Triumph of the Ill - Ukraine Coup Leaders Turn on People

[autorank]

Triumph of the Ill - Ukraine Coup Leaders Turn on People

By Michael Collins

Utter Hypocrisy

"WASHINGTON (AP) -- Secretary of State John Kerry has expressed strong concern that attacks by armed militants in eastern Ukraine have been orchestrated and synchronized, and are similar to previous attacks in eastern Ukraine and Crimea." Associated Press, Apr 12

As far as Secretary of State Kerry is concerned:

It's all right for anti Russian protesters to stage violent demonstrations and occupy buildings to protest the former Ukrainian government, but not all right for pro Russian Ukrainians to stage non violent demonstrations and occupy buildings to seek independence from the the current government.

It's all right for the United States to invade Iraq without any cause, but not all right for Russia to accept the Crimea's non violent protests and super majority vote to return to Russia.

It's all right for the United States to spend $5 billion to destabilize the government of the Ukraine in order to create an anti-Russian government, but not all right for Russia to resist.

Link: http://www.opednews.com/articles/Triumph-of-the-Ill--Ukrai-by-Michael-Collins-Kerry-John_Neocons_Russia_Slavyansk-140413-544.html

[TwilightGardener]

1. Oh for Christ's sake, are we still pretending these aren't Russian forces in masks?

[Tommy_Carcetti]

2. It's much easier for some people to throw conspiracy theorist crap against the wall....

....and see what sticks.

Sad, but true. Evidenced by all the "coup" talk by some here.

[autorank]

27. Conspiracies are usually secret

The sabre rattling and diversion from real issues on this issue is out front, in our faces.

Everything mentioned is public record.

I remember John Kerry, the peace activist and candidate.

I worked for John Kerry.

I spent a lot of time trying to get justice for Kerry and the people who voted for him Election 2004: The Urban Legend

Like everyone here and 330 million others, I have the most important job in the country - CITIZEN - and I'm happy to call bullshit when I see it.

Ginning up a controversy with Russia over all this is bullshit. It wastes time, money, and diverts us from the real issues.

[blm]

31. I know your heart, auto and admire it - you're wrong on this. They're trained military ops not

protestors. They ran that entire takeover like a military operation and with military weapons. Since when do peaceful protestors show up in uniforms armed with military assault weapons and with precise execution pull off a takeover?

[autorank]

36. Heart wise;)

Hey there, long time and thanks. Reminds me of a debate I had with Paul Craig Roberts (very decent guy, btw) on another forum regarding the Iran elections protests. Roberts said, "Collins reasons with his heart." Well, damn...actually, I aspire to the status of "The Dude." lol

I don't know who the referenced individuals are and I don't care. This is pure diversion coming at a time when we need laser focus. Time to fix the country, clean up the environment, and get the people to work. That's where my heart is, right here. We do good here and it will emanate.

[blm]

46. I get the intention, but, tearing at Kerry for responding appropriately to Russia's aggression is

wrongheaded, imo.

Putin is on record for wanting the USSR rebounded. The US has relationships with sovereign countries that Putin is targeting. Wanting the US to ignore all treaties including NATO, is idealistic not realistic.

[Ghost Dog]

51. Thanks, Michael.

Heads and hearts need to work well together.

[sabrina 1]

98. Who provided the uniforms and weapons to the Kiev 'protesters'?

All you have to know is a little history of Ukraine to know that this was going to happen when a coup took place and a majority of the people there had no say in it.

Why didn't they wait for an election to remove the president? It would have taken a few months, but it appears someone didn't trust the electoral process, and now perhaps, we are seeing why.

Anytime this happens in a country where an elected leader is forced from office, nothing good comes of it because somewhere there are ulterior motives for refusing to use the legitimate method of changing governments.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

35. This controversy is quite real.

And deals with a sovereign country--in this case, being Ukraine's--ability to maintain its sovereign borders without interference and intimidation from a foreign power (in this case, being Russia).

And it being the US's interests by virtue of the fact that the US did sign treaties with Russia back in the 1990s wherein Russia would agree to respect the territorial borders of Ukraine. Which is a promise that Russia has since seen fit to break.

There's no controversy to be "ginned up". It's quite real. And it doesn't (and shouldn't) mean US military intervention. But it does demand our attention and our activism.

[autorank]

38. Just answer this

If George W Bush were doing exactly the same thing, what would your reaction be?

[Tommy_Carcetti]

39. Doing what?

What exactly has been done by the US other than condemnation and some sanctioning of Russian officials?

Frankly, it's a lot more than what George W. Bush actually did when Putin pulled the same stunt in Georgia back in 2008. And good on the administration for that.

[autorank]

44. Georga

The facts show that we should have done nothing in Georgia in 2008. The initial attack that sparked the conflict was by Georgia. The Russian response was intense but it was none of our business and it was provoked by the Georgians who, by then, should have known that the Russians would respond as they did:

Tensions between Russia and Georgia had been building in recent months. On Aug. 7, 2008, the Georgian president issued orders to his negotiators to meet with the chief Russian negotiator.

"We should find all the means to stop incidents and to stop the violence, to stop threats and creating of problems to the peaceful population. Of course, we will show maximum restraint, but we do not recommend anyone to continue provocations." Mikeil Saakashvili, Aug, 7, 2008, 12:45

A few hours later, the government of Georgia said it had "decided to restore constitutional order in the entire region” of South Ossetia" through military efforts. By the afternoon of Aug, 8, officials in South Ossetia confirmed that, "Numerous Georgian military units are moving towards the border [with the breakaway region]" and that Georgia was carrying out "large scale military attacks" against their country.

The TimesOnline (London) reported that this was the start of military conflict. They're clear that the conflict was initiated by the military actions announced by the Georgian government on August 8, 2008.

Tensions between Russia and Georgia had been building in recent months. On Aug. 7, 2008, the Georgian president issued orders to his negotiators to meet with the chief Russian negotiator.

"We should find all the means to stop incidents and to stop the violence, to stop threats and creating of problems to the peaceful population. Of course, we will show maximum restraint, but we do not recommend anyone to continue provocations." Mikeil Saakashvili, Aug, 7, 2008, 12:45

Sept 6, 2008

[Tommy_Carcetti]

45. Georgia was a bit more complex. But going back to Ukraine......

...what is it that this administration has done with Ukraine that had it been the Bush administration, we'd be criticizing?

Or more importantly, exactly what are you taking issue with that this administration has done with Ukraine?

[MattSh]

68. Georgia was a bit more complex than Ukraine?

That's a neat bit of revisionism.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

73. Ukraine is extremely simple.

Vladimir Putin, well on record bemoaning the fall of the Soviet Union for the simple reason that "tens of millions of our co-citizens and co-patriots found themselves outside Russian territory", knows that the Ukrainian government in its transitional period is at its very weakest, and seizes the opportunity to lay claim to parts of Ukraine where he views these "co-citizens and co-patriots" to live.

And that's what it's all about. Clap clap.

