As much as I want to support our needs at home, I believe it is important to make a stand for people who want freedom. We have plenty of needs here in the US, but freedom is our foundation.
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
[quote]Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs “Toria” Nuland was the “mastermind” behind the Feb. 22, 2014 “regime change” in Ukraine, plotting the overthrow of the democratically elected government of President Viktor Yanukovych while convincing the ever-gullible US mainstream media that the coup wasn’t really a coup but a victory for “democracy.”
Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs Victoria Nuland, who pushed for the Ukraine coup and helped pick the post-coup leaders.[/quote]
@SumKindaMunster you've nailed down a huge part of the issue...Americans don't understand or appreciate US imperialism in Ukraine. No awareness of the coup in 2014, or the civil war Kiev launched against its own pro-Russian citizens in the east, or how in 2005, [i]senator[/i] Barack Obama was instrumental in establishing US biolabs in Ukraine, and how Russia might view this as a threat, or simply NATO's steady advancement eastward through Europe since the end of WWII.
This is a really disturbing Tweet from Elon. If true, and why wouldn't it be, suggests the Biden administration is pushing us toward a full scale war with a nuclear super power. Imagine how that would end?
@SumKindaMunster Just another tankie pushing the discredited line that the U.S. overthrew the "democratically elected" Yanukovich and replaced him with the "western puppet" Poroshenko. None of that justified Putin's support of Wagner mercenaries in Donbas starting in 2014.
Is it possible that most people who aren't Putin admirers view the war for what it is - the illegal invasion of a sovereign country on dubious grounds? We opposed the U.S. invasion of Iraq for the same reason.
In retrospect, Obama should have been far more aggressive in opposing the Crimea takeover, but at the time, the Ukrainian government wasn't interested, and everyone accepted the line "Crimea is Russian, Khruschev gave it to Ukraine as a gift and Putin is just taking it back."
@SumKindaMunster The only people blaming the U.S. for overthrowing the Yanukovich government are Putin shills and their conservative fellow travelers. If anything illegal happened, why didn't orange god direct his DOJ to investigate Nuland or anyone else involved? Too busy playing golf?
You're just promoting a tinfoil-hat conspiracy theory that seeks to place the blame for Putin's illegal war on the Obama administration.
@SumKindaMunster The article you cited is full of innuendo and accusations with no hard evidence. It's the same mentality that paints Biden as a diabolical mastermind, shaking down people for millions with no evidence for that, either.
Meanwhile, Trump's IT director at Mar-a-Lago just turned state's evidence.
@LeopoldBloom That's not an answer to the question I asked. Who is credibly disputing this? If you don't like the article you are welcome to do your own research and confirm for yourself.
Trump and Biden don't have anything to do with information I provided, your mention of them is a pathetic attempt at misdirection.
This was a home-grown revolution; U.S. involvement was minimal and claims to the contrary are based in conspiracy theory that seeks to blame the U.S. for Putin's aggression. The U.S. did suspend the visas of 20 officials it deemed responsible for human rights violations, but what outside involvement there was, was through the EU and its negotiators.
There's a tendency for commentators on both the right and the left to present the U.S. as the sole instigator in international affairs, with other countries and actors merely reacting to us. I may have been guilty of this myself in the past but try not to do this as it takes agency away from others.
@LeopoldBloom So nothing in here disputes or discredits the leaked conversation between Nuland and Pyatt.
Here is a link to the transcript as well as comments regarding the conversation. Not once do they deny the veracity of the conversation. In fact...
[quote]At the outset it should be clear that this is a fragment of what may well be a larger phone conversation. [b]But the US has not denied its veracity and has been quick to point a finger at the Russian authorities for being behind its interception and leak[/b].[/quote]
Additionally, here is the transcript of the conversation. People can read it and draw their own conclusions. I don't think anything you have provided has disputed/discredited the conversation nor its obvious implications. In fact, this is much like what you said about my source...what was it?
[quote]The article you cited is full of innuendo and accusations with no hard evidence[/quote]
[quote]Voice thought to be Nuland's: What do you think?
