HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Is President Obama admitt...

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 06:40 AM

 

Is President Obama admitting we caused overthrow of Ukraine's government?

I'm all for openness and truth on the part of American leaders, but the comments our President recently made in regard to the overthrow of Ukraine's democratically elected government one year ago set a new standard for frankness. It is difficult to imagine how one can interpret his statement except to conclude he is admitting our government interfered most intrusively in the internal affairs of Ukraine, something we were treaty-bound not to do.



US Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs Victoria Nuland (R) and US Ambassador Geoffrey Pyatt (Reuters)


Obama openly admits 'brokering power transition' in Ukraine


In an interview with CNN’s Fareed Zakaria, Barack Obama acknowledged that the United States had "brokered a deal to transition power in Ukraine," thus admitting to a high level of democratic impropriety. Before we consider Obama’s revealing remarks, and how the Ukrainian people sold their country for a song, let’s rewind to November 2013, when then-President Viktor Yanukovich had shocked western capitals - and, more importantly, western markets - by suspending plans for an association agreement with the European Union. As if on command, thousands of Ukrainians suddenly poured into the streets of Kiev to protest the decision. Such a rapid reaction should not have come as a surprise. After all, a multitude of US government agencies – most notably, USAID - had been operating in Ukraine since the collapse of the Soviet Union, investing billions on its latest "democratic" pet project.

This is no conspiracy theory. On December 13, 2013, Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland, following her third trip to Ukraine in five weeks, told the National Press Club: "Since Ukraine's independence in 1991 the United States has…invested over $5 billion to assist Ukraine in needs and other goals." Exactly what those "other goals" may have been, and who helped underwrite them, seem rather obvious today.

Although many are tempted to believe otherwise, governments don't normally spend such prodigious sums of money in a foreign land unless it expects to get something hefty - in this case, Kiev’s loyalty - in return. Governments are by nature political opportunists, not philanthropists, which is precisely why Russia gave USAID the boot in 2012. Ukraine did not, and was forced to pay the piper, so to speak. We should note here that it was not just US taxpayer dollars that unwittingly provided the funds to support the coup d’ etat in Ukraine. In another softball interview with CNN’s Zakaria, billionaire George Soros last May coolly admitted: “I set up a foundation in Ukraine before Ukraine became independent of Russia. And the foundation has been functioning ever since and played an important part in events now.”

Certainly those billions of dollars weren’t spent just on humanitarian work, like distributing pastries to the Ukrainian rabble gathered on Independence Square. After all, the crucial question as to who would lend Ukraine a multi-billion dollar rescue package was the elephant parked on Maidan that few talked about. Once upon a time, western financial institutions had the market cornered on the lucrative task of bailing out cash-strapped countries. Today, however, other economic agencies - BRICS for example - are able to compete with the IMF. But after Kiev exploded in chaos and violence, the regular lender of last resort bagged itself another national trophy for above its fireplace.

(snip)


Read more, and view video of the President's remarks, at: http://rt.com/op-edge/228379-obama-power-transition-ukraine/


110 replies, 17244 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 110 replies Author Time Post
Reply Is President Obama admitting we caused overthrow of Ukraine's government? (Original post)
another_liberal Feb 2015 OP
Spider Jerusalem Feb 2015 #1
another_liberal Feb 2015 #5
Spider Jerusalem Feb 2015 #14
leveymg Feb 2015 #77
Spider Jerusalem Feb 2015 #85
Igel Feb 2015 #95
leveymg Feb 2015 #97
duhneece Feb 2015 #21
Spider Jerusalem Feb 2015 #23
Turbineguy Feb 2015 #101
MattSh Feb 2015 #60
Spider Jerusalem Feb 2015 #86
MattSh Feb 2015 #89
snappyturtle Feb 2015 #108
Android3.14 Feb 2015 #2
another_liberal Feb 2015 #3
KoKo Feb 2015 #53
KoKo Feb 2015 #56
randome Feb 2015 #57
uhnope Feb 2015 #96
snappyturtle Feb 2015 #107
RiverLover Feb 2015 #4
another_liberal Feb 2015 #7
Enthusiast Feb 2015 #18
SidDithers Feb 2015 #10
hobbit709 Feb 2015 #6
another_liberal Feb 2015 #8
SidDithers Feb 2015 #9
polly7 Feb 2015 #11
malaise Feb 2015 #16
newfie11 Feb 2015 #12
tammywammy Feb 2015 #13
another_liberal Feb 2015 #19
tammywammy Feb 2015 #22
Duckhunter935 Feb 2015 #27
JonLP24 Feb 2015 #43
another_liberal Feb 2015 #33
polly7 Feb 2015 #34
jeff47 Feb 2015 #50
JonLP24 Feb 2015 #51
DeSwiss Feb 2015 #44
pampango Feb 2015 #36
Tommy_Carcetti Feb 2015 #103
davidpdx Feb 2015 #37
Cha Feb 2015 #110
KoKo Feb 2015 #71
leveymg Feb 2015 #81
newfie11 Feb 2015 #15
polly7 Feb 2015 #17
nationalize the fed Feb 2015 #20
OverseaVisitor Feb 2015 #24
OilemFirchen Feb 2015 #38
another_liberal Feb 2015 #62
OilemFirchen Feb 2015 #79
another_liberal Feb 2015 #82
blackspade Feb 2015 #25
DetlefK Feb 2015 #26
OilemFirchen Feb 2015 #39
Adrahil Feb 2015 #28
SidDithers Feb 2015 #30
MattSh Feb 2015 #59
another_liberal Feb 2015 #31
randome Feb 2015 #35
Shemp Howard Feb 2015 #42
jeff47 Feb 2015 #48
randome Feb 2015 #49
Shemp Howard Feb 2015 #52
tammywammy Feb 2015 #54
jeff47 Feb 2015 #64
jeff47 Feb 2015 #47
snappyturtle Feb 2015 #109
NCTraveler Feb 2015 #29
Demeter Feb 2015 #32
Dr Hobbitstein Feb 2015 #40
DeSwiss Feb 2015 #41
Karmadillo Feb 2015 #46
another_liberal Feb 2015 #84
jeff47 Feb 2015 #45
johnp3907 Feb 2015 #78
Sunlei Feb 2015 #55
MattSh Feb 2015 #65
jeff47 Feb 2015 #67
MattSh Feb 2015 #73
jeff47 Feb 2015 #74
MattSh Feb 2015 #90
another_liberal Feb 2015 #91
MattSh Feb 2015 #94
OverseaVisitor Feb 2015 #87
Sunlei Feb 2015 #92
uhnope Feb 2015 #58
polly7 Feb 2015 #68
uhnope Feb 2015 #69
polly7 Feb 2015 #76
msanthrope Feb 2015 #70
treestar Feb 2015 #61
another_liberal Feb 2015 #63
jeff47 Feb 2015 #66
woo me with science Feb 2015 #72
sabrina 1 Feb 2015 #75
KoKo Feb 2015 #80
sabrina 1 Feb 2015 #93
Ramses Feb 2015 #98
sabrina 1 Feb 2015 #99
woo me with science Feb 2015 #83
woo me with science Feb 2015 #88
woo me with science Feb 2015 #100
Tommy_Carcetti Feb 2015 #102
another_liberal Feb 2015 #104
Tommy_Carcetti Feb 2015 #105
woo me with science Feb 2015 #106

