He campaigned on entering a much-publicized free trade agreement with the EU. And parliament passed it. I know this will really upset you . . . but Russia meddled big-time, and Yanukovych abruptly changed his mind, rejected the EU, and climbed in bed with Russia. He pulled similar 180s on domestic issue. His own party voted to oust him.Redbrickbear said:sombear said:No, he ran specifically on the EU agreement, more economic freedom, more citizen freedom, and anti-corruption. He did a complete and abrupt 180 on all of these once in office. We did not make him do that.Redbrickbear said:sombear said:Right, but Yanukovych ran on an even closer economic alliance with the west and on more freedoms in general. He did not run on any kind of pro-Russia platform.Redbrickbear said:sombear said:All of Ukraine, including Crimea, voted for independence in 1991..Redbrickbear said:sombear said:it is a free sovereign nation aligned with the free world.KaiBear said:trey3216 said:Ukraine shouldn't be allowed to attack military targets that used to target Ukrainian military and civilian targets??? Interesting angle....Doc Holliday said:So Ukraine should use the long range missiles that would be launched from Ukraine and are targeted and controlled by NATO?whiterock said:Catturd misses on that one.historian said:The fact that the Biden regime is trying to start WWIII right before Trump, who just won a historic landslide victory who ran on ending the Russia/Ukraine war, just shows how evil these POS treasonous traitors scumbags really are.
— Catturd ™ (@catturd2) November 17, 2024
Biden and Trump met a couple of days ago. Do we think Ukraine was discussed? Did Trump comment on any of that about Ukraine? One could reasonably read between the lines that Trump wanted all the aid delivered so he would not have to spend his own political capital to get it done.....to give him time to work his own plan.
Trump is in a little bit of a bind here. He pandered to anti-war sentiment to get elected, knowing full well that abandoning Ukraine would be an unfathomably stupid thing to do. i don't blame him at all for the pander. Pandering is an essential part of politics and those who think they're too good to do it aren't worth the proverbial bucket of warm spit. But now he has to figure out a way to avoid doing what a really big and noisy chunk of his base wants him to do - cut & run from Ukraine. For sure he has a plan for how to walk the tightrope, and pushing all that aid into Ukraine before he takes over will give him some room to maneuver.
Keep your eye on the ball here:
Trump does not want Ukraine to become Afghanistan 2.0
Trump wants to win so much that America gets tired of winning.
As far as I know, they did just that today and fired them at a military facility in the Bryansk border region.
Good grief dude……exactly what do you think any US administration would do if Russia was openly supplying long range missiles to Mexican Drug cartels and they were actively using them to attack targets in various US cities and states ?
Just once at least attempt to provide an honest / specific answer and not just some generic Rambo bull*****
Russia invaded it, knowing Ukraine had the support of the free world and knowing we would supply weapons.
1. It was not aligned to the West until a political coup in 2014 overthrew the old government.
Very strong evidence the CIA and State Department were involved in that coup.
2. Why would Moscow know that DC would spend billions to help Ukraine fight a proxy war?
Did Moscow send billions in weaponry to Iraq & Afghanistan after DC sent in troops in 2001 and 2003
Maybe they expected that DC would act like they did and largely stay out of it.
Sure
But those regions (Crimea and Donbas) were always the least supportive and the most supportive of the Party of regions (the pro-Moscow party)
Ukraine is a country that has always been pulled between East and West
But the coup in 2014 is what was decisive in setting off this decades long conflict (the purpose of which is to pull Ukriane forget into the Western orbit)
Russia was always going to oppose that and if necessary try and bite off parts (Crimea/Donbas)
All the more reason not to have supported a coup that over threw him and his party from power
(And technically he and his party supported closer economic ties to both EU and Russia
They were pretty moderate on that front)
10 years of conflict, trillions in war damage, hundreds of thousands of dead and wounded....seems like a disaster looking back
I don't see where ever campaigned on promising to join the EU
[in 1997 became head (governor) of the Donetsk oblast state administration. He retained this post until 2002. From then until January 2005 he served as prime minister under President Leonid Kuchma. With the latter's half-hearted support he contested the presidential election of 2004 against Viktor Yushchenko, but lost out on account of vote fraud exposed in the course of the Orange Revolution.