Jonathan Marcus: At the outset it should be clear that this is a fragment of what may well be a larger phone conversation. But the US has not denied its veracity and has been quick to point a finger at the Russian authorities for being behind its interception and leak.
Voice thought to be Pyatt's: I think we're in play. The Klitschko [Vitaly Klitschko, one of three main opposition leaders] piece is obviously the complicated electron here. Especially the announcement of him as deputy prime minister and you've seen some of my notes on the troubles in the marriage right now so we're trying to get a read really fast on where he is on this stuff. But I think your argument to him, which you'll need to make, I think that's the next phone call you want to set up, is exactly the one you made to Yats [Arseniy Yatseniuk, another opposition leader]. And I'm glad you sort of put him on the spot on where he fits in this scenario. And I'm very glad that he said what he said in response.
Jonathan Marcus: The US says that it is working with all sides in the crisis to reach a peaceful solution, noting that "ultimately it is up to the Ukrainian people to decide their future". However this transcript suggests that the US has very clear ideas about what the outcome should be and is striving to achieve these goals. Russian spokesmen have insisted that the US is meddling in Ukraine's affairs - no more than Moscow, the cynic might say - but Washington clearly has its own game-plan. The clear purpose in leaking this conversation is to embarrass Washington and for audiences susceptible to Moscow's message to portray the US as interfering in Ukraine's domestic affairs.
Nuland: Good. I don't think Klitsch should go into the government. I don't think it's necessary, I don't think it's a good idea.
Pyatt: Yeah. I guess... in terms of him not going into the government, just let him stay out and do his political homework and stuff. I'm just thinking in terms of sort of the process moving ahead we want to keep the moderate democrats together. The problem is going to be Tyahnybok [Oleh Tyahnybok, the other opposition leader] and his guys and I'm sure that's part of what [President Viktor] Yanukovych is calculating on all this.
Nuland: [Breaks in] I think Yats is the guy who's got the economic experience, the governing experience. He's the... what he needs is Klitsch and Tyahnybok on the outside. He needs to be talking to them four times a week, you know. I just think Klitsch going in... he's going to be at that level working for Yatseniuk, it's just not going to work.
Pyatt: Yeah, no, I think that's right. OK. Good. Do you want us to set up a call with him as the next step?
Nuland: My understanding from that call - but you tell me - was that the big three were going into their own meeting and that Yats was going to offer in that context a... three-plus-one conversation or three-plus-two with you. Is that not how you understood it?
Pyatt: No. I think... I mean that's what he proposed but I think, just knowing the dynamic that's been with them where Klitschko has been the top dog, he's going to take a while to show up for whatever meeting they've got and he's probably talking to his guys at this point, so I think you reaching out directly to him helps with the personality management among the three and it gives you also a chance to move fast on all this stuff and put us behind it before they all sit down and he explains why he doesn't like it.
Nuland: OK, good. I'm happy. Why don't you reach out to him and see if he wants to talk before or after.
Pyatt: OK, will do. Thanks.
Nuland: OK... one more wrinkle for you Geoff. [A click can be heard] I can't remember if I told you this, or if I only told Washington this, that when I talked to Jeff Feltman [United Nations Under-Secretary-General for Political Affairs] this morning, he had a new name for the UN guy Robert Serry did I write you that this morning?
Jonathan Marcus: An intriguing insight into the foreign policy process with work going on at a number of levels: Various officials attempting to marshal the Ukrainian opposition; efforts to get the UN to play an active role in bolstering a deal; and (as you can see below) the big guns waiting in the wings - US Vice-President Joe Biden clearly being lined up to give private words of encouragement at the appropriate moment.
Pyatt: Yeah I saw that.
Nuland: OK. He's now gotten both Serry and [UN Secretary General] Ban Ki-moon to agree that Serry could come in Monday or Tuesday. So that would be great, I think, to help glue this thing and to have the UN help glue it and, you know, Fuck the EU.
Jonathan Marcus: Not for the first time in an international crisis, the US expresses frustration at the EU's efforts. Washington and Brussels have not been completely in step during the Ukraine crisis. The EU is divided and to some extent hesitant about picking a fight with Moscow. It certainly cannot win a short-term battle for Ukraine's affections with Moscow - it just does not have the cash inducements available. The EU has sought to play a longer game; banking on its attraction over time. But the US clearly is determined to take a much more activist role.