Response to another_liberal (Original post)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 06:55 AM

1. Yanukovych caused the overthrow of his government

by being so crooked he had to screw his trousers on in the morning (seriously, the levels of corruption in the Ukrainian government were positively staggering; Yanukovych siphoned off untold millions and spent it on houses, vehicles, etc) and by initiating repressive brutality against protesters that threatened to trigger a civil war. (And it wasn't a "coup d'etat"; really, get a better source than Russia Today.)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Spider Jerusalem (Reply #1)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 07:03 AM

5. There is nothing in this piece which is not backed up by direct quotes . . .

 

Direct quotes from the individuals concerned, that is. I could understand a reluctance to believe anything Vicky Nuland says, but are you calling President Obama a liar?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to another_liberal (Reply #5)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 07:23 AM

14. "Direct quotes"?

Please point me to anything in that jumble of Russian propaganda that quotes any US official as saying "the US was behind the change of government in Ukraine". Oh, you can't, because it's not there. The "direct quotes" are open to a number of interpretations. For instance, the logical interpretation that, following popular demonstrations against Ukraine's alliance with Russia and in support of greater alignment with the EU and NATO, the new Ukrainian government turned to the West in a direct repudiation of Putin. Hence "brokered a transition of power". Which doesn't mean "we overthrew the government".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Spider Jerusalem (Reply #14)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 04:28 PM

77. We "brokered a deal to transition power in Ukraine" means "we overthrew the government." Really.

Even the President now admits it. You're really twisting up his statement and reality to deny that. Like some mustard with that?



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leveymg (Reply #77)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 09:02 PM

85. Except he was talking about the agreement to hold early elections.

This agreement: http://world.time.com/2014/02/21/ukraine-kiev-clashes-viktor-yanukovych-elections/

That's context you're not going to get from RT (which didn't even provide the entire quote).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leveymg (Reply #77)

Tue Feb 3, 2015, 03:50 PM

95. "broker, verb": to act as a broker for

"broker, noun": a person who functions as an intermediary between two or more parties in negotiating agreements, bargains, or the like.


Direct application of customarily accepted meanings is now "twisting"?

Did the US help in dealing as an intermediary between two or more parties? That's brokering.

Did the US take out one of the parties by force? That's a coup.

Even Yanukovich's night flight to the farthest Moscow was essentially abdication. And as shown by the fact that the moving vans were being loaded for a while before the agreement he reneged on was even finalized, planned before he signed that agreement. (What's it called when you sign an agreement you have no intention of being around to keep?)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Igel (Reply #95)

Tue Feb 3, 2015, 09:20 PM

97. One thing I don't need is a lesson in grammar. You could use one in Poli sci - a coup is not

Last edited Tue Feb 3, 2015, 10:22 PM - Edit history (2)

when a government takes another one out directly by force. That's an overt act of war. What happened in the Ukraine was an elected government was destabilized by a violent opposition, covertly backed by the west, and forced to flee abroad. That is an overthrow by agency, also known as destabilization leading to "regime change." The violent protests and subsequent offer of "brokerage" of an unscheduled election can be viewed as part of that regime change, which is how Yanukovich and the Russians see it. Obama appears to have acknowledged that in his comment, daring Russia to double-down on its own side of the table.

What makes this unusual is that Yanukovich, the elected President of Ukraine, fled to the superpower next door, where he announced the secession of the eastern province, Crimea, that the superpower had historically claimed as its own territory. That confirmed Yanulovich's role as the agent (pawn) of Russia in this game. Actually, Crimea had been part of the former Soviet Union which is actively reclaiming itself, using this power play by the west as an opportunity to do some reassembly of what may have appeared to be low-hanging fruit. The western powers doubled-down, in response, and that has set off a civil war in the Ukraine. That militarization of the game, in turn, has unleashed a potential for escalation to a new Cold War.

Frankly, Ukraine has history and geography against it. Not a good table to double-down on for the west. This part of the game we are unlikely to win.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Spider Jerusalem (Reply #1)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 07:44 AM

21. What is a good, fair source of info

A man I consider well informed about so many things said the Ukraine gov't was as close to a Nazi, right wing government as we've seen since Germany in the 30's and 40's. True or no?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to duhneece (Reply #21)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 07:56 AM

23. Russia fits that description much better, honestly

see: Russian laws criminalising LGBT people; see also: Russian laws criminalising protest and freedom of speech (remember Pussy Riot?); see also: Russian military operations/wars for, apparently, territorial gain in the service of Putin's dream of "Greater Russia" (ie reconstituting the old USSR by force; Ukraine, Georgia/South Ossetia/Abkhazia, Chechnya, etc.) Putin has been destabilising former Soviet countries by backing breakaway pro-Russian groups in Ukraine, South Ossetia and Abkhazia (all of which is very similar indeed to the events leading up to the Anschluss in 1938, or to the "Sudeten Germans" in Czechoslovakia).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to duhneece (Reply #21)

Wed Feb 4, 2015, 06:37 AM

101. The people who provide "news" (from both sides)

were equally well trained in the art of propaganda by the Soviets.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Spider Jerusalem (Reply #1)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 12:53 PM

60. Uh, what repressive brutality?

He didn't do 1/10 of what happened to Occupy protesters in the USA. Nothing that Yanukovich did threatened to start a civil war. That only occurred after he was gone. Most of the violence came from the US supported side.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MattSh (Reply #60)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 09:04 PM

86. At the point he was voted out?

The protests had broken down, troops had been deployed, and over a hundred people had been killed. If you don't think it threatened to start a civil war, I submit you don't know what you're talking about and should stop embarrassing yourself.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Spider Jerusalem (Reply #86)

Tue Feb 3, 2015, 01:21 AM

89. Oh, so you subscribe to this theory?

Last edited Tue Feb 3, 2015, 01:52 AM - Edit history (1)



or possibly this one is more to your liking?