[karynnj]

91. You mean speaking out, scheduling diplomatic conventions and using sanctions?

Neither Obama or Kerry are escalating anything. Quite the contrary - publicly (and likely privately) they advised the Ukrainians to respond with restraint. Until today, they have done just that - in the face of huge confrontation.

Kerry, in particular, worked hard to build trust with Lavrov -- who either was out of the loop (unlikely) or lied to Kerry's face on Crimea. Given that Kerry wants a diplomatic resolution of both Syria and Iran -- and having Russia with us is important for that, I seriously doubt that he wanted a return to more hostile relations. He is NOT John McCain.

In fact, just use google and see what neocons from McCain to Jackson Diehl (Washington Post opinion editor) have said of Kerry's work. You might also look to where they are on Ukraine - there are calls for US boots on the ground!

If you look at 2002/2003, the Bush administration led the drumbeat to war .. and unfortunately too much of the media followed. Here, it is NOT the Obama administration doing so -- the neocons in the media and politics are the ones doing so.

[arendt]

57. Too bad your standard did not apply to pre-coup Ukraine.

The legitimately elected president of Ukraine was driven from office by violent demonstrators who were OPENLY EMBRACED BY THE A US ASST SECY OF STATE. The hard right political parties were funded by the neocon front NED.

Too bad you only recognize outside interference from the other side, not your own.

The Ukrainian coup is yet another victory for neocon warmongers (NATO will be rescued from the scrapheap, and more of our tax dollars will go down the bottomless pit of military spending, while MY country literally crumbles to dust and MY people go without medical care) and neoliberal economic looters (the Ukrainian people will have their pensions looted and their public assets sold off at bargain basement prices to NON-UKRAINIAN players.

I just love your stand for "sovereign borders". LOL

The media does a great job ignoring the economic ramifications of the coup, and you serve them by regurgitating whatever two-minute hate is being offered by the corporate media whores and their neocon and neoliberal masters.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

78. You're framing things the way you want it to be framed.

It was all a "fascist, neo-con western sponsored coup of a legitimately elected president" because Victoria Nuland handed out cookies. Got it.

Do me a favor and spare me your faux pity about Ukrainian citizens and their pensions. You very clearly care jack shit about the Ukrainian people. Otherwise, you wouldn't be giving tacit support to another country running rough shot over Ukrainian territory and Ukrainian affairs. You do realize that is the ultimate disgrace and insult to Ukrainians, correct?

Clearly, you've created a false dilemma in which there are only two courses of action when it comes to Ukraine for the US. Either intervene militarily, or stick your head in the sand and do nothing. Naturally, no one here (myself included) wants the first solution, but you opt for the latter because it appears impossible in your limited frame of mind that the US could actually stand up and call out Russia for blatant aggression against a sovereign country. No, that's not even a possibility in your mind. Better you stick your head in the sand and do nothing.

This conspiracy talk is being furthered by bored Westerners who can't believe that the Ukrainian people actually had their own say about their own country, and instead insist that it was all manufactured by the west. Because, cookies, duh. And meanwhile, you make yourselves out to be useful idiots to Russia as they seek to eat up Ukrainian territory.

Sure, my own Ukrainian blood makes this important to me. But your asinine and cavalier attitude, and bandying about far-fetched fantasies of western machinations (and then decrying anyone who doesn't subscribe as slaves to corporate media and neoliberal masters) is so incredibly insulting. Not only to myself, but to anyone who actually gives a shit about the Ukrainian people. And that's not you.

You know nothing, Jon Snow.

[JackRiddler]

69. The conspiracy theory is that these are Russian forces in masks.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

74. The conspiracy theory....

....is that the US engineered a "coup" by "fascists" in order to get an (interim) government of its own choosing. And proof positive of this coup is the fact that Victoria Nuland handed out cookies.

Never mind the actual thoughts and desires of actual Ukrainians. Because Victoria Nuland handed out cookies.

Never mind Russia's clear desire to capitalize on the weakened state of the Ukrainian nation. Because Victoria Nuland handed out cookies.

You get it? Victoria Nuland handed out cookies. Hence, fascist coup.

[malaise]

75. Below are facts from the article

anti Russian protesters staged violent demonstrations and occupied buildings to protest the former Ukrainian government

the United States invaded Iraq without any cause

the United States spent $5 billion to destabilize the government of the Ukraine in order to create an anti-Russian government

It is fugging hypocrisy

[Tommy_Carcetti]

77. The US doesn't need to spend any money to destabilize or create anti Russian sentiment in Ukraine.

The Yanukovych government itself was inherently unstable and corrupt. It was the nature of the beast. We didn't need to spend money to do that, it did it for itself.

And anti-Russian sentiment and distrust is just a historical fact in Ukraine. It's been like that for centuries, for very good cause. Ukrainians just don't trust Russians, mainly because Russians don't fully recognize Ukrainians as being a nation apart from Russia. You wouldn't trust someone like that, either.

[ljm2002]

84. You may be correct...

...in saying "The US doesn't need to spend any money to destabilize or create anti Russian sentiment in Ukraine".

However, the fact remains that the US DID spend money to do just that. $5 billion worth. Do you think it had no effect?

So much of what goes on these days has layers and layers, hidden currents and offstage manipulations. So the former Ukrainian president was corrupt... What about the new one? "Meet the new boss..." comes to mind.

Not only that: our entire federal government is corrupt, it operates in the context of legal bribery where big companies spend big $$ to buy politicians and they also spend big $$ for lobbyists who then write the laws to benefit the companies and use the bought politicians to get the laws put into effect. And we want to talk about others being corrupt? Puhleeze.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

85. With all due respect, your opinion on political corruption matters nothing to Ukrainians.

If Ukrainians see fit to protest corruption in their country, that's what they are going to do. They don't necessarily care whether or not it's a widespread epidemic in other countries as well.

[ljm2002]

88. Again, you are most likely correct...

...that the Ukrainians don't care about our own government's corruption. However, WE are not Ukrainians and WE are the ones discussing this topic.

Anyway, your statement "The Yanukovych government itself was inherently unstable and corrupt" implies that YOU believe Yanukovych deserved to be overthrown due to his own corruption. In support of my interpretation, I refer you to your own post on another thread:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024794283#post4

wherein you respond to the question "How did the interim government come about?":

"The interim government came about when Yanukovych fled the country.

If you are asking who was responsible for the massive, months long protests against Yanukovoych, the best answer would probably be Yanukovych himself based on his well-documented corruption."

Therefore, the condition of our own government is highly relevant to your arguments on this topic. Do you TRULY believe that government corruption is a good reason for overthrowing the government -- without going through the formalities of an election? Or do you believe it only for SOME countries, SOME of the time.

Finally, I note that you avoided addressing the question of just what the United States' $5 billion investment bought us there.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

89. We are still capable of analyzing the situation even if we are not Ukrainian.

(And as a second-generation Ukrainian-American, yes I might have some additional interest in the topic, FWIW).

