(OT) Today we remember Maidan

[Pelle Svanslös]

https://twitter.com/GlasnostGone/status/1594612086520385544

--
"And off they went, from here to there,
The bear, the bear, and the maiden fair"
-- Traditional

[*skriptis]

Pelle Svanslös <pe...@svans.los> Wrote in message:r
> https://twitter.com/GlasnostGone/status/1594612086520385544-- "And off they went, from here to there,The bear, the bear, and the maiden fair"-- Traditional



https://mronline.org/2022/07/06/anatomy-of-a-coup/


--




----Android NewsGroup Reader----
https://piaohong.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usenet/index.html

[The Iceberg]

On Monday, 21 November 2022 at 20:53:41 UTC, *skriptis wrote:
> Pelle Svanslös <pe...@svans.los> Wrote in message:r
> > https://twitter.com/GlasnostGone/status/1594612086520385544-- "And off they went, from here to there,The bear, the bear, and the maiden fair"-- Traditional
>
>
>
> https://mronline.org/2022/07/06/anatomy-of-a-coup/

good website they also have this:
https://mronline.org/2022/11/17/ftx-partnership-with-ukraine-is-latest-chapter-in-shady-western-aid-saga/

[Pelle Svanslös]

On 21.11.2022 22.53, *skriptis wrote:
> Pelle Svanslös <pe...@svans.los> Wrote in message:r
>> https://twitter.com/GlasnostGone/status/1594612086520385544-- "And off they went, from here to there,The bear, the bear, and the maiden fair"-- Traditional
>
>
>
> https://mronline.org/2022/07/06/anatomy-of-a-coup/

There was no coup. Yanukovich tore up the EU partnership deal he
negotiated, he knew it was good for the country and wanted it. What was
in ripping up the deal for him is not exactly known. But ...

Russia didn't make it easy for the bankrupt Ukraine to be BFF with them.
Russia did want to impose some kind of paltry economic zone on Ukraine
and others, but you know what those things are. Despite wanting to
co-operate and stuff, Russkies had Ukrainian imports under sanctions,
gas pipelines closed, Putin talking about two peoples "being one", ...
The Russkie way of showing friendship has always been odd.

When the deal was torn up, the conditions were ready for the country to
be split. NEDs are useful in organising people, but inconsequential in
the big picture. What matters is what the people want when push comes to
shove. You should have no doubt about what the Ukrainians want.

[The Iceberg]

it was definitely a coup, quit trying to deny the blatently obvious, why do you keep lying all the time about political stuff? yes hate Russia all you like that's your weird choice and by all means dispute the reasons for the current Ukraine war, but pls don't try to deny what happened in 2014. Can personally remember the BBC reporters in 2013 being very upset cos Yanukovich had taken an anti-EUSSR and pro-Russia stance, it meant a real change in the order of things and they were saying stuff like Hillary Clinton couldn't have that. Have said many times granted Yanukovich made a mistake by firing on the demonstrators, even if they were funded by the USA to overthrow a democratically elected leader but the guy was fighting for his political life after Hillary/USA/CIA kicked off this campaign against him. We've all seen what happened in Syria and Libya and plenty of times in South America, where the USA did exactly the same. They even had a film the other night about Gary Webb who broke the story about how the CIA paid drug dealers to flood the USA with cocaine to pay the guerillas in Nicaragua, the CIA denied this for years!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gary_Webb

[*skriptis]

Pelle Svanslös <pe...@svans.los> Wrote in message:

> There was no coup.


Haha. Of course there was.

https://qph.cf2.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-f987a5aa2a9ebe18b8026af31c2d8c5f-lq

Or else how would you describe the fact that high US state officials were there?


Let's look at the differently. What would you say if deputy of Russian foreign ministry was in front of Capitol during January 6th 2021 hanging around with shaman guy?

Would you not scream Russia?

Haha. Of course you would.

> Yanukovich tore up the EU partnership deal he negotiated,

He was president, he can do it. Elections were less than 12 months away so he'd face political consequences or perhaps enjoy even more success in elections.

Whatever would have happened, it was a legitimite, legal move by a democratically elected president nearing the end of his 2010-2014 term.

Really Pelle you have some strange idea about "democracy". According to you, Ukraine president is not allowed to stay out of EU, he is supposed to hand over his country to Bruxelles, Britain is not allowed to leave EU, etc.

You're a tyrant.





> ...he knew it was good for the country and wanted it.


Objection. Hearsay. You don't know what he knew or wanted.




> What was in ripping up the deal for him is not exactly known. But ...Russia didn't make it easy for the bankrupt Ukraine to be BFF with them. Russia did want to impose some kind of paltry economic zone on Ukraine and others, but you know what those things are.


Russia completely ignored Yanukovich's Ukraine. Russia together with Germany built Nordstream pipeline to avoid Poles and Ukraine who were blackmailing Russia all the time.

