Quote:

---

Originally posted by whozit:
b
Um...Barry is the Prez right? This mess is his right? Why you libs bringing McCain into this? Ya don't want Barrry or his whores any where near this? Barry has nothing to do this?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Civil war may be the next step. The Ukraine may be split in two. I think this was the goal of the west all along.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by oldenglanddry:
I know some of you baulk at the sight of the word "Socialist", and this is a few days old now, but it is a good background perspective and worth reading;

http://www.socialistworld.net/doc/6666

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Oh, this is definitely Obama's mess. Syria, Libya, and the Ukraine should be laid at his feet. (And for all you pro-Obama liberals out there, you should look really long and hard at what Obama's been doing, and stop listening to his weasel-words. Obama's a neo-con.)

It's just amazing to me that McCain has had, over the years, such an unerring nose for assholes with which to have a photo-op.

---

Quote:

---

Clinton and Kerry are the ones to be pointing fingers at.

---

Quote:

---

So how does a civil war in Ukraine benefit the evil "West"? Seems like it would benefit Russia more, as that would give them an excuse to intervene militarily, and either put a puppet regime in place or intimidate the population into toeing the Russian line. They did it before in Georgia.

---

Quote:

---

The official language of Ukraine is Ukrainian, an East Slavic language which is the native language of 65% of Ukraine's population. Russian is the native language of 33% of Ukraine's population and the rest (2%) are native speakers of other languages.

---

Quote:

---

Strangely enough, the "Rioters supported by the West" meme doesn't come up.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
(IIRC, you were one of those claiming that the Russians invaded Georgia without cause, when in fact the Georgians had fired missiles into S Ossetia.)

---

Quote:

---

The Russians already HAD a friendly government in place- that was Yanukovych.

Let me reel this back a bit, for context: The Ukraine is divided into two- a Russian-speaking southeast which is characterized by steppes, and a Ukrainain-speaking northwest characterized by forests (a portion of which was formerly Poland).

Quote:

---

The official language of Ukraine is Ukrainian, an East Slavic language which is the native language of 65% of Ukraine's population. Russian is the native language of 33% of Ukraine's population and the rest (2%) are native speakers of other languages.

---

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languages_of_Ukraine

Yanukovich is a Russian-speaking Ukrainian. He was elected in 2009 with 49% of the vote. (Elections in multi-party countries such as the Ukraine are characterized by candidates with less than 50%). Many people who voted for Yanukovych did so in order to keep Yulia Tymoshenko (she of the braided hair) out of power because it was she- an opposition figure- who had signed a disastrously expensive gas deal with Putin.

Fast forward a few years. Tymoshenko (the braided lady) is now in disgrace. Yanukovych is faced with two options: (1) joining the EU, which insists that the join be exclusive, or (2) signing a trade pact with Putin, who is willing to let the Ukraine trade with both economic blocs. (PLEASE NOTE that it was Putin who was willing to give Ukraine trading freedom, NOT the EU.) Yanukovych dithers, playing one side against the other. The EU is willing to offer nothing to the Ukraine in terms of concessions - no help in discharging its debt, just Greek-style austerity. Russia is ready to sweeten the deal with lower gas prices and an immediate $15 billion cash-on-the-barrel bond purchase. Not too surprisingly, Yanukovych signs a deal wtih Russia.

Given all that.. how could Russia possibly benefit from a coup in the Ukraine? If the west hadn't supported the opposition with money, PR, and political cover, and if the coup had not occurred, Russia would have had a deal with the Ukraine. And the EU - by it's own terms- would have been frozen out of economic dealings with that nation.

---

Quote:

---

Yanukovich is usually seen as pro-Russian but, since his return to power in 2010, he has been pragmatic in his relations between the powers. His first visit was to Brussels, where he confirmed that Ukraine would remain as part of Nato’s outreach programme. Shortly after, he visited Moscow, where he promised to restore previous good relations. He resisted, however, any attempts by Vladimir Putin to recruit Ukraine to the Eurasian customs union of Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan. Until December’s shock decision, it seemed that Yanukovich was enthusiastic about the EU’s association agreement.

As the date for signing it came closer, Russia stepped up its restrictions on trade. Trade volume between the two countries fell by 11% in 2012 ($45bn) and by a further 15% in 2013. The trade volume between Ukraine and the EU is about the same but, given the state of the EU economy, it has not been able to increase its trade to make up for the loss from Russia. The €1.8 billion aid over ten years offered by the EU to compensate for such losses was clearly nowhere near adequate. In addition, Russia uses the gas pipelines crossing Ukraine as a further

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1kiki:

Quote:

---

"The 1991–1992 South Ossetian War was fought between Georgian government forces and ethnic Georgian militia on one side, and the forces of South Ossetia and ethnic Ossetian militia who wanted South Ossetia to secede from Georgia and become an independent state, supported by individual Russian troops (uncited), on the other.