However, in analyzing situations overseas, it is important to understand that the American perspective is not necessarily the perspective of people living in different countries. Each country has their own unique history, culture, social norms and ultimate context that remains its own little fingerprint, making it unique from others. So you can't just view a foreign country from strictly American eyes, but the eyes of the ordinary citizen living there. The current day situation in Ukraine is unlike anything seen in the United States in at least 150 years, if not ever at all.

But as to my original statement, I stand by it 100%. Victor Yanukovych is responsible for the protests against him, as he was the subject of said protests, and it was his corruption that people were protesting. So there's really no other way around it, correct?

Now, he could have stuck around Kyiv as the protests swelled. And perhaps if he did, he might have been subjected to an actual coup and not simply the imaginary "coup" that armchair internet analysts insist without any substantial fact was manufactured by the West. And if that had been the case, perhaps I myself might have a different take on the whole situation and what should be done.

But the facts are that Yanukovych chose to flee to Russia, and that he did so under his own willpower. After leaving Ukraine, no one but himself and Russia seemed to acknowledge him as the current Ukrainian leader. His own party (still very active, mind you) disowned him. And because any legitimate election needs at least several months preparation, there needed to be an interim government in the time being. Hence, the Ukrainian interim government, which remains quite interim. Why people seem to question the legitimacy of it when it was really the only option in the situation (except to allow Ukraine to dissolve into complete chaos and anarchy), I really have no idea.

As for the $5 billion you claim was paid by the US and what that did, I'll honestly say I have no clue. But it doesn't change the facts--that Yanukovych was highly corrupt, and that Yanukoych embraced Russia (a country long resented by Ukrainians for its history of meddling and dominating Ukrainian affairs), and neither of those things much ingratiated the Ukrainian people to him.

[ljm2002]

108. It is interesting...

...that you say we don't have to be Ukrainians to analyze the situation.

Remember, your first response to me was:

With all due respect, your opinion on political corruption matters nothing to Ukrainians.

If Ukrainians see fit to protest corruption in their country, that's what they are going to do. They don't necessarily care whether or not it's a widespread epidemic in other countries as well.

(1) I never claimed that my opinion mattered to Ukrainians, and (2) I never claimed that one must be Ukrainian in order to analyze the situation.

Your assertion that Yanukovych "chose to flee Russia (...) under his own willpower" is laughable. Yeah, right, he just decided to leave, that created a power vacuum, and Bob's your uncle... in some alternate universe. Completely gliding over the political situation, including demonstrations that were partly fueled by US meddling.

Then you admit you have NO CLUE as to the $5 billion the US has spent there. For someone with Ukrainian roots and "an additional interest in the topic", you seem oddly uninformed about this key bit of information.

Let me help you out:

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article37599.htm

US Assistant Secretary of State for Europe, Nuland said: “Since the declaration of Ukrainian independence in 1991, the United States supported the Ukrainians in the development of democratic institutions and skills in promoting civil society and a good form of government - all that is necessary to achieve the objectives of Ukraine’s European (aspirations). We have invested more than 5 billion dollars to help Ukraine to achieve these and other goals.”

In case you don't like the source, you can see the video of her remarks posted at the link.

So we spent $5 billion over the last 20+ years to develop "democratic institutions" and "civil society". Purely from our good-hearted wish to help Ukrainians, of course.

It's a complicated situation to be sure, and Putin's hands are anything but clean, and yes, Yanukovych is corrupt. That does not alter the fact that the US has actively meddled there. Imagine if Russia had actively meddled in Mexico's government? or Canada's? I know the situations are different, certainly there is not the same historical ties and tensions -- but just from a geographical perspective, the US does NOT tolerate meddling near its borders (Cuban missile crisis, anyone?) and we never have. Yet we meddle around the globe whenever we feel like it, usually to protect corporate interests.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

110. No. By all means, go forth and analyze all you want.

I'm just saying without an attempt to at least understand the local perspective on the topic, your armchair analysation is going to carry very little weight to the people actually affected by the situation.

You insist that the fact that the United States may have given money to various NGOs over the past two decades is proof positive that the regime change in Ukraine was a US funded coup. That, my friend, is a Grand Canyon sized jump to conclusions. Throwing around the claim that the demonstrations were "partly funded by US meddling" and apparently further insinuating that thousands of Ukrainians would not have demonstrated but for such funding is simply wild and reckless speculation.

And while I'm sure leaving the country was not Yanukovych's preferred course of action, nonetheless he was not arrested. He was not forcibly removed and exiled. He was not dragged out and shot a la Ceausescu. He left under his own free will power, and ever since that, the only people still claiming he's the still the legitimate leader in Ukraine are the Russians and Yanukovych himself. Everyone else has moved on, including his own party.

Show me the actual proof from a reputable source that the change in power in Ukraine was brought about by the US. Don't just spout how we've given money to NGOs or that Nuland handed out cookies. Show me something actually concrete and not just rampant insinuations.

[ljm2002]

114. Please don't put words in my mouth...

...as you do when you say:

"You insist that the fact that the United States may have given money to various NGOs over the past two decades is proof positive that the regime change in Ukraine was a US funded coup."

What I actually said is:

So we spent $5 billion over the last 20+ years to develop "democratic institutions" and "civil society". Purely from our good-hearted wish to help Ukrainians, of course.

and

That does not alter the fact that the US has actively meddled there.

Are you seriously trying to say that we have NOT meddled in Ukraine? Really?

Never mind. I have enjoyed our exchange. TTFN

[freshwest]

116. About that $5 billion figure being bandied about and Neuland. It's rated 'Pants On Fire':

President Barack Obama spent "$5 billion paying Ukrainians to riot and dismantle their democratically elected government."



Facebook posts on Wednesday, March 19th, 2014 in a Facebook meme

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

It’s a conspiracy with mainstream crossover: The United States bankrolled the bloody political uprising in Ukraine...

The Roots:

Victoria Neuland's words at a time when it garnered scant media attention:

...made clear the United States supported the protesters’ fight and spoke of how she met with Yanukovych, pressing him to end the pushback from Ukrainian security forces because it is "absolutely impermissible in a European state, in a democratic state..."

"Since Ukraine's independence in 1991, the United States has supported Ukrainians as they build democratic skills and institutions, as they promote civic participation and good governance, all of which are preconditions for Ukraine to achieve its European aspirations," she said. "We have invested over $5 billion to assist Ukraine in these and other goals that will ensure a secure and prosperous and democratic Ukraine."

The Truth:

"The insinuation that the United States incited the people of Ukraine to riot or rebel is patently false," said Nicole Thompson, a State Department spokeswoman.

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)...

...spent over more than 20 years.

Yanukovych was elected in 2010. So any connection between the protests and the $5 billion is inaccurate.

And Obama was elected in 2008, so any connection between $5 billion and Obama also is inaccurate.

http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2014/mar/19/facebook-posts/united-states-spent-5-billion-ukraine-anti-governm/

The truth does not fit the world view being promoted by conspiracy theorists. A post that went into the Neuland hatred was alerted by a DUer who described the source material:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014787623#post10

I thinkl those who believe in all of the spin offs to the Russia Today story that initiated this per the article, should give the article that was linked her, a good look. It has all the CT memes. And the end result is not at all pretty.

