaring when compared with other documentaries about Ukraine. Maidan: Tonight Tomorrow, which received a positive review in The New Yorker, managed to include the far right, despite being less than nine minutes long, while Masks of the Revolution, a French film, focused solely on the role of ultranationalists during and after Maidan. (Ironically, the Ukrainian government attempted to prevent France from airing the latter film because they claimed it “creates misconception.”)

Without the neo-Nazi groups, Maidan would not have succeeded in overthrowing Ukraine’s elected president—the titular “winter on fire” would have sputtered out. And yet the film makes no mention of them. (A frame-by-frame scrutiny revealed some background flashes of flags and insignia, an interviewee wearing a scarf with Bandera’s image, and two scenes with Tyahnybok milling about in the background, but none of this would hold any meaning for an American viewer.) The fact that Evgeny Afineevsky, the film’s director, chose to ignore the very factor that made his film possible is astonishing.

Another gross distortion in Winter on Fire is its presentation of Maidan as an independent phenomenon free of Western interference. While the film makes much of the ties between the Yanukovych government and Moscow, it portrays the protest movement as spontaneous, grassroots, and, above all, beholden to no foreign interests. Visiting American politicians appear in a single ten-second scene when they, according to the intertitle, “meet with Yanukovych in order to find a diplomatic solution to the current crisis.”

Evidence, however, demonstrates that America’s role during the winter turmoil of 2013–14 was more quarterback than arbiter. The most telling example of this comes via an intercepted phone call between US Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland and Washington’s ambassador to Ukraine, Geoffrey Pyatt. During the call, Nuland and Pyatt sound like two senior managers hashing out corporate restructuring, with Nuland instructing Pyatt on which Ukrainian leader should be appointed prime minister, how to sideline the UN and the EU in negotiations, and the best strategy for making Ukraine land “jelly side up,” as an enthusiastic Pyatt described it.

The call, which was leaked on February 4, 2014, was not the first time Nuland and Pyatt were deeply involved in Maidan. On December 11, 2013, the pair made a highly publicized tour of the barricades handing out cookies to protesters. Three days later, Senator John McCain flew in to speak to the crowds; McCain and Senator Chris Murphy shared the stage with Svoboda leader Tyahnybok. Both visits were filmed by Ukrainian and Western press, yet are absent from the documentary. Understandably, the involvement of senior US government officials working to land Ukraine “jelly side up” interfered with the “everyday people, teachers, doctors, street cleaners” narrative of Winter on Fire.

The Heartbreaking Irony of ‘Winter on Fire’

The Oscar-nominated documentary, like much Western coverage of Ukraine, presents the West with a mythical, whitewashed version of the Maidan “revolution.”

www.thenation.com

To top it off we also have a US Senator saying how involved we were in Ukraine in regards to the coup and the new government. Maybe Putin made a deep fake video and this really isn't Murphy.

You keep regurgitating the same used up and thoroughly debunked links and copy pasta over and over again. I'm impressed with your faithfulness to the cause.

And sidestepping the questions he asked is old hat for you, yeah.

You also keep going back to 2014. You're stuck in the wrong decade.

 

[SaintForLife]

You keep regurgitating the same used up and thoroughly debunked links and copy pasta over and over again. I'm impressed with your faithfulness to the cause.

And sidestepping the questions he asked is old hat for you, yeah.

You also keep going back to 2014. You're stuck in the wrong decade.

I don't expect anything other than a vague response and an insult, but do tell how a leaked US cable saying Ukraine NATO membership was a red line for Russia and a US Senator saying on TV exactly what their role was in Ukraine during the coup and the new government has been debunked.

 

[J-DONK]

I don't expect anything other than a vague response and an insult, but do tell how a leaked US cable saying Ukraine NATO membership was a red line for Russia and a US Senator saying on TV exactly what their role was in Ukraine during the coup and the new government has been debunked?

You refuse to listen.

Did Russia invade Ukraine and Georgia? Yes
Did Russia heavily influenced Ukrainian politics, and even tried to assassinate pro western presidents? Yes
Do Georgia, and Ukraine have autonomy to join the EU, or NATO? Yes
Were both Georgia and Ukraine denied membership to NATO at the time of this cable? Yes
Do all of these facts debunk your narrative? Absolutely.

Logic, and reasoning doesn't work with you. You project every sin of Russian on to America.

Please stop posting in this thread, and go back to reading RT. You clearly won't see reason.

P.S. You have some weird form of American exceptionalism you normally see on the far left. They think America is the cause of every ill in the world. Ukraine wanted closer ties to the EU. You know the marketplace of first world countries it borders. If you weren't so America-bad pilled you would understand this simple logic, and Ukraine's wanting to joining that organization.

 

[SaintForLife]

You refuse to listen.

Did Russia invade Ukraine and Georgia? Yes
Did Russia heavily influenced Ukrainian politics, and even tried to assassinate pro western presidents? Yes
Do Georgia, and Ukraine have autonomy to join the EU, or NATO? Yes
Were both Georgia and Ukraine denied membership to NATO at the time of this cable? Yes
Do all of these facts debunk your narrative? Absolutely.

Logic, and reasoning doesn't work with you. You project every sin of Russian on to America.

Please stop posting in this thread, and go back to reading RT. You clearly won't see reason.

P.S. You have some weird form of American exceptionalism you normally see on the far left. They think America is the cause of every ill in the world. Ukraine wanted closer ties to the EU. You know the marketplace of first world countries it borders. If you weren't so America-bad pilled you would understand this simple logic, and Ukraine's wanting to joining that organization.

I'm still waiting on your to respond to my hypothetical scenario of China entering a security pact with Canada and Mexico and installing bases on our borders.

Do the facts you listed somehow discredit the leaked US cable by current CIA director that said Ukraine NATO membership was a red line for Russia and what Murphy admitted on TV about Ukraine. I've noticed yall have ignored that cable.

The naivety of you and many others who think the one country that is involved in just about every military engagement in the world is somehow just doing it to protect democracy and other altruistic reasons.

 

[J-DONK]

I'm still waiting on your to respond to my hypothetical scenario of China entering a security pact with China and installing bases on our borders.

Do the facts you listed somehow discredit the leaked US cable by current CIA director that said Ukraine NATO membership was a red line for Russia and what Murphy admitted on TV about Ukraine. I've noticed yall have ignored that cable.

America wouldn't feel threatened about a DEFENSIVE security pact on our borders. I'm not a history buff, but I'm pretty sure the American-Mexican war ended before the civil war.

THERE WAS NO PLAN TO ADD UKRAINE TO NATO.

If you didn't get all your news from Glenn Greenwald, Tucker Carlson, and RT. You would know this fact. In reality, even in the current climate America is not sure about adding Ukraine to NATO.

U.S. and Germany Push to Delay Ukraine NATO Membership Invite

Ukraine and its Eastern European allies want the invite to come soon, but Washington and Berlin are wary.

foreignpolicy.com

That's how Russia pilled you are, and you come in here expecting serious discussions about your sickle, and hammer fever dreams.

Again, go back to RT, and stop posting this inane crap.