In April 2003, Yanukovych had become head of the Party of Regions on whose list he was elected to the Supreme Council of Ukraine in the general election of 2006. Later that year, because his party had won a plurality of seats in the Supreme Council, and together with the Communist Party of Ukraine and socialists was able to form a majority, he resigned his seat to become prime minister under President Viktor Yushchenko. A power struggle ensued between the latter two, and Yanukovych resigned in December 2007, being replaced by Yuliia Tymoshenko. Tymoshenko negotiated an unfavourable agreement for Russian gas, which provided the basis for later being charged with 'abuse of power' and sentenced to seven years in prison. Yanukovych bided his time as his popularity outstripped that of Tymoshenko. In the wake of the 2008 market crash…
In 2010 he again contested the presidency winning this time by a plurality of votes over his opponent, Yuliia Tymoshenko. It was a victory brought on not so much by his personal electoral appeal as by the self-defeating policies of Viktor Yushchenko whose record of incompetence and infighting while in office disappointed many former supporters of the Orange Revolution. In the decisive second round of presidential elections Yushchenko himself pleaded with voters not to elect Tymoshenko, his supposed ally. In both the 2010 and 2004 elections, Yanukovych ran as candidate of the Russian-speaking electorate in eastern and southern Ukraine as well as of the country's leading business tycoons such as Rinat Akhmetov, Dmytro Firtash, and Andrii Kliuiev, all of whom backed him.
Yanukovych's term as president was notable for reinstating the 1996 Constitution, reversing much of his predecessor's policies….
In foreign policy Yanukovych oscillated between the European Union (EU) and the Russian Federation. He paid his first official visit abroad to Brussels, but followed this up by signing the Kharkiv Agreement with Russian President Dmitri Medvedev. That document extended the Russian Federation's naval base lease in Sevastopol to 2042, and lowered the price of Russian gas by $100 per 1000 m3. This was followed by a law proclaiming Ukraine's non-aligned status (oddly incompatible with the Russian Federation's Black Sea Fleet being permanently in the Crimea), and rejection of Viktor Yushchenko's aspiration towards a NATO Membership Action Plan. Both of these developments were meant to mollify the Russian Federation.]
[The Party of Regions
It advocated a moderate pro-Russian political course, opposing itself to the Ukrainian national democratic camp. It held dominant positions in power in Crimea and in the southern and eastern regions of Ukraine. During the Revolution of Dignity, it launched the Antimaidan movement.]
https://www.encyclopediao***raine.com/display.asp?linkpath=pages%5CY%5CA%5CYanukovychViktor.htm
Why Are We in Ukraine?
450,542 Views |
6587 Replies |
Last: 7 min ago by Redbrickbear
No, it's not in dispute. It's simply false.sombear said:Never allowed to deliver? He publicly and abruptly did a 180 and announced he was backing out of the EU deal and aligning with Russia. That is not in dispute.Sam Lowry said:All of Ukraine voted for independence and neutrality in 1991. No region voted to rejoin Russia until after the neutral government of Ukraine was overthrown.sombear said:All of Ukraine, including Crimea, voted for independence in 1991. Ukraine has been a free and sovereign nation since then. It has had all sorts of different alliances, but never once did any region vote to be taken over again by Russia. In fact, when given a clear choice at the federal and regional levels, Ukrainians chose the free world. Russia wouldn't accept that, so it invaded in 2014.Redbrickbear said:sombear said:it is a free sovereign nation aligned with the free world.KaiBear said:trey3216 said:Ukraine shouldn't be allowed to attack military targets that used to target Ukrainian military and civilian targets??? Interesting angle....Doc Holliday said:So Ukraine should use the long range missiles that would be launched from Ukraine and are targeted and controlled by NATO?whiterock said:Catturd misses on that one.historian said:The fact that the Biden regime is trying to start WWIII right before Trump, who just won a historic landslide victory who ran on ending the Russia/Ukraine war, just shows how evil these POS treasonous traitors scumbags really are.
— Catturd ™ (@catturd2) November 17, 2024
Biden and Trump met a couple of days ago. Do we think Ukraine was discussed? Did Trump comment on any of that about Ukraine? One could reasonably read between the lines that Trump wanted all the aid delivered so he would not have to spend his own political capital to get it done.....to give him time to work his own plan.
Trump is in a little bit of a bind here. He pandered to anti-war sentiment to get elected, knowing full well that abandoning Ukraine would be an unfathomably stupid thing to do. i don't blame him at all for the pander. Pandering is an essential part of politics and those who think they're too good to do it aren't worth the proverbial bucket of warm spit. But now he has to figure out a way to avoid doing what a really big and noisy chunk of his base wants him to do - cut & run from Ukraine. For sure he has a plan for how to walk the tightrope, and pushing all that aid into Ukraine before he takes over will give him some room to maneuver.