Or you can subscribe to both. A great many people do.

ON EDIT: I submit that you don't know what you're talking about. How many years have you lived in Ukraine? I've been here 9 years. How many articles have you read about Ukraine in the last year? I've read thousands (plural). Me thinks that you're the one embarrassing yourself. OFF EDIT

The best independent investigation of what really happened is the one, from German TV. Don't worry, it's subtitled.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MattSh (Reply #89)

Sat Feb 7, 2015, 03:09 PM

108. Thanks for posting the German TV video. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to another_liberal (Original post)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 06:57 AM

2. RT?

 

Thanks for the unbiased source.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Android3.14 (Reply #2)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 07:00 AM

3. The story is backed up by direct quotes . . .

 

Direct quotes from the individuals concerned. What the hell do you want!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to another_liberal (Reply #3)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 10:43 AM

53. Here is the link to CNN's Zakaria Interview segment with PBO on Russia...

CNN’s FAREED ZAKARIA GPS features a wide-ranging interview with President Barack Obama in New Delhi as the President concluded his state visit to India. Topics included the impact of the death of Saudi Arabia’s King Abdullah on the fragile Middle Eastern region, Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu’s upcoming speech to Congress on President Obama’s Iran policy, the need for drone use regulations, China’s apparent distress over the burgeoning Obama-Modi friendship, Russia’s failing economy and its success in de-stabilizing Ukraine, and the legacy of his administration. Videos and a full transcript of the interview are below.

http://www.cnn.com/videos/tv/2015/01/31/exp-gps-obama-sot-putin.cnn/video/playlists/fareed-zakaria-interviews-president-obama/

Are the U.S. and Russia in a new Cold War? Are there any signs that Russia's Putin is ready to back-down? Pres. Obama answers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KoKo (Reply #53)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 11:11 AM

56. BTW: What PBO left out of this interview is revealing...

He had the NeoCon and Wall Street Investment Houses "Talking Points" down pat....but he left the history out what actually occurred in Ukraine when and after the Protests began. He left out the Crimea situation which is comparable to Clinton with Kosovo and that the Urkrainian elected Government was overthrown...etc. He left out John McCain's early involvement, Victoria Nuland's handing out cookies, and phone conversation "Fuck the EU" and the US Wall Street involved "new team" installed in Ukraine which he credits with putting Ukraine on the path to recovery. He doesn't seem to realize that not all Americans watch CNN/FAUX NEWS and the rest of the Corporate owned networks for information. We have Global Media available and not just "Russian controlled media" (his words) to inform ourselves.

It is disturbing that he says the US won't get involved with Russia beyond the harsher sanctions we will keep imposing, but that NATO will be used if there is any evidence of Russia involved in any surrounding NATO members. Meaning NATO will ramp up militarily against Russia but "our hand" will not be visible.

It reveals a side to Obama that I wish I hadn't seen...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KoKo (Reply #56)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 11:15 AM

57. So if Russia gets 'involved' with NATO members, nothing should be done?

 

He's being upfront with us about the conditions that will require action. And you wish you hadn't seen that?
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Don't ever underestimate the long-term effects of a good night's sleep.[/center][/font][hr]

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KoKo (Reply #56)

Tue Feb 3, 2015, 05:32 PM

96. cookies of evil

 

lol

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KoKo (Reply #56)

Sat Feb 7, 2015, 02:30 PM

107. "It reveals a side to Obama that I wish I hadn't seen..."

Me too. I think the President's words are always carefully chosen, he often hesitates in his delivery to get the right one. Therefore, I found this found part very disturbing:

And as a consequence, Russia's economy was growing, they had to the opportunity to begin diversifying their economy, their relations across Europe and around the world were sound, they joined the WTO with assistance from us. And since Mr. Putin made this decision around Crimea and Ukraine - not because of some grand strategy, but essentially because he was caught off-balance by the protests in the Maidan and Yanukovych then fleeing after we had brokered a deal to transition power in Ukraine - since that time, this improvisation that he's been doing has getting - has gotten him deeper and deeper into a situation that is a violation of international law, that violates the integrity, territorial integrity and sovereignty of Ukraine, has isolated Russia diplomatically, has made Europe wary of doing business with Russia, has allowed the imposition of sanctions that are crippling Russia's economy at a time when their oil revenues are dropping.

http://cnnpressroom.blogs.cnn.com/2015/02/01/pres-obama-on-fareed-zakaria-gps-cnn-exclusive/


He nonchantly glides over the words, "And since Mr. Putin made this decision around Crimea and Ukraine-..." What decision? As I recall the Crimeans and Eastern Ukrainians sought out Russia...not the other way around. Of course, at this point this mis-direction has been skillfully repeated so many times that people believe it. (Poke #1)

The President goes on to say that Putin was caught off-balance. I think it's insulting and naive to believe Putin did not know the current events that were occurring in the Maidan, etc. (Poke #2)

Again remember measured speech....saying we (?) had brokered a deal is far from what is being claimed down thread that this brokering was about elections. If that were true, why didn't he say, "...we brokered early elections." Instead he used brokered a deal which is a far cry from elections. imho

I find it laughable that the President sees Russia diplomatically isolated. If that's the case, someone should tell Germany and France. So Russia is isolated...(Poke #3)

Well, I worry that continually poking the bear through words spewing from our leaders and their media minions may result in a conflict, a war, that a war weary country can't win without nuclear weapons. I also think, last thought (!), that the U.S. is more likely to push the button, after all, we did it once. I wouldn't doubt that Germany and France think so too thus their peace efforts. Can't imagine Europe wanting another war on their continent.

edit: 1) Accusing Russia of violating international law is projection. Good Lord we were the ones doing the regime change brokering! And saying Russia is violating the territory and sovereignty of Ukraine is saying that Russia has invaded. The Ukrainian defense minister claimed on Ukrainian tv no less that the regular Russia army has not invaded.

2) Maybe France is wary of completing its business with delivery of the ships it built for Russia out of fear of the West. France is between a rock and a hard place....

