thus used deadly violence to suppress any dissent from its Eastern half.
The violence started when the Russian puppet president walked away from an EU trade deal that he literally campaigned on making, then cracked down on the resulting protests. Then an actual Russian created rebellion started. Calling that “suppressing dissent” is disingenuous as fuck.
You can leave out the ‘puppet’ in your statement, but keep Russian.
Again, Ukraine is half-Russian, half-Polish. To say that a Ukrainian president is a puppet of either country is like saying that an Australian president is a British puppet, with the difference being that Australia is a settler colony while Ukraine is/was a border dispute solution.
Yanukovich walked away from the deal because the EU made too many demands that would have resulted in millions of job losses. It was a bad trade deal and so he walked away from it hoping for renegotiations of a deal that would not completely ruin his country.
“cracked down”. What does that even mean? Who gets to decide a protest has been “cracked down”? Has anybody ever written about protests being “cracked down” during the Palestine liberation protests? Covid protests? Jan 6 2020 protests?
The insurgency, let’s just use the teminology used when it happens in an Anglo nation shall we?, consisted of terrorist attacks by snipers that shot Ukrainian police officers dead and civilian protesters, who wanted their country to go into financial ruin, dead.
People that have come forward saying they were the instigators of this violence were neither part of the Ukrainian law enforcement, nor part of the protest groups, but foreign mercenaries who got paid or part of ultra-right factions.
It’s a more believable story than what the other side claims, where police officers who are trained to uphold stability mow down their own colleagues and civilians for stability’s sake without refusal.
It’s more believable as the first story doesn’t have snipers shooting their own snipers dead just to create chaos. That wouldn’t make any sense. People do not tend to kill people of their own group, not just because those are their friends they can rely on, but also puts them in an extremely vulnerable paranoid position of themselves being next. How would you know when to stop? How would you know you’re not on the list? Would you be killed from orders of their higher ups? Collaegues out for revenge of their friends?
And all of this doesn’t change the fact that Ukraine was banning all things related Russia after the coup and mowing down indepedence voters at the ballot station in the Donbass region.
Like it or not, the reality is that regions in the East of Ukraine were very much on record as supporting Yakunovych, and closer relations with Russia, for decades. There’s only one reason the Minsk agreements fell through, and it’s because they did not want to give eastern regions autonomous votes.
If the other half of your country coup’d your president, half-outlawed your language and ignored the political will of your half of the country, you might have a right to be upset and label that suppression.
The greatest lie the west ever convinced itself is that trump is a Russian puppet, how many levels of American bureaucracy has to be compromised to even allow for this? Hahaha
It’s a really convenient narrative based on the fallacy of homogenizing Ukraine. Let’s take a look at a few slides from this lecture that Mearsheimer gave back in 2015 to get a bit of background on the subject. Mearsheimer is certainly not pro Russian in any sense, and a proponent of US global hegemony. First, here’s the demographic breakdown of Ukraine:
here’s how the election in 2004 went:
this is the 2010 election:
As we can clearly see from the voting patterns in both elections, the country is divided exactly across the current line of conflict. Furthermore, a survey conducted in 2015 further shows that there is a sharp division between people of eastern and western Ukraine on which economic bloc they would rather belong to:
Either you’re intentionally spreading misinformation here, or you’re far too ignorant to discuss the subject you’re attempting to debate here.
Lol, who was it that taught shitlibs like you that anyone not immediately agreeing with them is equivalent to “refusing to engage with the points”. I engaged with your points just fine, they’re just bad points.
The violence started when the Russian puppet president walked away from an EU trade deal that he literally campaigned on making, then cracked down on the resulting protests. Then an actual Russian created rebellion started. Calling that “suppressing dissent” is disingenuous as fuck.
You can leave out the ‘puppet’ in your statement, but keep Russian. Again, Ukraine is half-Russian, half-Polish. To say that a Ukrainian president is a puppet of either country is like saying that an Australian president is a British puppet, with the difference being that Australia is a settler colony while Ukraine is/was a border dispute solution.
Yanukovich walked away from the deal because the EU made too many demands that would have resulted in millions of job losses. It was a bad trade deal and so he walked away from it hoping for renegotiations of a deal that would not completely ruin his country.