Keep your eye on the ball here:
Trump does not want Ukraine to become Afghanistan 2.0
Trump wants to win so much that America gets tired of winning.
As far as I know, they did just that today and fired them at a military facility in the Bryansk border region.
Good grief dude……exactly what do you think any US administration would do if Russia was openly supplying long range missiles to Mexican Drug cartels and they were actively using them to attack targets in various US cities and states ?
Just once at least attempt to provide an honest / specific answer and not just some generic Rambo bull*****
Russia invaded it, knowing Ukraine had the support of the free world and knowing we would supply weapons.
1. It was not aligned to the West until a political coup in 2014 overthrew the old government.
Very strong evidence the CIA and State Department were involved in that coup.
2. Why would Moscow know that DC would spend billions to help Ukraine fight a proxy war?
Did Moscow send billions in weaponry to Iraq & Afghanistan after DC sent in troops in 2001 and 2003
Maybe they expected that DC would act like they did and largely stay out of it.
Putin had no interest in Iraq or Afghanistan. And he supplies weapons to many of our adversaries.
We and the Euros were clear about what we'd do if Putin invaded Ukraine. And we had been supplying Ukraine weapons forever.
Yanukovych ran on what the vast majority of Ukrainians wanted -- a fair deal with the EU and a balanced relationship with the EU and Russia. He was never allowed to deliver on that.
What he announced was a delay in the deal because the EU had refused further talks.
Again, not true. Ukraine's parliament had refused to pass the EU agreement. Most of Yanukovych's party was absent from the impeachment vote due to fears of violence.sombear said:He campaigned on entering a much-publicized free trade agreement with the EU. And parliament passed it. I know this will really upset you . . . but Russia meddled big-time, and Yanukovych abruptly changed his mind, rejected the EU, and climbed in bed with Russia. He pulled similar 180s on domestic issue. His own party voted to oust him.Redbrickbear said:sombear said:No, he ran specifically on the EU agreement, more economic freedom, more citizen freedom, and anti-corruption. He did a complete and abrupt 180 on all of these once in office. We did not make him do that.Redbrickbear said:sombear said:Right, but Yanukovych ran on an even closer economic alliance with the west and on more freedoms in general. He did not run on any kind of pro-Russia platform.Redbrickbear said:sombear said:All of Ukraine, including Crimea, voted for independence in 1991..Redbrickbear said:sombear said:it is a free sovereign nation aligned with the free world.KaiBear said:trey3216 said:Ukraine shouldn't be allowed to attack military targets that used to target Ukrainian military and civilian targets??? Interesting angle....Doc Holliday said:So Ukraine should use the long range missiles that would be launched from Ukraine and are targeted and controlled by NATO?whiterock said:Catturd misses on that one.historian said:The fact that the Biden regime is trying to start WWIII right before Trump, who just won a historic landslide victory who ran on ending the Russia/Ukraine war, just shows how evil these POS treasonous traitors scumbags really are.
— Catturd ™ (@catturd2) November 17, 2024
Biden and Trump met a couple of days ago. Do we think Ukraine was discussed? Did Trump comment on any of that about Ukraine? One could reasonably read between the lines that Trump wanted all the aid delivered so he would not have to spend his own political capital to get it done.....to give him time to work his own plan.
Trump is in a little bit of a bind here. He pandered to anti-war sentiment to get elected, knowing full well that abandoning Ukraine would be an unfathomably stupid thing to do. i don't blame him at all for the pander. Pandering is an essential part of politics and those who think they're too good to do it aren't worth the proverbial bucket of warm spit. But now he has to figure out a way to avoid doing what a really big and noisy chunk of his base wants him to do - cut & run from Ukraine. For sure he has a plan for how to walk the tightrope, and pushing all that aid into Ukraine before he takes over will give him some room to maneuver.
Keep your eye on the ball here:
Trump does not want Ukraine to become Afghanistan 2.0
Trump wants to win so much that America gets tired of winning.
As far as I know, they did just that today and fired them at a military facility in the Bryansk border region.
Good grief dude……exactly what do you think any US administration would do if Russia was openly supplying long range missiles to Mexican Drug cartels and they were actively using them to attack targets in various US cities and states ?