---

In other words, it was largely a civil war where (presumably) individual Russian troops joined in.

---

Quote:

---

Most of their equipment and arms were former Soviet arms abandoned following the break-up of the Soviet Union. Former Georgian president, Eduard Shevardnadze, accused Russia of military involvement in the conflict. At the same time, the Ossetians claimed that Russian military and police failed to protect the local civilian population during Georgian attacks on Tskhinvali and surrounding Ossetian villages.[6] The Georgian side claimed there was overt help from military units of the Russian Federation.[1]

---

Quote:

---

"Or are the Socialists pushing capitalist propaganda as well?"

You must be counting on people not being tedious enough to click on your link and read from the beginning all the way to the end.

---

Quote:

---

What do their socialist goals have to do with the fact they pretty much refuted all SignyM's claims that the West was trying to monopolize Ukraine's business and the Russians were just friendly helpers?

---

Quote:

---

One of the “Big Three” political parties behind the protests is the ultra-nationalist Svoboda, whose leader, Oleh Tyahnybok, has called for the liberation of his country from the “Muscovite-Jewish mafia.” After the 2010 conviction of the Nazi death camp guard John Demjanjuk for his supporting role in the death of nearly 30,000 people at the Sobibor camp, Tyahnybok rushed to Germany to declare him a hero who was “fighting for truth.” In the Ukrainian parliament, where Svoboda holds an unprecedented 37 seats, Tyahnybok’s deputy Yuriy Mykhalchyshyn is fond of quoting Joseph Goebbels – he has even founded a think tank originally called “the Joseph Goebbels Political Research Center.” According to Per Anders Rudling, a leading academic expert on European neo-fascism, the self-described “socialist nationalist” Mykhalchyshyn is the main link between Svoboda’s official wing and neo-Nazi militias like Right Sector.

Right Sector is a shadowy syndicate of self-described “autonomous nationalists” identified by their skinhead style of dress, ascetic lifestyle, and fascination with street violence. Armed with riot shields and clubs, the group’s cadres have manned the front lines of the Euromaidan battles this month, filling the air with their signature chant: “Ukraine above all!” In a recent Right Sector propaganda video [embedded at the bottom of this article], the group promised to fight “against degeneration and totalitarian liberalism, for traditional national morality and family values.” With Svoboda linked to a constellation of international neo-fascist parties through the Alliance of European National Movements, Right Sector is promising to lead its army of aimless, disillusioned young men on “a great European Reconquest.”

Svoboda’s openly pro-Nazi politics have not deterred Senator John McCain from addressing a EuroMaidan rally alongside Tyahnybok, nor did it prevent Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland from enjoying a friendly meeting with the Svoboda leader this February. Eager to fend off accusations of anti-Semitism, the Svoboda leader recently hosted the Israeli Ambassador to Ukraine. “I would like to ask Israelis to also respect our patriotic feelings,” Tyahnybok has remarked. “Probably each party in the [Israeli] Knesset is nationalist. With God’s help, let it be this way for us too.”

In a leaked phone conversation with Geoffrey Pyatt, the US ambassador to Ukraine, Nuland revealed her wish for Tyahnybok to remain “on the outside,” but to consult with the US’s replacement for Yanukovich, Arseniy Yatsenyuk, “four times a week.” At a December 5, 2013 US-Ukraine Foundation Conference, Nuland boasted that the US had invested $5 billion to "build democratic skills and institutions" in Ukraine, though she did not offer any details.

---

Quote:

---

Reasonable people can disagree about whether the EU was driving too hard a bargain or whether Ukraine should undertake such painful economic “reforms” – or how Yanukovych should have balanced the interests of his divided country, with the east dominated by ethnic Russians and the west leaning toward Europe.

But protesters from western Ukraine, including far-right nationalists, sought to turn this policy dispute into a means for overthrowing the elected government. Police efforts to quell the disturbances turned violent, with the police not the only culprits. Police faced armed neo-Nazi storm troopers who attacked with firebombs and other weapons.

Though the U.S. news media did show scenes of these violent melees, the U.S. press almost universally blamed Yanukovych – and took almost gleeful pleasure as his elected government collapsed and was replaced by thuggish right-wing militias “guarding” government buildings.

With Yanukovych and many of his supporters fleeing for their lives, the opposition parties seized control of parliament and began passing draconian new laws often unanimously, as neo-Nazi thugs patrolled the scene. Amazingly, the U.S. news media treated all this as uplifting, a popular uprising against a tyrant, not a case of a coup government operating in collusion with violent extremists.

In the upside-down world that has become the U.S. news media, the democratically elected president was a dictator and the coup makers who overthrew the popularly chosen leader were “pro-democracy” activists.

---

Quote:

---

Russia has sent "several hundred" troops into Ukraine's Crimea region, US defense officials said Friday, after Kiev called on Moscow to withdraw its forces from the peninsula.