It will continue to work on a populace that maintains a willful ignorance, all the better to attack those doing the work of governments acting together in peaceful, but less public ways.

War talk, dirty laundry and rumor is exciting. They're cheap thrills that cost nothing except civil society.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

117. Unfortunately, I don't think the CTers on here will listen. nt

[Cha]

118. Thank you for this link, fresh! Finally some sanity to counter all the

crazy propaganda coming from the "leave Russia alone" bunch.

"War talk, dirty laundry and rumor is exciting. They're cheap thrills that cost nothing except civil society."

Well said, freshwest~

[sabrina 1]

97. There was a coup in Kiev. Did you miss it somehow?

[Tommy_Carcetti]

99. Victor Yanukovych choose to flee the country and go to Russia.

Perhaps if he had stayed, maybe there would have been an actual coup, maybe not. I guess we'll never know.

What happened, however, was that Yanukovych essentially abdicated his responsibilities towards his country following the public outcry of his actions on the Maidan. An interim government was chosen to govern until elections could be held in May. (Contrary to what Russia might think re: Crimea, legitimate elections should take more than a week or two to organize).

No doubt, there was regime change. And arguably a people's revolution. But it was not what would be categorized as a coup.

[sabrina 1]

101. He was driven from office, that is called a coup. Someone was in a hurry to avoid a country wide

election. Now we are witnessing why. Not that most people around the globe didn't understand from the beginning.

The tens of millions of Ukrainians who live outside the few thousand who appeared in Kiev beating up the police, etc, are now speaking for themselves as most observers with any knowledge of the country, anticipated. And the appointed government is sending out troops to shut them up. It won't work, someone should have told them.

And what are WE doing involving ourselves once again in other people's business? Where are WE getting the billions to send there when we can't provide school lunches for our own children?

Who is going to benefit from this latest investment of billions of dollars in yet another 'conflict' in a foreign nation which many Americans never even heard of, as shown in polls? WE KNOW it will not be the American people, whose money they are once again spending to provide 'support', for who, for what?

So sick of it all, as are most Americans. Which is why a majority do not want us involved there. Let's see if our government listens to its own people for a change, rather than the supporters of the IMF and the World Bank and the actual investors (using our money again) who stand to gain from all of these foreign adventures.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

104. Certainly you aren't claiming...

....that the people occupying a few police stations and airports in Eastern Ukraine and welding AK-47s while demanding annexation by Russia are not representative of the "tens of millions of Ukrainians" of which you speak, correct? It's doubtful that such persons represent the majority view of the people in those regions (most of which are in fact ethnically Ukrainian), let alone the entire country. How could demanding annexation by Russia ever be considered in the best interests of Ukraine? Do you have any idea how silly that sounds?

As to the matter of your "coup", Webster's defines "coup d'état" as:

&quot T)he violent overthrow or alteration of an existing government by a small group."

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/coup%20d'%C3%A9tat

So pray tell, who was the "small group" at play here?

Was it the thousands of protesters on the Maidan? Hardly small, wouldn't you agree?

Was it the ultra-nationalists of Svoboda or Right Sektor? If so, why aren't they the ones in charge at the top?

Was it the interim President, Turchynov? If so, why is he only interim and why are elections still scheduled for May in which he's not even a candidate for the permanent job?

Why is the Party of Regions (Yanukovych's former party) still active in the Ukrainian government? Is it common for the party of the former leader deposed in a coup to remain around in a new regime?

I'll be completely honest with you and tell you that I don't think you know what you are talking about when you throw around the word "coup."

Politics 101: Just because there was regime change in a country or even a revolution doesn't necessarily make what happened a coup.

[autorank]

3. We are not the world police

We have our own problems. It's on Russia's front door. A leading candidate for president of the Ukraine talks of killing Russians and their leader. We'd do the same if Russia had toppled Mexico with an anti American fascist government.

Team America is a cartoon, not a user manual.



Triumph of the Ill - Ukraine Coup Turns on the People

[joeybee12]

5. Still buying Putin's facsist bullshit meme are we?

Ridiculous.

[autorank]

21. Putin is not my president

Kerry works for my president and he's the bullshitter here.

See Sy Hersh on Syria

[Benton D Struckcheon]

32. If you believe Sy Hersh on the chemical weapons in Syria,

you've fallen off the edge of the map. You need to sit down, breathe, and get a grip - on reality.

[autorank]

41. Hersh is just fine

...when he goes after Republicans but a lune when he goes after Democrats.

Good reasoning.

[Benton D Struckcheon]

50. I don't know what you're using for your info,

but you need a different source, like maybe someone who knows a missile from a handsaw, even when the wind's blowing north by northwest:

http://brown-moses.blogspot.com/2014/04/what-does-seymour-hersh-knows-about.html

[Jesus Malverde]

62. Seriously...this expert knows more than hersh...

Eliot Higgins was born in 1979.[1] In 2012, when Higgins began blogging the Syrian civil war, he was an unemployed finance and admin worker who spent his days taking care of his child at home.He is married to a Turkish woman with one child. Higgins took the pseudonym Brown Moses from the Frank Zappa song "Brown Moses" on the album Thing-Fish.

Higgins' analyses of Syrian weapons, which began as a hobby out of his home in his spare time, are now frequently cited by the press and human rights groups and have led to questions in parliament.

Your going with a "finance admin" turned weapons hobbyist is more qualified than Hersh. He's obviously convenient propaganda for the war makers.

[Benton D Struckcheon]

71. ...and Hersh is a journalist, not a weapons expert.

So what, exactly, is your point? Other than the Russians and Hersh, everyone else who's looked at it knows it was Assad. Hersh is angling for a cushy job at RT, more than likely.

[karynnj]

92. Here is an article on the most recent UN report - they point to Assad - and they are experts

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/03/05/us-syria-crisis-chemical-idUSBREA240SF20140305

[Jesus Malverde]

113. Thanks karynnj

The UN is much more credible than a unemployed financial clerk hobbyist turned Weapons analyst.

The problem with the UN Report as I remember was that the initial chain of custody for the samples was suspect. By the time of the attack, the "rebels" had already overrun many government positions, positions that may have had seized chemical weapons. Those same "rebels" are the ones who gathered the samples as the UN deemed it too dangerous for it's own experts to gather them.

Assad at the time, as he has been for some time, was winning against the "rebels". He has had them on the run and had little need to do something that would have escalated the situation with international involvement.

Thanks for adding something credible to the discussion.

[arendt]

58. Going to spell out that lie, or just let it hang there? n/t

[Tommy_Carcetti]

6. "We'd do the same if Russia had toppled Mexico with an anti American fascist government."

If any of that was actually true, either via your analogy or what you are attempting to compare it with.

Oh, and if you are going to make comments on the situation, get the terminology correct: It's just "Ukraine", without the "the."

[arendt]

59. Uttterly incoherent. You said nothing.

If any of that was actually true, either via your analogy or what you are attempting to compare it with.