That entire interview bothered me a great deal....as you can see!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Android3.14 (Reply #2)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 07:00 AM

4. Obama's own words

No bias needed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Reply #4)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 07:04 AM

7. His comments are on the video . . .

 

The man did say what he said.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Reply #4)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 07:34 AM

18. We can ignore Obama's words if we wish.

So there! It might have been a simple slip of the tongue. [URL=.html][IMG][/IMG][/URL]

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Android3.14 (Reply #2)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 07:15 AM

10. It's all they've got...

it's all they've ever got.

Sid

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to another_liberal (Original post)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 07:04 AM

6. you know what Mark Twain said about who had the right to use the word "WE"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hobbit709 (Reply #6)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 07:05 AM

8. Not off the top of my head, no . . .

 

Please enlighten us.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to another_liberal (Original post)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 07:13 AM

9. ROFL...

Nuland!! Cookies!!

What a fucking joke.

Sid

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SidDithers (Reply #9)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 07:17 AM

11. Nah ...... not really.

Not for the 5,000 or so who've been killed, maimed, burnt alive, etc. etc. Not a fucking joke at all.

But then, there were some who laughed at Iraqi corpses floating in the water too .......... because, Hussein.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to polly7 (Reply #11)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 07:26 AM

16. +1,000

Only Western dead matter

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to another_liberal (Original post)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 07:22 AM

12. Thanks for posting this

Much of it was on the news at the time surprisingly.
It's as if America just can't help itself and must meddle in other countries affaires. This, of course, is always to the detriment of said country and there are many.
It's out there if people want to look but few will. It's easier blame the messenger.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to another_liberal (Original post)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 07:23 AM

13. Obama's referring to the early elections agreed to before Yanukovych fled

http://world.time.com/2014/02/21/ukraine-kiev-clashes-viktor-yanukovych-elections/

Ukraine President and Opponents Sign Deal in Bid to End Violence

Early elections and other concessions are part of an internationally-brokered deal to end battles between police and protesters in Kiev

Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych and opposition leaders signed a deal Friday that will bring early elections and a new coalition government, an internationally-brokered agreement intended to end the fighting between police and protesters that has left about 75 dead and scores wounded in Kiev this week.

Yanukovych’s office announced that the centreal government and the opposition reached the deal after negotiations with European Union diplomats. The deal includes early elections and a promise by the president to form a coalition government. Yanukovych said in a statement on his website that he would begin the process for early elections, but he did not give a date, the Associated Press reports. He also promised constitutional reforms that would limit the power of the presidency, which has been a key demand for Kiev’s protesters. Ukraine’s parliament voted Friday in favor of amnesty for people who were detained during the protests, Reuters reports, and the parliament also voted to release the prominent jailed opposition leader Yulia Tymoshenko.

Foreign ministers from Germany, France and Poland sought a deal after two days of clashes between protesters and police around Kiev’s Independence Square left about 75 dead. Some of the fiercest fighting in the past few days left the bodies of twenty people scattered on the ground not far from where Yanukovych was meeting with the E.U. diplomats, Reuters reports.

The United States, which had been considering sanctions of its own, welcomes the easing of tensions.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tammywammy (Reply #13)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 07:35 AM

19. Except our well-funded fascists took over the Rada and staged our coup instead.

 

I guess Nuland was afraid the "early elections" Yanukovich had agreed to might, after all, be won by the wrong people. It was a more sure thing to just have Right Sector throw the President and all his supporters out of government and out of the country.

Hey, it worked too. Isn't everything in Ukraine just aces today?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to another_liberal (Reply #19)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 07:45 AM

22. The "transition" Obama is referring to in your OP is the deal for early elections.

Yanukovych fled after the deal for early elections was agreed to. The early elections would have transitioned power.

And as a consequence, Russia's economy was growing, they had to the opportunity to begin diversifying their economy, their relations across Europe and around the world were sound, they joined the WTO with assistance from us. And since Mr. Putin made this decision around Crimea and Ukraine - not because of some grand strategy, but essentially because he was caught off-balance by the protests in the Maidan and Yanukovych then fleeing after we had brokered a deal to transition power in Ukraine - since that time, this improvisation that he's been doing has getting - has gotten him deeper and deeper into a situation that is a violation of international law, that violates the integrity, territorial integrity and sovereignty of Ukraine, has isolated Russia diplomatically, has made Europe wary of doing business with Russia, has allowed the imposition of sanctions that are crippling Russia's economy at a time when their oil revenues are dropping.

http://cnnpressroom.blogs.cnn.com/2015/02/01/pres-obama-on-fareed-zakaria-gps-cnn-exclusive/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tammywammy (Reply #22)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 08:17 AM

27. Thanks

 

RT tends to leave those things out and some people here fall for the propaganda. Context matters to most but I guess not all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Duckhunter935 (Reply #27)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 09:49 AM

43. The RT op-ed actually includes a video of Obama saying exactly what the poster you replied to posted

but there is a lot being left out Obama mentions and context would be helpful in understanding the whole early elections.

Following the Presidential election of Petro Poroshenko, a wealthy businessman with support from European allies & Obama wanted to hold early elections for Parliament, before the 5 years was up. This new election prohibited Eastern regions of Ukraine form voting as well as Crimea. Crimean citizens couldn't vote in the election, turnout was a low 32% well the western parts had a 70% turnout.

This is actually contrary to what others such as Hillary Clinton : "We share the view of OSCE monitors that Sunday's election constituted a step backward for Ukrainian democracy"

Obama mentions Yankovych fleeing after the power was brokered but he signed the early elections into law, his own party later disowned them. Parliament voted to remove him from office after he extended an existing treaty with Russia from 2017 to sometime in the 2020s, 2022 if I'm not mistaken. Also 5 constitutional court judges were dismissed for "oath breaking" by Verkhovna Rada, approved by Parliament. Then Yankovych fleed but still it is an interesting choice of words by Obama given the context. One of Yankovych's more controversial moves was adding Russian to the official language (the adding or keeping off Russian as an official language is what qualifies as a politicized issue).

A lot of what he says about Russia is even more interesting. I could say more but basically paints it as Russia could be so much more if they agreed to play ball by our rules, he is right about their interests in Crimea though I wouldn't worry about the territory aspect since Crimea has changed hands so many times, but Crimea Parliament declared itself Independent & annexed with Russia so it basically fell into their laps. The international laws & this or that is basically what the dispute is about, Crimean Parliament cited Kosovo in its decision & they feel they had the right, within international law do what they did.