Pyatt: No, exactly. And I think we've got to do something to make it stick together because you can be pretty sure that if it does start to gain altitude, that the Russians will be working behind the scenes to try to torpedo it. And again the fact that this is out there right now, I'm still trying to figure out in my mind why Yanukovych (garbled) that. In the meantime there's a Party of Regions faction meeting going on right now and I'm sure there's a lively argument going on in that group at this point. But anyway we could land jelly side up on this one if we move fast. So let me work on Klitschko and if you can just keep... we want to try to get somebody with an international personality to come out here and help to midwife this thing. The other issue is some kind of outreach to Yanukovych but we probably regroup on that tomorrow as we see how things start to fall into place.
Nuland: So on that piece Geoff, when I wrote the note [US vice-president's national security adviser Jake] Sullivan's come back to me VFR [direct to me], saying you need [US Vice-President Joe] Biden and I said probably tomorrow for an atta-boy and to get the deets [details] to stick. So Biden's willing.
Pyatt: OK. Great. Thanks.
Jonathan Marcus: Overall this is a damaging episode between Washington and Moscow. Nobody really emerges with any credit. The US is clearly much more involved in trying to broker a deal in Ukraine than it publicly lets on. There is some embarrassment too for the Americans given the ease with which their communications were hacked. But is the interception and leaking of communications really the way Russia wants to conduct its foreign policy ? Goodness - after Wikileaks, Edward Snowden and the like could the Russian government be joining the radical apostles of open government? I doubt it. Though given some of the comments from Vladimir Putin's adviser on Ukraine Sergei Glazyev - for example his interview with the Kommersant-Ukraine newspaper the other day - you don't need your own listening station to be clear about Russia's intentions. Russia he said "must interfere in Ukraine" and the authorities there should use force against the demonstrators. [/quote]
@SumKindaMunster A conversation between two bureaucrats doesn't mean the Ukrainian revolution wasn't a home-grown response to Russian interference. If you actually think that the 2014 change in government was solely due to US interference, you've drunk the right wing Kool-Aid. And if this did happen, why didn't your orange lord and savior address it during his four years in office, when he spared no effort in sucking up to his pal Putin?
Even if there was some level of US involvement, it's in our interest to align Ukraine more closely with us than with Russia. It's amazing, conservatives used to support keeping the US as a world power. Now you guys sound like tankies, where the US is always wrong and our enemies are always right.
@LeopoldBloom [quote]A conversation between two bureaucrats doesn't mean the Ukrainian revolution wasn't a home-grown response to Russian interference.[/quote]
Enjoying the goal post moving. First it was completely "discredited", now its merely a conversation between diplomats. But what an interesting conversation. It certainly doesn't sound like idle conversation, it sounds like two people determining the direction the Ukrainian government will take.
And that's enough to disprove the US ridiculous propaganda that this is solely the fault of Russia and the US didn't have multiple hands in this, and have purposely escalated the conflict at every turn.
[quote] And if this did happen, why didn't your orange lord and savior address it during his four years in office, when he spared no effort in sucking up to his pal Putin?[/quote]
What is it with you and this? Every time I make a point, you always bring it back to Trump. This is especially ridiculous and Trump never made any promises about this, nor brought it up. One thing that is notable is that Victoria Nuland was NOT in his administration after working with Clinton, Bush Jr, Obama and now the Biden administrations.
Give it a rest. If Trump made a promise and didn't deliver ok, but this is the 3rd or 4th time you have made this point on various subjects and it comes across as childish TDS.
[quote]Even if there was some level of US involvement, it's in our interest to align Ukraine more closely with us than with Russia[/quote] Is it? Is this money well spent? Over American infastructure? Our citizens? Healthcare?
I disagree, and that has nothing to do with Russia, Ukraine or being a "tankie" 🙄
I looked up that slur, and you are being completely ridiculous. I'm not even close, this is just you using a new pet term that you just learned.