I've heard more coherent stuff from Louis Gohmert.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

72. Let me try to make it simple for you.

Mexico is not Ukraine. Russia is not the U.S.

And the US did not "topple Ukraine with a fascist government."

No matter how long you scream about Victoria Nuland handing out cookies, it won't make the greater claim--that the US directed a "coup" of the Yanukovych government--true.

Or, to make it really simple for you: The analogy sucks.

Better?

[joeybee12]

7. +1 The Putin love is strong within some here...nt

[autorank]

22. Who cares about Putin

I'm concerned with what's being done here and what isn't.

We're wasting out time on Syria, Libya, Ukraine, etc etc in some quest to boost the military budget/companies and supposedly secure energy sources. Guess what? If we'd spent a fraction of the military budget on real energy conservation and alternative fuels, we'd be in great shape and it wouldn't matter what was happening in the Middle East. If we gin up a "cold war", there goes the budget. You can't eat guns and bullets and they don't clean up the atmosphere. The bloviating rhetoric coming from some of our representatives produces more methane than cows!

[joeybee12]

25. If you really didn't you'd stop referring to the initial

Ukranian protestors as fascists...that's Putin's propaganda, and he sucks.

[cprise]

43. They tolerated molotov cocktail catapults and bulldozers

that tried to run over scores of police. This all started around Dec. 2, and you bet it counts as lethal violence.

What did the "protesters" do to stop the violence from escalating??

[socialist_n_TN]

66. So the Right Sector and .....

the Svoboda (?) during the demonstrations weren't fascist? It's ironic how Ukraine was calm when they were considering an austerity deal with the EU, but exploded into chaos when the President decided to take a better deal from the Russians. The western Ukrainian oligarchs losing billions in profits didn't have ANYTHING to do with the unrest.

Not a fan of Russian imperialism either, but don't think the fascistic attack dogs of the Ukrainian capitalists are any better and they're probably worse.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

76. Do you have any context as to the history of Ukraine and Russia?

The Ukrainian people are very weary of Russian meddling in its affairs. This sentiment has been going on for centuries based on actual documented historical events. The Russian mindset is essentially that Ukraine isn't Ukraine, but instead "Little Russia." And you might think that might rub most Ukrainians the wrong way, correct?

So naturally, cutting a deal with Russia is going to get most Ukrainians more upset than cutting a deal with Europe. Not to mention that the supposed "better deal" was fraught with question marks as to what exactly Russia wanted in return, so Ukrainians were naturally skeptical and upset with such an arrangement. And while the protests on Maidan were in general supportive of joining the EU, the protests were less about the EU than making a stand about moving away from Russia.

[arendt]

60. So, no one can deviate from the neocon party line, comrade?

You just translate anything that doesn't bow down before you as "Putin love"?

You must want America to be just like the Soviet Union, where no one could disagree in the slightest degree, not for any legitimate reason, from the Ministry of Propaganda.

[LanternWaste]

83. You appear get rather petulant and irrational when people have different opinions than you

You appear get rather petulant and irrational when people have different opinions than you

(insert rationalize here)

[ljm2002]

87. There's having different opinions...

...and then there's flamebait.

The poster you are responding to, was not responding to a "different opinion", they were responding to pure flamebait, to wit:

"The Putin love is strong within some here"

Please explain how that statement -- that was made with ZERO other content -- is a "different opinion".

[Jesus Malverde]

8. Im guessing KGB.

[Xithras]

13. There's no evidence that they are.

It's unlikely that Russian forces would need to stage raids against police and government building to arm themselves though, as both the protesters and Ukrainian government have acknowledged has happened.

When I see these guys on video, I see a bunch of militia wannabe's in mismatched camo. I haven't seen anything to suggest that they are "real" soldiers.

[TwilightGardener]

14. Sure, these aren't Russians taking over police stations and setting up "checkpoints".

Right. You know what's funny? How come the dreaded Ukrainian Separatist movement and civil war, supposedly the triggers for Russian invasion, happen exactly when it's convenient for Russia (once it's done putting troops on the border, or after the Olympics, etc. etc.)? Where were these "separatists" and "pro-Russians" in, say, December, January, February, in the eastern part of the country, when the Kiev protests were going on? In fact, officials in Donetsk refused to give Yanukovich sanctuary when he fled. But NOW that Russia has all its ducks in a row to take over, they all suddenly and conveniently want to be a part of Russia by coincidence? And have machine guns and training to take over police stations and airports? You've got to be kidding.

[Xithras]

16. Sure, they're ethnic Russians.

But no, if you have any evidence whatsoever that they are actually Russian soldiers, please point it out.

As the Ukrainian government itself has explained, the police have not resisted these takeovers. They didn't need to be trained soldiers to pull off what they did.

The mayor of one of the Ukrainian towns where a takeover occurred even talked to the men who siezed the towns police station. She confirmed that the men were local residents and not Russian soldiers. http://news.yahoo.com/uniformed-men-occupy-donetsk-police-hq-143227064.html

These guys are the Russian-Ukrainian equivalent of the nuts in Nevada yesterday. It's a bunch of minority yahoos with stolen guns and mismatched ammo. Political rhetoric aside, there's been no actual evidence that any of them are actually Russian soldiers. If there WERE, it would be headline news on every news site on the planet.

[TwilightGardener]

17. They're the same "masked gunmen" who took over Crimea. Who were under

the direction of Russia. Whether or not they're regular troops, or special forces, or simply hired goons, is neither here nor there. It's Crimea II.

[Xithras]

23. Again, got any links to back that up?

In Crimea, the Russian soldiers rolled straight out of their military bases in their APC's and were wearing proper military uniforms with the insignias removed.

In eastern Ukraine, you've got people wearing a hodgepodge of mismatched camo raiding police stations and government buildings to try and arm themselves.

So I do take issue with the suggestion that they were the same "masked gunmen" who took over Crimea. When the Ukrainian mayors of these towns are telling the press that it's locals doing the takeovers, and lacking any evidence to the contrary, I tend to believe them. Even if it's not politically advantageous to do so.

[TwilightGardener]

28. Last week, the "locals" tried to take over some buildings, but didn't last long,

the whole thing petered out, there was no popular support and Ukraine didn't let it become violent. This weekend, something has clearly changed. There are professionals handling this now, making sure it goes the right way, same as what happened in Crimea. Not all of them, of course... but ultimately running the show? Russia. Anyone who thinks this is simply a popular uprising is frankly an idiot.

[Xithras]

30. I don't think it's a "popular" uprising.

Far from it. One of the fundamental differences between eastern Ukraine and Crimea is the fact that ethnic Russians are a minority in eastern Ukraine. A large, powerful minority to be sure, but still a minority. I don't believe that there is popular support for these little "uprisings".

At the same time, the behavior and dress of these guys doesn't suggest that they're a proper military force either. The fact that this weeks group is a little more persistent than last weeks group doesn't change that.