Interesting to say "allowed sanctions" on themselves. Indeed. Imagine if the roles were reversed & it was Russia, Crimea & Eastern parts of Ukraine that wanted to join EU & receive IMF extortion funds & it was Ukraine (that wanted to go the other way--wouldn't make sense given that natural resources is a major part of this). Ukraine would be allowing sanctions on themselves.

I personally don't have a dog in this fight except to say not to have a dog in this fight which is where I differ when it comes US/NATO/EU

On edit - My knowledge is very limited, especially in comparison to other long standing identity politics driven conflicts but I'd recommend in asking another_liberal more questions as he knows a hell lot more than I do. I'm not sure if he/she is on a side but from my POV the poster appears to be defending the truth more than anything, he/she may be off but there certainly is a Pro-Western Ukraine bloc that are off, in disputing that anyone in Ukraine is unhappy & the only ones upset or fighting is the Russian Army.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tammywammy (Reply #22)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 08:45 AM

33. He fled because our neo-fascist armed mobs had seized the Rada and the Presidential Palace . . .

 

President Yanukovich and others of his political party fled to save their lives.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to another_liberal (Reply #33)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 08:49 AM

34. But ........ he was supposed to stick around to be tortured and sodomized in the street

like Gaddafi, publicly hung by the neck like Hussein or murdered like other overthrown leaders of gov'ts throughout time (whether you liked them or not). That he didn't, just proves it wasn't really a coup at all!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to another_liberal (Reply #33)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 10:24 AM

50. Again, your timing is wrong.

Protests -> negotiations brokered by the US and other countries -> early elections -> Yanukovich's allies lose -> Yanukovich flees.

You're dropping out the middle part. Because a "news" organization literally run by the Russian government is leaving that out.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #50)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 10:33 AM

51. Yanukovych's Party of Regions actually had the highest total popular vote in the early elections

He actually signed off on the early elections now his allies may have lost considering much of Ukraine couldn't participate in the new elections, due to protests & rebellion in those parts. he same party disowned him, Parliament voted to remove him and the President that asked for these new elections after he was elected, before the 5 years dismissed 5 constitutional court judges for violating "oaths". --> Yankovich flees

A whole lot is being left out, including this was an Op-Ed and if we expect the Opinion Editorials to be non-biased & report all the facts, leave things out as an indictment against RT itself. Certainly, it probably has an effect regarding that much like Forbes editorial & the constant defense of the oil & gas industry & 99% should be "giddy with excitement" due to the news that the 1% wealth is on track to "surge".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tammywammy (Reply #22)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 09:52 AM

44. There are none so blind as those who will not see.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to another_liberal (Reply #19)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 09:20 AM

36. Yanukovich still had full control of the military and security forces. They had kept the protesters

bottled up in small part of the city for months. I suspect those same military and security forces could easily have protected government buildings (which was one provision of the agreement between the government and protesters) if Yanukovych had decided to stay in office and live up to the agreement. Instead he decided to flee to Russia and take his billions with him.

Leader of the Party of Regions, Oleksandr Yefremov, travelled to Luhansk to meet with local leaders and law enforcement agents to discuss the possibility of the south-east of Ukraine declaring independence, and seceding from the state. The chairman of the Supreme Council of Crimea Vladimir Konstantinov traveled to Moscow where he announced that the Autonomous Republic of Crimea will secede from Ukraine if there would change of power.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Ukrainian_revolution#Opposition_leaders_meeting_with_President_Yanukovych

On February 20 Konstantinov got back from Moscow and announced that Crimea would secede if there were a change in power.

While Yanukovich was still in power the "recently-returned-from-Moscow" leader of Crimea warns that if there is a change in power, Crimea will secede. Surprise, surprise! Within 24 hours the "I'm leaving because I want to "coup" happened and there was a change in power. Makes you wonder if Yanukovich did not receive a phone call from a Moscow area code at some point to let him know what Moscow and Konstantinov had worked out for what was going to happen.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to another_liberal (Reply #19)

Wed Feb 4, 2015, 11:10 AM

103. Actually, Yanukovych took three days to leisurely pack up his things and then flew away.

It's all on video. You know that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tammywammy (Reply #13)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 09:22 AM

37. Thank you for putting it in context

We all know that some on DU like to maliciously accuse Obama of doing things he didn't.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to davidpdx (Reply #37)

Sat Feb 7, 2015, 08:11 PM

110. Yes, they don't need no stinking context when trying to cover putin's sorry **** and put the blame

on President Obama and "the West!!1111".. it's pathetic.. big ol RT fans. Anything to grab on to make it seem like their CT are actual occurrences.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tammywammy (Reply #13)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 02:40 PM

71. Russia's Foreign Minister, Sergey Lavrov says Obama Confirmed US involved in Ukraine Coup

Obama’s words on power transition in Ukraine confirm US involvement in state coup — Lavrov
World
February 02, 16:02 UTC+3
According to the Russian foreign minister, Barack Obama confirmed the US has been involved in the Ukrainian state coup since the very beginning

US President Barack Obama
© EPA/Olivier Douliery/POOL

BEIJING, February 2. /TASS/. The statement of US President Barack Obama on the United States role in "brokering power transition" in Ukraine confirms that Washington was involved in the February state coup, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said on Monday.

Speaking about Obama’s interview with CNN on Sunday, Lavrov said the US leader confirmed that the US has been "since the very beginning involved in an anti-governmental coup which Obama called neutrally a "power transition."

"The rhetoric that sounded in the interview speaks about Washington’s intention to further do everything to implicitly support the actions of the current Kiev authorities which have apparently taken the course towards suppressing the conflict by force only," Lavrov said.

The Russian foreign minister said Europe also shares the assessment that there is a need to establish a direct dialogue between the Kiev authorities and the representatives of the self-proclaimed Donetsk and Luhansk people’s republics.

However, Lavrov said this effort has encountered attempts to disrupt the negotiation process.

"But I’m convinced that everyone who sincerely wishes peace to the Ukrainian people, and Russia is definitely among these countries like as I understand are Germany, France and other Europeans, and the OSCE, then we need to continue this effort and do everything so that the direct dialogue is launched and should bring the results," Lavrov said.

http://tass.ru/en/world/774903

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tammywammy (Reply #13)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 05:06 PM

81. The street battles that forced the deal were part of the overthrow. Where is the distinction?

How is a change in government forced by violent protests distinct from a coup?