“cracked down”. What does that even mean? Who gets to decide a protest has been “cracked down”? Has anybody ever written about protests being “cracked down” during the Palestine liberation protests? Covid protests? Jan 6 2020 protests?
The insurgency, let’s just use the teminology used when it happens in an Anglo nation shall we?, consisted of terrorist attacks by snipers that shot Ukrainian police officers dead and civilian protesters, who wanted their country to go into financial ruin, dead.
People that have come forward saying they were the instigators of this violence were neither part of the Ukrainian law enforcement, nor part of the protest groups, but foreign mercenaries who got paid or part of ultra-right factions. It’s a more believable story than what the other side claims, where police officers who are trained to uphold stability mow down their own colleagues and civilians for stability’s sake without refusal. It’s more believable as the first story doesn’t have snipers shooting their own snipers dead just to create chaos. That wouldn’t make any sense. People do not tend to kill people of their own group, not just because those are their friends they can rely on, but also puts them in an extremely vulnerable paranoid position of themselves being next. How would you know when to stop? How would you know you’re not on the list? Would you be killed from orders of their higher ups? Collaegues out for revenge of their friends?
And all of this doesn’t change the fact that Ukraine was banning all things related Russia after the coup and mowing down indepedence voters at the ballot station in the Donbass region.
Like it or not, the reality is that regions in the East of Ukraine were very much on record as supporting Yakunovych, and closer relations with Russia, for decades. There’s only one reason the Minsk agreements fell through, and it’s because they did not want to give eastern regions autonomous votes.
If the other half of your country coup’d your president, half-outlawed your language and ignored the political will of your half of the country, you might have a right to be upset and label that suppression.
Why would you lie about something that’s well documented, this isn’t reddit.
The greatest lie the west ever convinced itself is that trump is a Russian puppet, how many levels of American bureaucracy has to be compromised to even allow for this? Hahaha
Yanukovych. Try to keep up.
“it’s not suppressing descent if you accuse the people you’re supressing of being Russian agents first”
Thank you for that insight, senator McCarthy.
Ukraine population: overwhelmingly supports trade with eu.
You: CIA backed color revolution!
Russian soldiers: taking geotagged selfies in Ukraine by the dozen, revealing overwhelming Russian military involvement in 2014.
You: Nuuu, putin wouwd nevewww 👉👈
It’s a really convenient narrative based on the fallacy of homogenizing Ukraine. Let’s take a look at a few slides from this lecture that Mearsheimer gave back in 2015 to get a bit of background on the subject. Mearsheimer is certainly not pro Russian in any sense, and a proponent of US global hegemony. First, here’s the demographic breakdown of Ukraine:
here’s how the election in 2004 went:
this is the 2010 election:
As we can clearly see from the voting patterns in both elections, the country is divided exactly across the current line of conflict. Furthermore, a survey conducted in 2015 further shows that there is a sharp division between people of eastern and western Ukraine on which economic bloc they would rather belong to:
Either you’re intentionally spreading misinformation here, or you’re far too ignorant to discuss the subject you’re attempting to debate here.
Reality is whatever I want it to be
“Suppressing descent is fine if you claim the population ‘overwhelmingly supports’ you”
Why even bother with elections at that point? Just claim anybody who wouldn’t vote for you is a RuSsIaN AgEnT
Support for eu trade was high enough that yanukovych campaigned on it. Are you saying that’s not true?
Also are you saying contracted Russian soldiers weren’t in luhansk and donetsk in 2014 and onward?
“Yanukoviych ran on trade with EU, therefor it’s OK to violently suppress dissent” is certainly a take.
“Are you saying there aren’t communist spies in America?” -SkyezOpen defending McCarthyism.
Misrepresenting my stance and refusing to engage with the points isn’t the win you think it is.
Just because it’s not framed in the most generous possible way doesn’t make it a misrepresentation
Lol, who was it that taught shitlibs like you that anyone not immediately agreeing with them is equivalent to “refusing to engage with the points”. I engaged with your points just fine, they’re just bad points.
Mccarthyism is accusing with little or no evidence. There’s piles of evidence of Russian involvement. Hand waving doesn’t make it disappear.