[TwilightGardener]

33. When they start controlling roads, airports, other infrastructure,

disarm the police and take their weapons--all of which I predict they'll do--we're not talking the usual rabble. This is clearly coordinated across the region at the same time in several cities, in order to overwhelm Ukraine's security response. Nope, these are pro's.

[muriel_volestrangler]

34. NATO Secretary General concerned about escalation in eastern Ukraine

I am extremely concerned about the further escalation of tension in Eastern Ukraine. We see a concerted campaign of violence by pro-Russian separatists, aiming to destabilise Ukraine as a sovereign state. The reappearance of men with specialised Russian weapons and identical uniforms without insignia, as previously worn by Russian troops during Russia's illegal and illegitimate seizure of Crimea, is a grave development.

http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/news_109148.htm

[AverageJoe90]

55. It's possible they may have even infiltrated Maidan by now as well(or at least helped to do so!).

I realize this may sound crazy to some, but think about it: Putin needed an excuse to intervene over there. He needed an excuse to justify what was essentially an illegal manuever. Don't you find it strange that all of a sudden, out of nowhere, these right-wing groups like Svoboda and Pravy Sektor just suddenly gained influence and followers towards the end of January of this year, whereas they were on the very fringes before?

And isn't it funny that Mr. Yanukovych actually hired a U.S. Republican to help him with his campaign, even?
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/30/world/europe/30ukraine.html?fta=y

Something seems highly off about this.

[sabrina 1]

96. Got something to prove that? Speculation is rampant we know on all sides of this, but a little

proof would be helpful, otherwise that's all anything is, speculation.

The FACTS are that the US supported the coup in Kiev, and helped plan for the toppling of the elected government there. When armed thugs beat up the police, the US cheered it on.

The claim was we supported the 'people's right to self determination', which btw, they could have done through the election process a few months later without getting anyone killed. But leaving that aside, we now find out that millions of people in Ukraine did NOT support the coup in Kiev and are now protesting, and from world media appear to be ordinary people objecting to the appointed government in Kiev determining THEIR future.

Suddenly the US no longer supports 'self determination' by the people, and appears, although we will see if our government condemns the use of the military against those people asking for what we claim to 'respect'.

Hypocrisy could not be more obvious. Clearly to the rest of the world, if not here in our Corporate Media dominated nation.

[Jesus Malverde]

4. People are reliving their duck and cover years

Quit being a buzzkill confusing them with equivilencies. It makes some of them uncomfortable.

Referendums and mob actions are only valid if they are pro NATO.

Like the "rebels" in Syria "yearning to be free" to impose sharia.

[autorank]

18. Al Quada in Syria

Good point. Extending it, Al Qaeda is bad when they're trashing the our country but when they're trashing a country we want trashed, our rulers turn a blind eye.

[jamzrockz]

81. Exactly

and US warns Russia not to destabilize Ukraine or they will put on further sanctions. But the US and its allies are destabilized Libya and are destabilizing Syria right now and then putting on sanctions against the people when they resist their advances. The double standard is evident on anyone who is not totally bought into American exceptionalism.

Its also funny seeing how people who decry conspiracy theories are quick to buy into conspiracy theories about the new boggeyman in Russia.

[Union Scribe]

94. Exactly. nt

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

9. "Self-determination" only applies to people we can control and/or exploit.

[autorank]

24. True

I guess only certain people can experience and appreciate freedom. It is amazing how our rulers are able to distinguish and choose the right people

[Aerows]

10. Believing that the Russian government

is being an actor in good faith is foolish.

I don't buy it for a second.

[autorank]

19. It's not our business

It wastes our resources. We have huge problems that an be addressed but are not.

The bull shit is wasting our time overseas playing Team America to serve some interests that want this done.

The public doesn't support this.

The cold war is a waste and a joke at this point.

[davidpdx]

70. I think it is

While I agree with you that we should be the world's police, we do have a duty to work diplomatically with other countries. You are conflating what Bush did from 2001 through the end of his term, with what Obama (and SOS Kerry) are doing now, which is completely false.

Were you one of the ones screaming that Obama was going to get us into a war in Syria? How'd that work out?

I totally support non-violent intervention when possible.

What you and others are suggesting is complete isolationist policies. I believe we tried that one before. Please remind me how that went.

To be clear before a certain pinhead (who has accused me of being a warmonger) comes into the conversation, I opposed the war in Iraq from the beginning. I also have lived overseas in South Korea for a decade. Since I've been here I've seen the reaction to the US going to war in Iraq and the reaction to the election of President Obama. It certainly wouldn't take a genius to guess which one I'd rather see.

[OKNancy]

11. Kerry/Putin/Kerry/Putin/Kerry/Putin

Let's see.... I respect what Kerry says. If given a choice, I'd take Kerry's word over Putin's puppets

[autorank]

20. Like on sarin gas

The Red Line and the Rat Line - Seymour M. Hersh on Obama, Erdogan and the Syrian rebels April 6, London Review of Book

Sorry, Kerry is using the Gulf of Tonkin trick and it has backfired.

[muriel_volestrangler]

37. What's your problem with Kerry in that article? (nt)

[karynnj]

90. You know why Hersh published this in a book review magazine? No other place would publish it

The fact is that the most recent UN report was more - not less - certain that the August attack was done by the Assad government. In Hersh's earlier piece he quotes unnamed people to argue that it was the rebels - and he provided no real proof.

The fact is that he was an outstanding reporter in the 1960s and 1970s, but he has reported many things that did not pan out since then.

[amandabeech]

109. The London Review of Books is like the NY Review of Books.

They publish interesting essays on many topics in addition to book reviews.

The London Review sometimes publishes essays that take what are very controversial positions in the US on subjects that are themselves very controversial in the US.

From my own reading, I think that some US writers deliberately publish things in the LRB that they don't want to publish in the US because they don't want the flack but still want to say that they published their ideas or research.

[karynnj]

111. I've read both Hersh used to publish in the New Yorker as well

My point being that any of these outlets could judge the quality of writing, but they are unlikely to have or hire fact checkers. There is no question that he was an outstanding journalist at one time, but he may now be too willing to believe the worst and inclined to double down - when as on Syria and the chemical weapons, he is likely to be wrong. (Here, I think the UN, which did a serious investigation of the chemicals used - and identified certain characteristics that made the Assad government almost certainly the one who used them - is likely the best source available.)

(Note I would NOT say that about this week's incident. That gas could be made by a high school chemistry student from two easily available liquids according to some sources. The only thing that WOULD make Assad more likely is if they could prove it was dropped by helicopter as they say. I am pretty certain that only Assad has anything that flies. That claim however does not appear to have been verified.)

[amandabeech]

112. Your're right about the fact checkers,

but I'm less convinced than you that he's wrong. There have been bits and pieces out there swimming around since the Benghazi attack that just haven't added up.

There's a piece from the UK independent that's just come up in GD. As far as I know, the Independent is reputable. I look forward to reading it thoroughly later to see how much is parallels Hersh's piece.

[arendt]

61. I have no respect for Kerry

I have followed his career since Viet Nam - when he threw SOMEONE ELSE'S medals over the WH fence.