@SumKindaMunster "Determining the direction" or expressing an opinion? You think the Ukrainians are automatons? And why shouldn't we bring Ukraine into our orbit, assuming, for the sake of argument, we had the ability to do that and actually accomplished it?
It's not unreasonable to ask why, if these shenanigans were so horrible, Trump's DOJ didn't investigate and do something about them. Either nothing untoward happened, or he was incompetent.
Russia is 100% responsible for the invasion. Nobody forced Putin to invade. He had bad intel and thought he'd have tanks in the streets of Kyiv in three days. Now he's stuck.
If the shoe fits, wear it. Maybe you don't think the US is responsible for all of the evil in the world and all of our enemies are automatically virtuous. but you sure seem to think that in this particular area.
And yeah, I think we should drastically scale back our military and redirect the money toward infrastructure and social welfare programs. Which party is the one that screams "socialism" whenever anyone suggests that?
@LeopoldBloom Really loving the goal post moving in this conversation. First it was "discredited" and a "right wing fantasy", now you are justifying the meddling in Ukrainian affairs.
[quote] It's not unreasonable to ask why, if these shenanigans were so horrible, Trump's DOJ didn't investigate and do something about them. Either nothing untoward happened, or he was incompetent.[/quote]
It is actually. Again, this is your TDS. The point is to demonstrate how the US has been just as involved in meddling in Ukraine as Russia, but its being overlooked, ignored or justified.
[quote]Russia is 100% responsible for the invasion. Nobody forced Putin to invade[/quote]
Totally 100% agree, no argument here.
But the US, Europe and NATO have purposefully, methodically and at every turn, escalated the conflict when they had opportunities to try and resolve it or minimize the carnage.
Hundreds of thousands have died in the conflict, millions displaced, or otherwise affected by this conflict. And all we care about is inflicting damage on Russia.
This isn't being denied.
It's so interesting to me to see all these left wing liberal people infected with bloodlust and nationalism on this issue.
@SumKindaMunster Well, as a tankie, you have no problem with the Russians meddling in other countries' affairs, so why shouldn't we? And again, I'm only speculating, as a conversation between two bureaucrats doesn't mean the U.S. was involved in a conspiracy to foment discord in Ukraine and replace the government.
Would you call it "bloodlust" when the US was supplying the UK through the Lend-Lease program before we were directly involved in WWII? If we'd just stayed out of it completely, Nazi Germany could have neutralized the UK and the war would have ended a lot sooner, with far less loss of life.
It's interesting to see how conservatives, who used to hate the USSR and salivated at the thought of war, are suddenly Russia-loving peaceniks.
@LeopoldBloom I remember when I used to think like you. It was all very binary, everything was 0 or 1. Black or White. Red or Blue. Coke or Pepsi. PC or Mac.
But now I don't think that way, and I find it amusing and sad when I see people who are still stuck in their biases.
[quote]Well, as a tankie, you have no problem with the Russians meddling in other countries' affairs, so why shouldn't we? [/quote]
I certainly didn't say that, nor imply it strawman.
[quote] And again, I'm only speculating, as a conversation between two bureaucrats doesn't mean the U.S. was involved in a conspiracy to foment discord in Ukraine and replace the government[/quote]
It's one instance where the US and its allies have meddled in Ukraine, and it contradicts the Western notion that this conflict is entirely Russia's doing and we are merely defending Ukraine. It's a lie, it's not hard to get quotes and data from officials that demonstrate this is about weakening Russia and Ukraine is a convenient proxy. That's why I find it important. It's an unvarnished look at how we truly are behaving here in Ukraine. And again, appreciating the frustration on your part to not be able to discredit it.
[quote]Would you call it "bloodlust" when the US was supplying the UK through the Lend-Lease program before we were directly involved in WWII? If we'd just stayed out of it completely, Nazi Germany could have neutralized the UK and the war would have ended a lot sooner, with far less loss of life.[/quote]
Boy if there is one thing you would think that would give you pause on this, its the whole Russia is Nazi Germany thing. How many enemies of the US over the last 20 years was the next Hitler? Saddam Hussein, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Donald Trump, now Vladimir Putin and others I am sure. You'd think it wouldn't work again and again, but you are demonstrating otherwise.
