Monday, April 14, 2014

Andrei USA exports democracy

In 2008 President Bush gave Vladimir Putin a lesson on democracy

And now democracy Iraq style has come to Ukraine courtesy of the USA.

Its amazing that people get so upset that the Government they voted for has been replaced and their current "prime minister" actually got less than 7% of the vote at the ballot box last elections.

But the current Prime minister does have the approval of the American State Department, who engineered a coup to install him so they should just accept it.

10 comment(s):

pmilt said...

I don't dismiss out of hand the idea of the US government staging a coup in a foreign country - after all, they have form for that kind of thing. However, in the absence of even the slightest evidence that they 'engineered a coup' in Ukraine, not to mention no credible mechanism yet offered for how they might have achieved such a thing, this assertion of Russian propaganda remains exactly that.

Andrei said...

this assertion of Russian propaganda remains exactly that.

What do you make of this Milt? "Yats" of course is now the Prime Minister, Klitschko has withdrawn of course, just as these people decided he should.

Why did five, at least prominant American Politicians address the "peaceful protesters, including of course John McCain.

Why has the American Government invest billions of dollars in NGOs promoting "democracy"

Would Americans or Westerners tolerate this level of interference in their internal affairs?

Why couldn't the issues that bought out the protestors be discussed as part of the election campaign an election being scheduled for 11 months ahead anyway when these troubles started?

Why were peace deals creating coalition Governments sabotaged, the peace deals including bring the elections forward?

Sorry Milt these are indisputable facts not Russian propaganda.

pmilt said...

Here's what I make of it - it's foreign affairs types talking about talking and trying to influence events over which they actually have little or no influence, much like foreign affairs types everywhere a government is overthrown. There's no mechanism here - for instance, on what basis are we supposed to believe the US government controls 'Yatz,' 'Klitsch' et al? What does it have on them? How has it provided them with so many followers? By what means does it overthrow Janukovych? By what means does it impose 'Yatz' and his pals on the Ukrainian people? Is Janukovych also on the payroll, the way he simply gave up and fled?

In past instances in which the US government has engineered coups, it's done so by cutting deals with powerful military leaders who control forces sufficient to take power. What it hasn't ever done and indisputably can't do is arrange mass uprisings.

One thing I can definitely say about this conversation intercepted by Russian intelligence services and released for propaganda purposes is that the US hasn't released any conversations between Russian officials about their dealings with Janukovych. They'd certainly take the propaganda opportunity if it was available to them. So why haven't they? Well, it could be that Russian officials have been totally upright in their dealings with Ukraine and there's just nothing embarrassing for the US to release, although if you believe it I have a famous bridge you may like to purchase. Alternatively, it could be that US intelligence services haven't been much involved in this, which kind of undermines the whole "US-engineered coup" thing...

Andrei said...

Lol Milt you capacity to deny the obvious when it doesn't suit your prejudice is astonishing.

Anyway the Americans have been forced to admit the Director of the CIA just happened to be in Ukraine when the junta tried to take Slavyansk.

What a funny coincidence - it was initially denied that he was there incidentally and now it is reluctantly conceded buried deep within another story huffing and puffing about how bad Russia is and how it will be punished.

Though the real consequences of America;s action to punish Russia will fall on the Ukrainians themselves and the poorer countries of Western Europe.

But the American administration are not particularly intelligent as in becoming ever more apparent.

William Stout said...

Yes indeed, it is all America's fault. Never mind the fact that the Russians took the territory by force originally, never mind that Stalin starved millions in the Ukraine, never mind that there was more than 27,000 gulags across the former Soviet Union, never mind that there are monasteries where the men of the cloth pray constantly to remove the stain of sin from them due to the atrocities committed there, and never mind that ethnic Russians were imported into that nation because the native Tatars were moved out and are being forced out again.

It would seem that your propaganda wears a little thin in the light of day, does it not? Putin is KGB, his family has a long history with the KGB going back to the days of Lenin. Putin has had men assassinated, he has had business leaders jailed because of political opposition, and he has strong armed nations by turning off the gas during the winter so that their citizens would freeze. That is your hero. I know who and what he is, so please don't waste my time with your false portraits.

Point the finger of blame at the United States of America if you will, but the accusation is a lie. Nowhere do you mention the corruption inherent in the deposed government, nowhere do you mention the secret bank accounts containing government monies, nowhere do you mention Spetsnaz in the Ukraine or Crimea stirring up trouble. Do you honestly believe that the world does not know what is happening? We have seen this before.