He is a caver, a sellout, a quitter. He wants to be important but he is a coward. The onlhy way he can be important is by towing the neocon/neoliberal party line - thereby sending my tax dollars down the military rat hole and selling the Ukrainian people to the neoliberal banksters.

We all know Putin is a cold-blooded gangster. You should wake up to the fact that Kerry is a useless tool. I actually wasted my time campaigning for him - and then he folded in Ohio when he had promised throughout his campaign that he would fight election fraud.

[karynnj]

93. Your avatar would very very strongly disagree

He wrote in his autobiography of visiting Kerry on election night -- and from the account it made him respect him more than ever. Kennedy supported Kerry for 2008 until Kerry dropped out - and it is not coincidence that Kennedy followed Kerry in endorsing Obama.

As has been said millions of times - the Republicans stole Ohio by suppressing the vote in many ways but mostly in having too few voting machines. There were not more votes cast for Kerry that could be proven in the short interval it had to be done in.

[nadinbrzezinski]

12. Trashing the thread

I am done

[NuclearDem]

15. Yeah, Russian forces on the border looking for any excuse to reclaim what they think is theirs.

With paramilitary forces giving them more and more reason.

Yeah, totally not Russia's doing at all.

Anyone who thinks Maidan was a Western construct and also thinks this is not connected to Russia at all is delusional.

[sabrina 1]

26. The hypocrisy is stunning. But we know what it's all about, the neo-cons/libs are at the heart of

yet another coup based on lies and deceptions. Too bad for them that this time there are many more people in the world who see right through their deceptions.

[Ghost Dog]

53. More all the time.

[blm]

29. autorank, you have this wrong - those aren't peaceful protestors, they're trained military posing

as grassroots pro-Russia protestors.

Would you call extensively trained militias taking over Vermont government buildings peaceful protestors?

[autorank]

40. Protests have gone on for weeks in the east

There were many protests that were peaceful and non violent. The recent events are not the entirety of this affair.

If trained militia took over buildings in Vermont, I'd be extremely concerned. But, if there's intrigue in Ukraine and it doesn't impact us, then I'm not concerned.

When we act on the world stage, it should be for our national interests and our moves should be intelligent. They are not:

http://www.opednews.com/articles/The-Children-s-Crusade--O-by-Michael-Collins-Crimea_Merkel_Obama-Administration_Russia-140320-604.html

The Russians are predictable. When the Republic of Georgia decided to attack legally placed Russian troops in South Ossetia, the Russians responded with a crushing move that split the country in half for a while. Predictable. When the US-NATO start messing around in Ukraine and a government is installed that's anti-Russian, guess what? The Russians behave like Russians. It's a land based nation. This doesn't make their actions correct, necessarily. But it was predictable and we're wasting our time.

Where are the jobs?

Where is the Manhattan Project for the environment?

How does any action in Ukraine enable any of these efforts?

[cprise]

42. IIRC the US funded explicitly neo-Nazi groups for years

...who then showed up to (i.e. taking over) local government meetings last month in masks and carrying guns.

The State Dept. thought no one would notice they had violent and reprehensible elements of Ukrainian "civil society" eating out of their hand.

It does make sense that some pro-Russian Ukrainians would eventually try to respond in kind.

[blm]

47. It's certainly been spun that way by some. I am not a casual news consumer, cprise,

so the spin doesn't work with me.

[cprise]

49. Are you claiming to be a professional? n/t

[blm]

79. No - just attentive and focused - I don't buy spin, especially when it defies logic.

.

[JoseGaspar]

80. Spin?

Nazis in the Ukraine is spin?

I have a factoid for you. In Lvov (where else?), there is a University called MAUP. With 55000 students, it is the largest private university in the Ukraine. It is also a world center of anti-semitism and slavic racialism. It is the goto place for neo-Nazis and holocaust deniers throughout the "West". In 2005, MAUP held a major conference for David Duke, at the end of which they awarded him an honorary degree in history.

The funny thing is that though MAUP is a Nazi terminus, it wasn't started by Svoboda. It was started in 1989 by the Conservative Party, many of whose members are now "moderate" US and EURO backed Ukrainian politicians.

Or did you object to the suggestion that the US is backing Nazis?

In 2008, you would have been right. In that year, Condoleezza Rice's State Dept called MAUP, "one of the most persistent anti-Semitic institutions in Eastern Europe." Since then, however, the subject has not come up in the face of increasing European/US competition over the Ukraine. You have to go no further than googling Der Spiegel to prove the point.

Either your attention span or your focus is failing you.

[JoseGaspar]

63. Not just the US.

It's not just the US.

In Germany, there is a controversy over the Konrad Adenauer Institute (associated with Merkel's political party) supporting the Ukrainian Nazis for years. Official German politics shuns the NPD but happily supports those who enthusiastically celebrate the SS in Ukraine, while raising the old banners that are still forbidden by German law.

They aren't Nazis. They are "Ultra-Nationalists", don't you see? And anyway, they are merely proxies for the Ukrainian liberals who are bound to show up any minute now.

[cprise]

64. Always support RW extremists when dealing w/Russians

...isn't that the formula at work here? The same one that supported Bin Laden and his followers.

[Adrahil]

48. Yeah... sure... THESE guys looks non-violent to me.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/apr/14/ukraine-deadline-pro-russian-rebels-passes

Ridiculous.

[Benton D Struckcheon]

52. Just to bury Syria,

more on Sy Hersh's smokescreen, from someone who's patience with the phony left is even less than mine, which is saying something: http://claysbeach.blogspot.com/2014/04/after-hersh-lays-smoke-screen-assad.html

[seveneyes]

54. It's simply about which side one agrees with

Right and wrong acts are used to bolster whichever side is chosen. It's also something which the US has no business meddling with.

[TwilightGardener]

56. The US signed the Budapest memorandum, as did Britain.

So while that doesn't mean we're bound to act militarily, as by a defense treaty, it does mean we do have a stake in helping Ukraine. Anyone who questions why it's the United States' business over there must not be aware that we offered to help them maintain their sovereignty.

[cprise]

65. AND respect sovereignty.

So, depending who you ask, no respect means no more treaty.

It was a huge mistake to have the State Dept. deliver speeches of support for protests that had already turned into violent rioting and that called for the president's dismissal. The US was saying in public that Ukraine should join the EU, but in secret the attitude was "F*CK THE EU!"

[JoseGaspar]

67. Give up auto...

You are fighting a burning desire for USA, USA!

Welcome to the new reality. Up is down. Rocks eat popcorn.

The people with the SS tats on their neck; they aren't fascists. Putin is a fascist (and Saddam, and Gaddafi, and those others).

Meanwhile, the "good" Ukrainian goverment helps in the rediscovery of Ukrainian roots every day. Every day, people who fought with the Dirlewanger Brigade, the Einsatzgruppen, and the Sonder battalions are rehabilitated for the good patriots that they were.