Just once at least attempt to provide an honest / specific answer and not just some generic Rambo bull*****
Russia invaded it, knowing Ukraine had the support of the free world and knowing we would supply weapons.
1. It was not aligned to the West until a political coup in 2014 overthrew the old government.
Very strong evidence the CIA and State Department were involved in that coup.
2. Why would Moscow know that DC would spend billions to help Ukraine fight a proxy war?
Did Moscow send billions in weaponry to Iraq & Afghanistan after DC sent in troops in 2001 and 2003
Maybe they expected that DC would act like they did and largely stay out of it.
Sure
But those regions (Crimea and Donbas) were always the least supportive and the most supportive of the Party of regions (the pro-Moscow party)
Ukraine is a country that has always been pulled between East and West
But the coup in 2014 is what was decisive in setting off this decades long conflict (the purpose of which is to pull Ukriane forget into the Western orbit)
Russia was always going to oppose that and if necessary try and bite off parts (Crimea/Donbas)
All the more reason not to have supported a coup that over threw him and his party from power
(And technically he and his party supported closer economic ties to both EU and Russia
They were pretty moderate on that front)
10 years of conflict, trillions in war damage, hundreds of thousands of dead and wounded....seems like a disaster looking back
I don't see where ever campaigned on promising to join the EU
[in 1997 became head (governor) of the Donetsk oblast state administration. He retained this post until 2002. From then until January 2005 he served as prime minister under President Leonid Kuchma. With the latter's half-hearted support he contested the presidential election of 2004 against Viktor Yushchenko, but lost out on account of vote fraud exposed in the course of the Orange Revolution.
In April 2003, Yanukovych had become head of the Party of Regions on whose list he was elected to the Supreme Council of Ukraine in the general election of 2006. Later that year, because his party had won a plurality of seats in the Supreme Council, and together with the Communist Party of Ukraine and socialists was able to form a majority, he resigned his seat to become prime minister under President Viktor Yushchenko. A power struggle ensued between the latter two, and Yanukovych resigned in December 2007, being replaced by Yuliia Tymoshenko. Tymoshenko negotiated an unfavourable agreement for Russian gas, which provided the basis for later being charged with 'abuse of power' and sentenced to seven years in prison. Yanukovych bided his time as his popularity outstripped that of Tymoshenko. In the wake of the 2008 market crash…
In 2010 he again contested the presidency winning this time by a plurality of votes over his opponent, Yuliia Tymoshenko. It was a victory brought on not so much by his personal electoral appeal as by the self-defeating policies of Viktor Yushchenko whose record of incompetence and infighting while in office disappointed many former supporters of the Orange Revolution. In the decisive second round of presidential elections Yushchenko himself pleaded with voters not to elect Tymoshenko, his supposed ally. In both the 2010 and 2004 elections, Yanukovych ran as candidate of the Russian-speaking electorate in eastern and southern Ukraine as well as of the country's leading business tycoons such as Rinat Akhmetov, Dmytro Firtash, and Andrii Kliuiev, all of whom backed him.
Yanukovych's term as president was notable for reinstating the 1996 Constitution, reversing much of his predecessor's policies….
In foreign policy Yanukovych oscillated between the European Union (EU) and the Russian Federation. He paid his first official visit abroad to Brussels, but followed this up by signing the Kharkiv Agreement with Russian President Dmitri Medvedev. That document extended the Russian Federation's naval base lease in Sevastopol to 2042, and lowered the price of Russian gas by $100 per 1000 m3. This was followed by a law proclaiming Ukraine's non-aligned status (oddly incompatible with the Russian Federation's Black Sea Fleet being permanently in the Crimea), and rejection of Viktor Yushchenko's aspiration towards a NATO Membership Action Plan. Both of these developments were meant to mollify the Russian Federation.]
[The Party of Regions
It advocated a moderate pro-Russian political course, opposing itself to the Ukrainian national democratic camp. It held dominant positions in power in Crimea and in the southern and eastern regions of Ukraine. During the Revolution of Dignity, it launched the Antimaidan movement.]
https://www.encyclopediao***raine.com/display.asp?linkpath=pages%5CY%5CA%5CYanukovychViktor.htm
Well over 200 kilometers from the phantom North Koreans in Kursk, FTR.Doc Holliday said:So Ukraine should use the long range missiles that would be launched from Ukraine and are targeted and controlled by NATO?whiterock said:Catturd misses on that one.historian said:The fact that the Biden regime is trying to start WWIII right before Trump, who just won a historic landslide victory who ran on ending the Russia/Ukraine war, just shows how evil these POS treasonous traitors scumbags really are.