What complicates the analysis is that the President fled the capitol and declared that the eastern part of the country was succeeding. It seems more accurate to categorize this as a coup that led to a civil war.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to another_liberal (Original post)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 07:24 AM

15. Thanks for posting this

Much of it was on the news at the time surprisingly.
It's as if America just can't help itself and must meddle in other countries affaires. This, of course, is always to the detriment of said country and there are many.
It's out there if people want to look but few will. It's easier blame the messenger.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to another_liberal (Original post)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 07:27 AM

17. Why not? The rest of the world knows it ..... 'bout time, I'd say. nt.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to another_liberal (Original post)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 07:39 AM

20. k/r

Certainly those billions of dollars weren’t spent just on humanitarian work, like distributing pastries to the Ukrainian rabble gathered on Independence Square.


The People of the US MUST DEMAND an audit of this $5 BILLION DOLLARS
Who could oppose that?



"After three visits to Ukraine in five weeks, Victoria Nuland explains that in the past two decades, the United States has spent five Billion dollars ($5,000,000,000) to subvert Ukraine, and assures her listeners that there are prominent businessmen and government officials who support the US project to tear Ukraine away from its historic relationship with Russia and into the US sphere of interest (via "Europe".

Victoria Nuland is the wife of PNAC Co-Founder Robert Kagan, leader of the younger generation of "neo-cons". After serving as Hillary Clinton's spokesperson, she is now undersecretary of state for Europe and Eurasia." Diana Johnstone

Hear Victoria Nuland's very concise, almost victorious speech



"Fuck the EU" -- Victoria Nuland

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nationalize the fed (Reply #20)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 08:00 AM

24. Let just wait

 




Then we will know the truth.

This is crime against humanity

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nationalize the fed (Reply #20)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 09:25 AM

38. Wut, again?

The United States spent $5 billion on Ukraine anti-government riots

Since 1992, the government has spent about $5.1 billion to support democracy-building programs in Ukraine, Thompson said, with money flowing mostly from the Department of State via U.S. Agency for International Development, as well as the departments of Defense, Energy, Agriculture and others. The United States does this with hundreds of other countries.

About $2.4 billion went to programs promoting peace and security, which could include military assistance, border security, human trafficking issues, international narcotics abatement and law enforcement interdiction, Thompson said. More money went to categories with the objectives of "governing justly and democratically" ($800 million), "investing in people" ($400 million), economic growth ($1.1 billion), and humanitarian assistance ($300 million).

...

That’s a distorted understanding of remarks given by a State Department official. She was referring to money spent on democracy-building programs in Ukraine since it broke off from the Soviet Union in 1991.

We rate the claim Pants on Fire.




Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OilemFirchen (Reply #38)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 01:24 PM

62. And on neo-Nazis . . .

 

We apparently spent a good deal on neo-Nazis too. They did come in handy when we needed the Maidan demonstrations to turn into violent riots with buildings set on fire and policemen shot in the streets; you know, so as to force President Yanukovich's hand.

Just a year ago . . . seems so much longer, doesn't it?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to another_liberal (Reply #62)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 04:43 PM

79. Nice non-sequitur.

The day wouldn't be complete without one.

BTW, you do know what Mark Twain said about who had the right to use the word "WE", right? (h/t hobbit709).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OilemFirchen (Reply #79)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 05:57 PM

82. I love Mark Twain . . .

 

However, as I mentioned to hobby, that particular quote escapes me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to another_liberal (Original post)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 08:00 AM

25. Interesting read....

But the facts are suspect....it is an RT oped.....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to another_liberal (Original post)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 08:03 AM

26. I call bullshit. If your story only works by leaving things out, it's a conspiracy theory.

Thousands of protesters showing up. Absolutely incredible!!!!!! Who has ever heard of several thousand people showing up for a demonstration!!!!!!!!! And why would people from the western-minded western part of Ukraine launch protests when the ukrainian government decides to cut ties to the West???????

And who has ever heard of money NOT being used to overthrow a government????????

And the US scheming AFTER the ouster of Yanukovich is basically an admission that they schemed BEFORE his ouster. Right? One can't exist without the other!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DetlefK (Reply #26)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 09:33 AM

39. Rule of thunb:

When an editorial includes the statement "This is no conspiracy theory."... it's a conspiracy theory.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to another_liberal (Original post)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 08:27 AM

28. You're kidding, right?

 

You post a self-serving propaganda hit piece from RT and you want to be taken seriously?


And how is "brokering a deal to transition" an impropriety? That's good old fashioned diplomacy.

You've now trasitioned into full blown self-parody.

Maybe Obama did it while flying a Ukrainian Su-25! I'm sure RT has a photoshopped pic of that somewhere.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Adrahil (Reply #28)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 08:36 AM

30. The Putin boot-liking is strong in this thread...nt

Sid

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SidDithers (Reply #30)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 12:49 PM

59. And you know what they say about a certain river in Africa...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Adrahil (Reply #28)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 08:38 AM

31. What the US did was organize and instigate the overthrow of another sovereign government . . .

 

That is something we would recognize as a major violation of international law, were it being done by any country other than our own.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to another_liberal (Reply #31)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 08:51 AM

35. Really. You pose the question in your OP then reveal your pre-determined answer.

 

Good grief, man, find another hobby. You're not even very good at...whatever it is you do here.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to another_liberal (Reply #31)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 09:49 AM

42. You're more right than wrong here, a_l.

I don't know if I'd go as far as to use the word "instigate" here, but the US most certainly interfered in the internal politics of the Ukraine. And the Ukraine is not just any nation, but a nation that borders on an always-suspicious Russia.

Now, if Putin tried that in Canada or Mexico, it would be roundly condemned. Obama would be denouncing it at the UN.

But normal standards of behavior just don't apply the USA! The USA can do what it wants, where it wants, when it wants. Because the USA always knows what's best for the rest of the world!

And anyone who disagrees is an isolationist, a Nazi, a puppet of Putin, or whatever.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Shemp Howard (Reply #42)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 10:16 AM

48. No, they're really not more right than wrong.

Protests against the Ukrainian government started before the incidents you cite. The negotiations brokered by the US and others were for early elections, to stop the protests.

If Canada was almost in a civil war and other countries brokered a peaceful settlement of that, I don't think the US would mind terribly.