Yanukovich was nuisance for Russia with his policy of neutrality and constant begging for money, playing east and west like a whore. You could argue he was responsible for all of this. Ukraine is 100% Russian territory historically and a profoundly Russian territory in at least 50% of the country and as its leader you conduct policy of "neutrality"? That's anti-Russian in a sense already.




> Despite wanting to co-operate and stuff, Russkies had Ukrainian imports under sanctions, gas pipelines closed, Putin talking about two peoples "being one", ... The Russkie way of showing friendship has always been odd.When the deal was torn up, the conditions were ready for the country to be split. NEDs are useful in organising people, but inconsequential in the big picture. What matters is what the people want when push comes to shove. You should have no doubt about what the Ukrainians want.


Here's what they wanted in February 2014, days before coup.

Yanukovich was probably the best chance for Ukraine to prosper. If you have 50% of the country that wants gay Pride and EU and 50% wants Russian Czar and return to Mother Russia, neutrality seems like the only viable option. If the country is supposed to stay unified.


https://www.economist.com/sites/default/files/images/print-edition/20140322_FBM938.png


How do you put this into EU?
The only way is, of course, violent coup and a war.

[Pelle Svanslös]

On 22.11.2022 13.54, *skriptis wrote:
> Pelle Svanslös <pe...@svans.los> Wrote in message:
>> There was no coup.
>
>
> Haha. Of course there was.

Only after Yanukovich shot at his people. Scrapping the EU deal was
traitorous and a root cause, Ukrainians wanted to forge their own path.
The Maidan violence was tantamount to a resignation by Yanukovic.

> https://qph.cf2.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-f987a5aa2a9ebe18b8026af31c2d8c5f-lq
>
> Or else how would you describe the fact that high US state officials were there?
>
>
> Let's look at the differently. What would you say if deputy of Russian foreign ministry was in front of Capitol during January 6th 2021 hanging around with shaman guy?
>

I wouldn't be surprised if the Shaman worked for Cozy Bear.

> Would you not scream Russia?
>
> Haha. Of course you would.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>> Yanukovich tore up the EU partnership deal he negotiated,
>
>
> He was president, he can do it.

Ukraine is/was a fledgling democracy. But they did have a parliament.

> Elections were less than 12 months away so he'd face political consequences or perhaps enjoy even more success in elections.

Yanukovic was lucky to get out alive after what he did.

> Whatever would have happened, it was a legitimite, legal move by a democratically elected president nearing the end of his 2010-2014 term.
>
> Really Pelle you have some strange idea about "democracy". According to you, Ukraine president is not allowed to stay out of EU, he is supposed to hand over his country to Bruxelles, Britain is not allowed to leave EU, etc.
>
> You're a tyrant.

Maybe.

>
>
>
>
>> ...he knew it was good for the country and wanted it.
>
>
> Objection. Hearsay. You don't know what he knew or wanted.

Of course I know. He called association with the European Union “an
important stimulus for forming a modern European state”. The Ukr
parliament passed several reforms required by EU.

Yanu was either bribed or pressed by Moscow to make his u-turn. Probably
both.

>
>
>
>> What was in ripping up the deal for him is not exactly known. But ...Russia didn't make it easy for the bankrupt Ukraine to be BFF with them. Russia did want to impose some kind of paltry economic zone on Ukraine and others, but you know what those things are.
>
>
> Russia completely ignored Yanukovich's Ukraine.

Oh, no. Ukraine always was a bigus dealus to Moscow. "One people".
Ukrainians disagree.

> Russia together with Germany built Nordstream pipeline to avoid Poles and Ukraine who were blackmailing Russia all the time.
>
> Yanukovich was nuisance for Russia with his policy of neutrality and constant begging for money, playing east and west like a whore.

He still was Moscow's man.

> You could argue he was responsible for all of this.

In the end, Russia is/was responsible. The CIA might of wanted
influence, and gave the dissidents a couple of mobile phones so they
could utilise social media. Russia wanted Ukraine and started the war in
2014.

Russia can't have Ukraine.

> Ukraine is 100% Russian territory historically and a profoundly Russian territory in at least 50% of the country and as its leader you conduct policy of "neutrality"? That's anti-Russian in a sense already.
>
>
>
>
>> Despite wanting to co-operate and stuff, Russkies had Ukrainian imports under sanctions, gas pipelines closed, Putin talking about two peoples "being one", ... The Russkie way of showing friendship has always been odd.When the deal was torn up, the conditions were ready for the country to be split. NEDs are useful in organising people, but inconsequential in the big picture. What matters is what the people want when push comes to shove. You should have no doubt about what the Ukrainians want.
>
>
> Here's what they wanted in February 2014, days before coup.
>
> Yanukovich was probably the best chance for Ukraine to prosper. If you have 50% of the country that wants gay Pride and EU and 50% wants Russian Czar and return to Mother Russia, neutrality seems like the only viable option.

A partnership with EU doesn't mean you're aligned. Except in the eyes of
Putin. A prosperous Ukraine outside the influence of Russia is the
biggest boo-boo of them all. Whether it's neutral or not. It's proof
that an autocratic Russia is doomed to backwardness.

Look around, it is.