— Catturd ™ (@catturd2) November 17, 2024
Biden and Trump met a couple of days ago. Do we think Ukraine was discussed? Did Trump comment on any of that about Ukraine? One could reasonably read between the lines that Trump wanted all the aid delivered so he would not have to spend his own political capital to get it done.....to give him time to work his own plan.
Trump is in a little bit of a bind here. He pandered to anti-war sentiment to get elected, knowing full well that abandoning Ukraine would be an unfathomably stupid thing to do. i don't blame him at all for the pander. Pandering is an essential part of politics and those who think they're too good to do it aren't worth the proverbial bucket of warm spit. But now he has to figure out a way to avoid doing what a really big and noisy chunk of his base wants him to do - cut & run from Ukraine. For sure he has a plan for how to walk the tightrope, and pushing all that aid into Ukraine before he takes over will give him some room to maneuver.
Keep your eye on the ball here:
Trump does not want Ukraine to become Afghanistan 2.0
Trump wants to win so much that America gets tired of winning.
As far as I know, they did just that today and fired them at a military facility in the Bryansk border region.
Sam Lowry said:Well over 200 kilometers from the phantom North Koreans in Kursk, FTR.Doc Holliday said:So Ukraine should use the long range missiles that would be launched from Ukraine and are targeted and controlled by NATO?whiterock said:Catturd misses on that one.historian said:The fact that the Biden regime is trying to start WWIII right before Trump, who just won a historic landslide victory who ran on ending the Russia/Ukraine war, just shows how evil these POS treasonous traitors scumbags really are.
— Catturd ™ (@catturd2) November 17, 2024
Biden and Trump met a couple of days ago. Do we think Ukraine was discussed? Did Trump comment on any of that about Ukraine? One could reasonably read between the lines that Trump wanted all the aid delivered so he would not have to spend his own political capital to get it done.....to give him time to work his own plan.
Trump is in a little bit of a bind here. He pandered to anti-war sentiment to get elected, knowing full well that abandoning Ukraine would be an unfathomably stupid thing to do. i don't blame him at all for the pander. Pandering is an essential part of politics and those who think they're too good to do it aren't worth the proverbial bucket of warm spit. But now he has to figure out a way to avoid doing what a really big and noisy chunk of his base wants him to do - cut & run from Ukraine. For sure he has a plan for how to walk the tightrope, and pushing all that aid into Ukraine before he takes over will give him some room to maneuver.
Keep your eye on the ball here:
Trump does not want Ukraine to become Afghanistan 2.0
Trump wants to win so much that America gets tired of winning.
As far as I know, they did just that today and fired them at a military facility in the Bryansk border region.
Phantom? Are N Koreans in Russia?
Russia's new nuclear doctrine means NATO missiles fired against our country could be deemed an attack by the bloc on Russia. Russia could retaliate with WMD against Kiev and key NATO facilities, wherever they're located. That means World War III.
— Dmitry Medvedev (@MedvedevRussiaE) November 19, 2024
I don't know, but I highly doubt it.Osodecentx said:Sam Lowry said:Well over 200 kilometers from the phantom North Koreans in Kursk, FTR.Doc Holliday said:So Ukraine should use the long range missiles that would be launched from Ukraine and are targeted and controlled by NATO?whiterock said:Catturd misses on that one.historian said:The fact that the Biden regime is trying to start WWIII right before Trump, who just won a historic landslide victory who ran on ending the Russia/Ukraine war, just shows how evil these POS treasonous traitors scumbags really are.
— Catturd ™ (@catturd2) November 17, 2024
Biden and Trump met a couple of days ago. Do we think Ukraine was discussed? Did Trump comment on any of that about Ukraine? One could reasonably read between the lines that Trump wanted all the aid delivered so he would not have to spend his own political capital to get it done.....to give him time to work his own plan.
Trump is in a little bit of a bind here. He pandered to anti-war sentiment to get elected, knowing full well that abandoning Ukraine would be an unfathomably stupid thing to do. i don't blame him at all for the pander. Pandering is an essential part of politics and those who think they're too good to do it aren't worth the proverbial bucket of warm spit. But now he has to figure out a way to avoid doing what a really big and noisy chunk of his base wants him to do - cut & run from Ukraine. For sure he has a plan for how to walk the tightrope, and pushing all that aid into Ukraine before he takes over will give him some room to maneuver.