In Ukraine, the Russia-aligned rebels decided to start a civil war anyway. Well...."rebels" that just happened to have a whole lot of Russian equipment....and speak Russian.....with supplies being driven over the Russian border. And we're supposed to believe a "news" organization that is literally run by the Russian government on this?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #48)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 10:19 AM

49. It's simply an alternate opinion, jeff.

 

You know, like the one that says farting cows are responsible for climate change.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font][hr]

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #48)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 10:40 AM

52. You missed my point, Jeff.

The USA has no business "brokering" anything in the Ukraine. That should be the job of the UN, period.

Wars often start because of mistrust. And mistrust occurs when one nation interferes right on the borders of another.

As to your Canadian civil war analogy, you mentioned "other countries" as doing the brokering. That analogy does not fit, unless the "other countries" were lead by Russia, and the brokering resulted in a pro-Russian Canadian government.

You can bet that the USA would not be happy with that sort of interference.

But you are correct about Russia Today being a very suspect source. I posted my comment after reading the entire transcript of Obama's interview, at a CNN website.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Shemp Howard (Reply #52)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 10:47 AM

54. Germany, France and Poland brokered the deal for early elections. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Shemp Howard (Reply #52)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 02:16 PM

64. Yes, isolationism worked so great after WWI.

That's why there's a I after it.

We help broker deals. So does every other large country on the planet. You want to turn that into evil, because then you have a story you want to tell. You ignore actual history when it doesn't fit your story.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to another_liberal (Reply #31)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 10:11 AM

47. You've got the timing backwards.

But that doesn't tell the story you want to tell.

What happened: Protests -> Negotiations for early elections, negotiations brokered by Western countries -> Western-aligned politicians win elections -> Yanukovych flees -> Rebellion in the East starts.

The US didn't start it, as RT claims. But it's RT, so that is not surprising. A "news organization" literally run by the Russian government is always going to say what makes the Russian government happy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #47)

Sat Feb 7, 2015, 05:06 PM

109. Yanukovych fled Ukraine long before there were any elections. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to another_liberal (Original post)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 08:32 AM

29. See post 13 and 22.

 

It is what makes du great. Many here are better at vetting news stories than government run media or media in general.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to another_liberal (Original post)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 08:40 AM

32. Yes he did overthrow Ukraine's democratically elected government

 

If he admitted as much, it's one for the records.

It's an open secret:

Open to the rest of the world, secret to the rubes in the USA.

Who will come after and punish such a crime? I think it will punish the perpetrator without anyone else having to lift a finger.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to another_liberal (Original post)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 09:41 AM

40. No. Context is key.

 

The context has been given numerous times in this thread. RT is a right wing govt mouthpiece. Why would we believe ANYTHING they say?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to another_liberal (Original post)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 09:49 AM

41. Oh.....

 

...I see you've forgotten what time it was. Ummmm, here's a reminder:

- It's Zappa Time.......



K&R

[center][/center]

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DeSwiss (Reply #41)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 10:05 AM

46. +1

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DeSwiss (Reply #41)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 07:38 PM

84. Great quote!

 

Frank Zappa had a World-class bullshit detector. He was twenty years ahead of his time, at least.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to another_liberal (Original post)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 10:01 AM

45. Fucking cookies. Damn Oreos always overthrow a government. (nt)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #45)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 04:30 PM

78. Like this one did:

<a href="http://imgur.com/hLsvMSB"><img src="" title="source: imgur.com" /></a>

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to another_liberal (Original post)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 11:05 AM

55. didn't happen that way. article should quote from the signed treaties/agreements.

In mid-2013 the EU-Ukraine Council endorsed an updated EU-Ukraine Association Agenda , designed to pave the way for the Association Agreement and the Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area (DCFTA ).

2013-Agenda http://eeas.europa.eu/ukraine/docs/eu_ukr_ass_agenda_24jun2013.pdf

4/2013- Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area DCFTA http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2013/april/tradoc_150981.pdf

On 5 March 2014 the European Commission agreed on a financial assistance package of at least EUR 11 bn in loans and grants from the EU budget and EU-based international financial institutions, to:
##help stabilise Ukraine's economic & financial situation
##support transition
##encourage political & economic reforms
##support inclusive development.

After signing the political chapters of the EU-Ukraine Association Agreementat the EU summit of 21 March 2014, both parties signed the remaining sections of the Agreement - including the Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area (DCFTA) - in the margins of the EU summit of 27 June 2014. continues here- http://eeas.europa.eu/ukraine/index_en.htm

Then Putin invaded because he did not want to lose control of Russian gas for Ukraines grain.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sunlei (Reply #55)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 02:19 PM

65. Putin did not invade...

the top Ukrainian general has stated so.

I'm sure he knows more about the situation than you do.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MattSh (Reply #65)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 02:22 PM

67. Nah, the rebels just managed to find tons of Russian military equipment

and the supplies traveling from Russia to Ukraine are actually gifts between families. See, Russians have a tradition of giving each other large quantities of ammunition and artillery.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #67)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 03:14 PM

73. Invasion

noun
1. an act or instance of invading or entering as an enemy, especially by an army.

In other words, military equipment cannot invade.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MattSh (Reply #73)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 03:22 PM

74. And if it was only equipment, you'd have a point.

But oddly enough, a whole lot of people using this equipment are speaking in Russian. Apparently, a war zone in Ukraine is a popular vacation destination for Russian soldiers.

If our goal was to start a war in Ukraine, we have way more evidence than we need to do so. For example, we've released satellite photos of artillery set up in Russia, shelling Ukraine. It's out of a desire to not start a war that the US has not been more aggressive.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #74)

Tue Feb 3, 2015, 01:46 AM

90. Geez. You've never heard of the Soviet Union?

Last edited Tue Feb 3, 2015, 02:34 AM - Edit history (1)

AKA, the USSR? Seriously?

OF COURSE they're speaking Russian. Russian was the lingua franca of the USSR. Ukraine was part of the USSR.

Sadly, you don't seem to know much about the world outside the USA. Do you really think that in countries around the world that everybody speaks the national language and as soon as you cross the border, volia! everybody speaks another language?



And this map even overstates the prevelence of Ukrainian in Kiev. I've lived here over 9 years and I can tell you it's difficult to find Ukrainian speakers in Kiev.

And how about this?