---

Quote:

---

"It looks like they’ve moved several hundred troops there (into Crimea)," a senior defense official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, told AFP.

The comments marked the first confirmation from President Barack Obama's administration that Russia had launched an incursion into Crimea. The Russians had not given the US government advance notice of the action or explained its intentions since the operation was launched, officials said. But Pentagon officials stressed Washington was focused on diplomacy, and there was no serious consideration being given to any US military action.

"It is now in the realm of diplomacy," said a second defense official, who asked not to be named. Officials also said they were not aware of any request from Ukraine for military assistance.

---

Quote:

---

Rappy- pinning the USA reaction to the Russian invasion of Georgia (AFTER Georgia fired on S Ossetia) on SENATOR Obama was... well, what can I say? Fucking stupid. But then, that's what I've come to expect from you. Because, last I checked, George W Bush was President at the time.

---

Quote:

---

Yeah, but he's drawing a line in the sand, yet again. If you're going to talk big, then act big. IF not , stay the hell out of the kitchen.

---

Quote:

---

The United States of America has over a hundred (what one prominent US General called) 'pre-deployed nuclear weapons' spread across the Eastern United States. Even a single low-yield nuclear weapon of approximately 250 kilotons striking in the vicinity of one of these reactors would cause a reactor meltdown and fantastic long-term lethal radiological contamination.

Indian Point alone, just 10 miles outside of New York city, contains the equivalent of 20 Fukushimas. The resulting explosive force and radiation from scattered nuclear material, much of it aerosolized, would in most certainty, leave the extended city of New York lethally contaminated for centuries. This result in most likelihood would make all of New York State and large parts of the Northeast uninhabitable.

That is A SINGLE nuclear power station, and A SINGLE low-yield nuclear weapon. A single submarine in the Russian navy carries 20 multi-targetable warheads on a single missile. The total number of missiles on a submarine varies from 8-12. That makes it a possibility of 240 warheads. Also, each of these warheads is independently maneuverable. That means that with even 50% losses, they could hit 120 nuclear power plants. If I understand this, then I'm pretty sure the Russian military does too.

Therefore, this proposal is the equivalent of the desire to see the entire destruction of the United States of America with no possibility of recovery within the foreseeable future, let alone the incredible loss of life involved. Only someone with absolutely no understanding of physics, or empathy toward human life would consider such a solution. Such a person is obviously a sociopath.

This is one submarine. No intercontinental ballistic missiles and no close-range missiles deployed at the Arctic. We are talking about the possibility of over 6000 multi-warheaded missiles being deployed. Even 10% of these missiles getting through would cause the complete destruction of the North American continent. This is plain and simple insanity.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:

Quote:

---

You're missing the point, ENTIRELY !

---

The point is......


"HEY I'm RAPPY.... EVERYONE LOOK AT ME WHILE I DO MY LITTLE "HEY I'M RAPPY " DANCE.

Who cares if the world is going to shit, as long as you all give me the attention I deserve".

Etc, etc, etc.

Quote:

---

The United States of America has over a hundred (what one prominent US General called) 'pre-deployed nuclear weapons' spread across the Eastern United States. Even a single low-yield nuclear weapon of approximately 250 kilotons striking in the vicinity of one of these reactors would cause a reactor meltdown and fantastic long-term lethal radiological contamination.

Indian Point alone, just 10 miles outside of New York city, contains the equivalent of 20 Fukushimas. The resulting explosive force and radiation from scattered nuclear material, much of it aerosolized, would in most certainty, leave the extended city of New York lethally contaminated for centuries. This result in most likelihood would make all of New York State and large parts of the Northeast uninhabitable.

That is A SINGLE nuclear power station, and A SINGLE low-yield nuclear weapon. A single submarine in the Russian navy carries 20 multi-targetable warheads on a single missile. The total number of missiles on a submarine varies from 8-12. That makes it a possibility of 240 warheads. Also, each of these warheads is independently maneuverable. That means that with even 50% losses, they could hit 120 nuclear power plants. If I understand this, then I'm pretty sure the Russian military does too.

Therefore, this proposal is the equivalent of the desire to see the entire destruction of the United States of America with no possibility of recovery within the foreseeable future, let alone the incredible loss of life involved. Only someone with absolutely no understanding of physics, or empathy toward human life would consider such a solution. Such a person is obviously a sociopath.

This is one submarine. No intercontinental ballistic missiles and no close-range missiles deployed at the Arctic. We are talking about the possibility of over 6000 multi-warheaded missiles being deployed. Even 10% of these missiles getting through would cause the complete destruction of the North American continent. This is plain and simple insanity.

---

Quote:

---

I pointed out the website and got an email, which I quoted with permission.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JAYNEZTOWN:
Former Democratic Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard calls for Biden to meet with Putin

https://nypost.com/2022/02/26/former-democratic-congresswoman-tulsi-ga
bbard-calls-for-biden-to-meet-with-putin/

---