Keep your eye on the ball here:
Trump does not want Ukraine to become Afghanistan 2.0
Trump wants to win so much that America gets tired of winning.
As far as I know, they did just that today and fired them at a military facility in the Bryansk border region.
Phantom? Are N Koreans in Russia?
Sam Lowry said:I don't know, but I highly doubt it.Osodecentx said:Sam Lowry said:Well over 200 kilometers from the phantom North Koreans in Kursk, FTR.Doc Holliday said:So Ukraine should use the long range missiles that would be launched from Ukraine and are targeted and controlled by NATO?whiterock said:Catturd misses on that one.historian said:The fact that the Biden regime is trying to start WWIII right before Trump, who just won a historic landslide victory who ran on ending the Russia/Ukraine war, just shows how evil these POS treasonous traitors scumbags really are.
— Catturd ™ (@catturd2) November 17, 2024
Biden and Trump met a couple of days ago. Do we think Ukraine was discussed? Did Trump comment on any of that about Ukraine? One could reasonably read between the lines that Trump wanted all the aid delivered so he would not have to spend his own political capital to get it done.....to give him time to work his own plan.
Trump is in a little bit of a bind here. He pandered to anti-war sentiment to get elected, knowing full well that abandoning Ukraine would be an unfathomably stupid thing to do. i don't blame him at all for the pander. Pandering is an essential part of politics and those who think they're too good to do it aren't worth the proverbial bucket of warm spit. But now he has to figure out a way to avoid doing what a really big and noisy chunk of his base wants him to do - cut & run from Ukraine. For sure he has a plan for how to walk the tightrope, and pushing all that aid into Ukraine before he takes over will give him some room to maneuver.
Keep your eye on the ball here:
Trump does not want Ukraine to become Afghanistan 2.0
Trump wants to win so much that America gets tired of winning.
As far as I know, they did just that today and fired them at a military facility in the Bryansk border region.
Phantom? Are N Koreans in Russia?
https://www.reuters.com/world/north-korea-troops-participated-some-ukraine-war-battles-part-russian-units-2024-11-20/
You should do 5 minutes of research. Parliament passed the EU deal in a landslide. Y pulled out and signed with Russia instead. There is now wiggle room there. That is 100% fact.Sam Lowry said:Again, not true. Ukraine's parliament had refused to pass the EU agreement. Most of Yanukovych's party was absent from the impeachment vote due to fears of violence.sombear said:He campaigned on entering a much-publicized free trade agreement with the EU. And parliament passed it. I know this will really upset you . . . but Russia meddled big-time, and Yanukovych abruptly changed his mind, rejected the EU, and climbed in bed with Russia. He pulled similar 180s on domestic issue. His own party voted to oust him.Redbrickbear said:sombear said:No, he ran specifically on the EU agreement, more economic freedom, more citizen freedom, and anti-corruption. He did a complete and abrupt 180 on all of these once in office. We did not make him do that.Redbrickbear said:sombear said:Right, but Yanukovych ran on an even closer economic alliance with the west and on more freedoms in general. He did not run on any kind of pro-Russia platform.Redbrickbear said:sombear said:All of Ukraine, including Crimea, voted for independence in 1991..Redbrickbear said:sombear said:it is a free sovereign nation aligned with the free world.KaiBear said:trey3216 said:Ukraine shouldn't be allowed to attack military targets that used to target Ukrainian military and civilian targets??? Interesting angle....Doc Holliday said:So Ukraine should use the long range missiles that would be launched from Ukraine and are targeted and controlled by NATO?whiterock said:Catturd misses on that one.historian said:The fact that the Biden regime is trying to start WWIII right before Trump, who just won a historic landslide victory who ran on ending the Russia/Ukraine war, just shows how evil these POS treasonous traitors scumbags really are.
— Catturd ™ (@catturd2) November 17, 2024
Biden and Trump met a couple of days ago. Do we think Ukraine was discussed? Did Trump comment on any of that about Ukraine? One could reasonably read between the lines that Trump wanted all the aid delivered so he would not have to spend his own political capital to get it done.....to give him time to work his own plan.