[quote]It's interesting to see how conservatives, who used to hate the USSR and salivated at the thought of war, are suddenly Russia-loving peaceniks.[/quote]
More binary, strawman responses. I certainly didn't say that, nor implied it. My issue is with the US and the West risking escalation and potentially a nuclear response because it wants to setup Ukraine as a vassel state to irritate Russia. It's not a good use of my tax money, and I am really sick of the US being a belligerent actor on the world stage. We can, and used to, do better. I don't love Russia, I don't hate Russia. I honestly don't care about Russia, but now I am forced to contemplate them since we are at war with them.
@SumKindaMunster You're still implying that US actions provoked Russia and Putin had no choice but to invade. Even assuming for the sake of argument that we are 100% responsible for the change of government in 2014, Putin had other options if his goal was the protection of Russian speakers in Donbas and not, in fact, something else.
I would love to see the US redirect much of our overseas involvement to other areas that would benefit more people back here. We are only required to spend 2% of our GDP on our military under the NATO requirement, and we're spending 3.5%, not the highest in the world in terms of GDP, but somewhere around 4th or 5th. However, for the time being, we still are a world empire. Our expenditure in Ukraine, while not trivial, would be a drop in the bucket if spent back here on infrastructure or social welfare programs. I also see value in stopping Putin's expansionism even if he's not the next Hitler. We have interests in Europe and they are affected by Russian expansionism.
I opposed the Iraq War. I don't know what you personally felt about it at the time, but I do remember that opposition was mostly liberal while support was mostly conservative. And yes, I'm aware that Hillary Clinton voted in favor of the invasion. Donald Trump supported it at the time even though he now denies that.
It was all conservatives who opposed the JCPOA and couldn't stop repeating how Obama gave Ahmedinejad "pallets of cash" (referring to our returning money that had been frozen after the revolution and had always belonged to Iran. Again, for all I know you personally supported the JCPOA but opposition to it was again, almost entirely conservative.
It's fascinating how conservatives are now rebranding themselves as peace-loving tree huggers when until now they've supported every imperialist war the US has been involved in.
@LeopoldBloom [quote]You're still implying that US actions provoked Russia and Putin had no choice but to invade[/quote]
No, not implying it at all. Russia is their own country and is responsible for their own actions. Again, pointing out the propaganda, lies and hypocrisy being fed to the American people about this conflict.
[quote]Putin had other options if his goal was the protection of Russian speakers in Donbas and not, in fact, something else.[/quote] Interesting you feel so sure about that. Isn't that just speculation on your part?
[quote]It's fascinating how conservatives are now rebranding themselves as peace-loving tree huggers when until now they've supported every imperialist war the US has been involved in. [/quote]
No idea what you are talking about. It seems to me conservatives oppose the action in Ukraine because they want to see all our military resources to go to opposing China. Same mentality, different enemy.
[quote]It was all conservatives who opposed the JCPOA and couldn't stop repeating how Obama gave Ahmedinejad "pallets of cash" (referring to our returning money that had been frozen after the revolution and had always belonged to Iran[/quote]
Point of clarity, it was literally pallets of cash regardless of where people say the money came from and whether or not Iran deserved it back. It wasn't really "their" money, it was the money of the previous regime who were violently overthrown by the theocracy that runs it now.
@SumKindaMunster You think we won't be able to oppose China because we're sending too much to Ukraine? What about the possibility that China sees how Russia couldn't steamroll Ukraine and that affected their calculus of what they could expect in Taiwan? It's not like these actions occur in a vacuum.
Conservatives support Russia in part because they admire Putin, a strongman and a guy who doesn't mess around with deh gayz. If you don't think there's an element based on that, you're very naive.
One aspect of the JCPOA was for the current Iranian regime to have access to funds frozen from the no longer existent prior regime in return for a higher level of oversight for their nuclear program. Whether you thought that was a good idea or not is a matter of opinion, but Trump shredding the JCPOA amounted to a guy buying a car, then crashing it into a tree because he though the sales agreement was unfair.