You may prefer Zhirinovsky's politics, but at least he never lied to achieve his goals. The troubles in the Ukraine go back a long way before the former Prime Minister was unceremoniously removed from office by the Ukrainians. The troubles go back years and is rooted in the corruption of public officials, not the meddling of the U.S., as you would have people believe. Try to turn a failed state into a U.S. puppet if you will, but nobody who knows better is going to believe you.

Andrei said...


Kiev, was the original center of Russian culture - the towns where the troubles are occurring, as we speak, and which are a long way away from Kiev were Russian towns from their foundation, they got included in the Ukrainian SSR when the Bolsheviks created the Ukrainian SSR in the 1920s

Russia is not equal to USSR. Stalin was a Georgian with an Ossetian mother, Nikita Khrushchev and Leonid Brezhnev were both born in what is today called Ukraine and would be today be called Ukrainians though that identity didn't really exist .when they were born

In the 1930s there was a famine in the USSR, not only what was then called the Ukrainian SSR but across the USSR. It was a terrible thing that effected rural populations the length of the Eurasian Steppes

The people who make the most noise about this are people who live in the West of the modern nation of Ukraine which was at the time of this famine not even part of the Ukrainian SSR but part of Poland.

Its a sad history. We can't change it..

What I want is no blood to be spilled, no peoples lives and livelihoods destroyed.but it seems I'm in a minority here

pmilt said...

The problem is, this "US-engineered coup" isn't obvious. As I've said before, there's no mechanism for it to occur.

Consider Putin's takeover of Crimea and the takeover now under way in eastern Ukraine. The mechanism is clear enough: send in Russian military personnel with badges removed, have them lead and organise local ethnic Russians, and mass some serious force on the border so the Ukrainians have to think twice about trying to retake the area.

Now consider the proposition of a "US-engineered coup" in Ukraine - how does it happen? You can't send in military personnel and pretend they're locals, there aren't any ethnic American locals to lead and organise, you can't mass any kind of credible force anywhere near the territory in question. So how are you claiming they did it?

Andrei said...

You know how they did it - they stirred up ancient emnities that exist between the different parts of Ukraine.

Things you don't understand but lie at the heart of why Lucyna and myself see this on opposite sides - things the Devil uses to divide God's people. And ancient history bought back to life instead of left in the past where it belongs.

Anyway - God willing, it looks like the junta is falling, they can't control the streets of Kiev which are up in arms over huge price rises in everything along with drops in wages (thanks to the IMF and the loss of very large Russian subsidies).

The army seems unwilling to shoot their own people and are in many cases joining the "rebels" much to the puzzelment of the BBC

The orange and black ribbons are St George's Ribbon - very significant.

There's a conference in Geneva tomorrow, God willing a way forward will emerge and the hard job of restoring civility and prosperity to the lands of Ukraine will begin - though it probably wont be one Nation within ten years, two or three different ones would be my guess (and I could even predict what their new names might be.

The current "President" and "Prime Minister" will end their days in the USA or be assassinated by Neo Nazis is my prediction.

Whatever happens this debacle will go down as the most ill conceived foreign policy adventure the Americans have ever come up with

pmilt said...

Ah, the old fall-back - the people couldn't possibly have risen up against this corrupt kleptocracy on their own, they must have been incited by foreigners. Fact is, only one foreign country has put troops into Ukraine and only one foreign country has annexed Ukrainian territory. Funnily enough, most of the world is considering that country the aggressor here.

As to that BBC story, the Ukrainians didn't prove unwilling to shoot "their own people," they proved unwilling to open fire on Russian military personnel who have a 40,000-strong backup force close by. The BBC may be surprised, but I'm not, From the linked report:

"The armed men, meanwhile, made little secret of the fact they took orders from Moscow. Many of them appeared to be Russian troops from Crimea. Asked where he had come from, one told the Guardian: "Simferopol." How were things in Crimea? "Zamechatelna," he said in Russian – splendid. He added: "The old ladies are happy. Because of Russia their pensions have doubled." Had he served in the Ukrainian army and perhaps swapped sides? "No, I'm Russian," he replied."

Kathleen said...

What president was this CIA director under?

Post a Comment

Please be respectful. Foul language and personal attacks may get your comment deleted without warning. Contact us if your comment doesn't appear - the spam filter may have grabbed it.