Did you know that a lot of the Fascist rehabilitation started with the Orange president, Viktor Yuschenko? He was the one who was supposedly poisoned by the Russians but turned out to have pancreatitis instead. Anyway, Viktor was an amazing revisionist of history but even he stopped short on the SS. This in turn pissed off Svoboda.

If they were pissed off by that, they were infuriated by Yanukovych who revoked all that newly gained hero-status.

What? You thought it was because he was a corrupt oligarch? They were all corrupt oligarchs. And so are the new people.

So get in line, Mr. Rank.

The time has come to support OUR very own Oligarchs and everyone knows that they are the finest most moral Oligarchs in the entire world.

[arely staircase]

82. Yushchenko was likely poisoned

and probably by Puti Pute the fascist thug.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

86. You do know that independent medical tests confirmed that Yuschenko was poisoned, right?

And that pancreatitis is one of several effects of dioxin poison.

Or maybe Victoria Nuland handed out cookies to the doctors conducting the tests, right?

[sabrina 1]

95. Nuland made clear what the role of the US is in this latest 'intervention'. Please, we have enough

crime in this country that has yet to be addressed, to have any time to be pointing fingers elsewhere, generally a tactic employed to try to distract from the criminal behavior right here which, try as they might, isn't going away.

Here's what I think regarding your comment. The brutal deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis, the torture of men, women and children, the detention without trial or even charges of known to be innocent people, the invasions of several countries based on lies, the corruption on Wall St that brought down the world's economies, and more, much more, done in the name of the American people, all of this criminal activity is still awaiting accountability. And no, we don't 'move forward' from war crimes. Other countries have tried that also, but with this many victims, it will eventually be addressed, as is now happening in the UK eg.

As for the person who was poisoned you mention, that is for the Russian people to deal with.

We are overburdened here by crimes committed by our own government to even have a minute to worry about one crime somewhere else.

Unless of course you think that we will instantly forget our own war and Wall St criminals if someone raises a crime somewhere else. You know, that used to work, but here's some advice, it doesn't anymore.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

100. Yes. God forbid we recognize we live in a global society.

We should never pay mind to the problems of people outside our border.

[sabrina 1]

103. Should we 'pay mind' to some of the worst crimes of the past decade and a half

right here before we think we can point fingers elsewhere? Clearly each time we do that now, we are constantly reminded of these crimes, the US having lost the moral authority to do what, if I'm reading you right, you view as more important, a crime committed somewhere else as opposed to the untold numbers of crimes, so far, crimes committed right here.

Feel free to try to get the world to look at a crime somewhere else, especially when it is rather self serving (eg, if I were truly concerned about recognizing crimes on a global scale, I would have mentioned Karamov of Uzbekistan and his many tragic victims, or the people of Bahrain who have been courageously risking their lives and freedom for several years by protesting under the threat of violence and prison against their Oppressive Rulers. I would mentioned the continuing crimes against the people in the Congo and in the CAR.

I could go on and on, pointing out crimes committed against human beings, many of the criminals btw, OUR ALLIES. But when people appear to be concerned selectively about 'global crimes', iow, ONLY when they think it can be used for political purposes, most people do not view that as genuine concern.

Look up our BFF in Uzbekistan eg, someone who should long ago have been at that Hague, if you truly care about crime on 'a global scale'. And then ask yourself, 'why is the US supporting this monster IF they care about 'crime on a global scale'?

Let's at least be honest, we ONLY care about 'crime in a global world' when it appears to support our OWN 'interests' which most often are NOT in the interests of the people who actually live in these places.

I prefer directness, honesty, such as 'yes, really the only reason I'm bringing this ONE crime up is because I want to USE it for political reasons'. We know that is a tactic, just be open about it and people won't have the need to point out hypocrisy.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

106. So because we pay attention to what's going on in Ukraine.....

....it somehow precludes us from investigating our own actions in Iraq or other past wrongdoings on our part?

Me no follow.

[sabrina 1]

107. Why did that ONE crime pop into your mind right now? Why not the persecution by one of our

allies, Karamov, eg, of his own people, the genocide he committed against them, to which we have turned a blind eye? I am ALL FOR going after bad guys like this and if you were to ask me about massive crimes we need to pay attention to, there is a LONG, LONG list I would have come up with that affect a LOT MORE HUMAN BEINGS that this one that you appear to feel is the worst one ever committed or something.

So my point is made, thanks. People who are genuinely concerned about human beings and crimes against them, are not selective in their choices of what 'global crimes' we need to pay attention to.

Karamov is up there on MY list due the NUMBERS of people he is responsible for murdering and torturing. And because OUR TAX DOLLARS are going to SUPPORT this monster..

But clearly you have other priorities, as I pointed out.

And btw, when did we start 'investigating' and 'prosecuting' Iraq War criminals? I don't recall ANY attempt to do so. Airc, we were told to 'move forward' from all those crimes, and the ONLY person prosecuted and jailed airc, was Chelsea Manning the person who EXPOSED the crimes.

So what is your point? You seem to be saying that it doesn't matter what WE do, it only matters what a few people we don't like do, it also doesn't matter what our Dictator Friends do. You want, iow, to be able to use only SELECTED crimes against those we currently 'don't like'.

Did I get that right?

[JoseGaspar]

102. What I know...

What I know is that there may be a connection between long-term dioxin exposure and pancreatic cancer.

What I know is that there is little to no evidence of an instant connection between acute pancreatitis and dioxin poisoning as was the assertion in the Yuschenko case. More importantly, I know that such an assertion ignores the much more obvious link between pancreatitis and say, alcoholism.

What I know is that the "independent medical tests" you refer to were those of the Rudolfinerhaus Clinic in Vienna which also happily admitted that they did not have possession of the blood samples throughout their process. I also know that the clinical director of the hospital sued the clinic for losing his job when he blew the whistle on these "tests".

Here is the link:

http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(05)66354-4/fulltext

What I know is that well after the media lost interest, a steady drumbeat of scientific articles raised doubts about any "poisoning", both from the nature of the results (the second highest concentration of dioxin ever recorded) and from the medical issues I raised above.

Here is a contemporary link:

http://www.antiwar.com/orig/boyle.php?articleid=4217

What I know is that doubt about this story became so severe that, "...in September 2009, a special commission, created by the Verkhovna Rada, came to a conclusion that the Yushchenko dioxin poisoning was falsified to strengthen his positions during the 2004 presidential elections. The commission demanded to bring to justice those guilty in the fabrication of blood tests." [Wikipedia]

Here is a link:

http://www.segodnya.ua/politics/power/rada-trebuet-zavecti-delo-po-faktu-falcifikatsii-otravlenija-jushchenko.html

That is what I know.

I know nothing about Nuland's cookies.

I only know about the cookies that you keep trying to hand out.

[warrprayer]

105. Yay Oligarchs!!!

[JoseGaspar]

115. thanks

There is a famous old quote from Leo Tolstoy:

"The greater the state, the more wrong and cruel its patriotism,
and the greater is the sum of suffering upon which its power is founded."

It seems this has to learned anew by each generation.