The territory where the war is happening was a part of Russia but Lenin ceded it to the Ukraine SSR. At that time it was absolutely meaningless, because they were all part of the same country. Likewise, Khrushchev ceded Crimea to Ukraine SSR in 1954. Again absolutely meaningless. Until the USSR broke up. Then residents of the areas found themselves in an alien nation, one they had no voice in deciding.

Here's a screenshot from the largest online retailer in Ukraine, based in Kiev. Notice the (044) number? That's Kiev. Notice the "This page is in Russian. Would you like to translate it?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MattSh (Reply #90)

Tue Feb 3, 2015, 06:41 AM

91. Well done, MattSh . . .

 

That is the best map-based breakdown of Ukraine's patchwork of ethnicities and regions I have seen.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to another_liberal (Reply #91)

Tue Feb 3, 2015, 02:43 PM

94. Feel free to use any part of it or all of it...

as necessary whenever the need arises!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #67)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 09:16 PM

87. Yeah

 




Well Santa Claus comes calling

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MattSh (Reply #65)

Tue Feb 3, 2015, 10:29 AM

92. Putin invaded a country next to Russia. That was Ukraine. Both russia & ukraine 'leadership' were c

corrupt, stealing from the countries economy & revenue for centuries.

That is why the 'sanction' of banning bank access to their piles of looted/stolen money pissed off Putin's 'buddies so very much.

Putin better watch out, Russia has a history of removing main Leadership who cut off Russia's corrupt looters.

Russia doesn't have access to thousands of slave laborers to do the farming and dredge the black sea for them, unless they make a deal with china for slave labor.

And that will show-up on satellite images. just like Putin's fake 'convoys of aid trucks' and military invaders with no mark on their uniforms. And Putin's stupid ground missile shooting down a plane full of innocent civilians.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to another_liberal (Original post)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 12:45 PM

58. Isn't there a DU "comedy" forum or group for OPs like these?

 

lol

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uhnope (Reply #58)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 02:23 PM

68. No, but there's one for yours, I think. nt.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to polly7 (Reply #68)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 02:28 PM

69. overpaid.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uhnope (Reply #69)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 03:52 PM

76. Yes, I bet you are. Try a bit harder. nt.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uhnope (Reply #58)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 02:33 PM

70. There's the Dumbgeon....

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to another_liberal (Original post)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 01:00 PM

61. What's the motive?

Why would Obama want to do such a dastardly thing? To be mean to Pootie?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to treestar (Reply #61)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 01:35 PM

63. I doubt President Obama originated the policy . . .

 

The policy to expand American hegemony over Ukraine (and to do so through "Regime Change" is a hand-me-down from the George W. Bush administration, as is its most visible proponent, Victoria Nuland. Why Ms. Nuland was employed by a Democratic administration in a position as important as Undersecretary of State for European Affairs is a total mystery to me. Even leaving the post unfilled would have been far better.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to treestar (Reply #61)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 02:19 PM

66. Hey now! Don't try to bring logic into this.

Just say Obama is beholden to Satan and get on with the story Russia wants to tell.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to another_liberal (Original post)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 03:27 PM

75. It can hardly be denied. I mean when you have neocons ON TAPE plotting the coup, even naming

'OUR GUY, YATZE', and the whole world gets to hear the plot in action, it would be foolish to deny it.

Virginia Nuland, neocon, husband signed the PNAC. John McCain was there too.

So any attempt to deny the neocons were there plotting a coup, is simply laughable.

They have their propagandists all over social media, but they're not getting a very good reception.

The Iraq lies and the devastating war that followed, opened the eyes of the world to the neocon deceivers.

I wouldn't be surprised either if they went behind the President's back, just as they tried to do with Iran recently.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #75)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 04:50 PM

80. State Dept Psaki grilled over leaked tapes--"This is What You Cook for Ukraine?"

'This is what you cook for Ukraine?' State Dept Psaki grilled over leaked tape
Published on Feb 6, 2014
Senior US State Department official Victoria Nuland has allegedly been caught giving a harsh message to the EU while discussing Ukrainian opposition leaders' roles in the country's future government. The phone call was taped and posted on YouTube

.

US officials refused to confirm or deny the tape's authenticity, but State Department spokesperson Jan Psaki said that she "didn't say it was inauthentic." While being grilled about this and other tape-related statements, Psaki hinted that the tape could have been leaked by Moscow.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KoKo (Reply #80)

Tue Feb 3, 2015, 02:35 PM

93. Thanks, I guess they don't want to talk about that, despite the wide coverage it received at the

time. So they plotted a coup. The whole world knows, only Americans, thanks to the Corporate Media, are in the dark regarding these matters. Not all Americans, thanks to the access they now have to many other sources, but enough for them to feel 'safe' that their not so secret activities won't affect them here.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #75)

Tue Feb 3, 2015, 09:24 PM

98. It seems they are here in every thread telling us all to hate Russia

 

The talking points seem to be hate Russia and the US is not fascist. Close your eyes and pretend to hate Russia and deny the evil shit the US does on a daily basis.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ramses (Reply #98)

Wed Feb 4, 2015, 12:10 AM

99. Same as Iraq. I remember them well. Even down to the old Saddam lover garbage from the last war they

ramped up the fear for.

They ARE cheaping out on the talking points though, re-using what they have rather than paying or new ones, I suppose.

War with Russia and Iran, their dreams come true.

And like Iraq, a nightmare for everyone else.

I am watching them operate on Social Media, getting a lot of pushback this time.

It's hard when people already have seen this act before.

Russsia is the EU's affair. What WE have to do with it, is something they can't quite explain when you ask, and if you meet them on Social Media, IF you ask, which of course we do, they will 'block' you. Can't waste time when they're on the clock I suppose.

Hopefully wiser heads will prevail this time, because war with either and certainly both of those countries would be devastating to the world. Not that THEY care about that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to another_liberal (Original post)

Mon Feb 2, 2015, 07:23 PM

83. Kick.

His own words.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink




Response to another_liberal (Original post)

Wed Feb 4, 2015, 09:27 AM

102. Given that video shows Yanukovych voluntarily left under his own power, I'd say no. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tommy_Carcetti (Reply #102)

Wed Feb 4, 2015, 09:30 PM

104. Because he walked to the car . . .

 

That means he wasn't forced from his democratically elected office? Do you really believe that?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to another_liberal (Reply #104)

Thu Feb 5, 2015, 08:36 AM

105. He took his sweet ass time packing.

Three days, to be exact.

He actually started packing before the EU brokered deal was signed, meaning he had no intention of sticking around.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Reply to this thread