Trump is in a little bit of a bind here. He pandered to anti-war sentiment to get elected, knowing full well that abandoning Ukraine would be an unfathomably stupid thing to do. i don't blame him at all for the pander. Pandering is an essential part of politics and those who think they're too good to do it aren't worth the proverbial bucket of warm spit. But now he has to figure out a way to avoid doing what a really big and noisy chunk of his base wants him to do - cut & run from Ukraine. For sure he has a plan for how to walk the tightrope, and pushing all that aid into Ukraine before he takes over will give him some room to maneuver.
Keep your eye on the ball here:
Trump does not want Ukraine to become Afghanistan 2.0
Trump wants to win so much that America gets tired of winning.
As far as I know, they did just that today and fired them at a military facility in the Bryansk border region.
Good grief dude……exactly what do you think any US administration would do if Russia was openly supplying long range missiles to Mexican Drug cartels and they were actively using them to attack targets in various US cities and states ?
Just once at least attempt to provide an honest / specific answer and not just some generic Rambo bull*****
Russia invaded it, knowing Ukraine had the support of the free world and knowing we would supply weapons.
1. It was not aligned to the West until a political coup in 2014 overthrew the old government.
Very strong evidence the CIA and State Department were involved in that coup.
2. Why would Moscow know that DC would spend billions to help Ukraine fight a proxy war?
Did Moscow send billions in weaponry to Iraq & Afghanistan after DC sent in troops in 2001 and 2003
Maybe they expected that DC would act like they did and largely stay out of it.
Sure
But those regions (Crimea and Donbas) were always the least supportive and the most supportive of the Party of regions (the pro-Moscow party)
Ukraine is a country that has always been pulled between East and West
But the coup in 2014 is what was decisive in setting off this decades long conflict (the purpose of which is to pull Ukriane forget into the Western orbit)
Russia was always going to oppose that and if necessary try and bite off parts (Crimea/Donbas)
All the more reason not to have supported a coup that over threw him and his party from power
(And technically he and his party supported closer economic ties to both EU and Russia
They were pretty moderate on that front)
10 years of conflict, trillions in war damage, hundreds of thousands of dead and wounded....seems like a disaster looking back
I don't see where ever campaigned on promising to join the EU
[in 1997 became head (governor) of the Donetsk oblast state administration. He retained this post until 2002. From then until January 2005 he served as prime minister under President Leonid Kuchma. With the latter's half-hearted support he contested the presidential election of 2004 against Viktor Yushchenko, but lost out on account of vote fraud exposed in the course of the Orange Revolution.
In April 2003, Yanukovych had become head of the Party of Regions on whose list he was elected to the Supreme Council of Ukraine in the general election of 2006. Later that year, because his party had won a plurality of seats in the Supreme Council, and together with the Communist Party of Ukraine and socialists was able to form a majority, he resigned his seat to become prime minister under President Viktor Yushchenko. A power struggle ensued between the latter two, and Yanukovych resigned in December 2007, being replaced by Yuliia Tymoshenko. Tymoshenko negotiated an unfavourable agreement for Russian gas, which provided the basis for later being charged with 'abuse of power' and sentenced to seven years in prison. Yanukovych bided his time as his popularity outstripped that of Tymoshenko. In the wake of the 2008 market crash…
In 2010 he again contested the presidency winning this time by a plurality of votes over his opponent, Yuliia Tymoshenko. It was a victory brought on not so much by his personal electoral appeal as by the self-defeating policies of Viktor Yushchenko whose record of incompetence and infighting while in office disappointed many former supporters of the Orange Revolution. In the decisive second round of presidential elections Yushchenko himself pleaded with voters not to elect Tymoshenko, his supposed ally. In both the 2010 and 2004 elections, Yanukovych ran as candidate of the Russian-speaking electorate in eastern and southern Ukraine as well as of the country's leading business tycoons such as Rinat Akhmetov, Dmytro Firtash, and Andrii Kliuiev, all of whom backed him.
Yanukovych's term as president was notable for reinstating the 1996 Constitution, reversing much of his predecessor's policies….
In foreign policy Yanukovych oscillated between the European Union (EU) and the Russian Federation. He paid his first official visit abroad to Brussels, but followed this up by signing the Kharkiv Agreement with Russian President Dmitri Medvedev. That document extended the Russian Federation's naval base lease in Sevastopol to 2042, and lowered the price of Russian gas by $100 per 1000 m3. This was followed by a law proclaiming Ukraine's non-aligned status (oddly incompatible with the Russian Federation's Black Sea Fleet being permanently in the Crimea), and rejection of Viktor Yushchenko's aspiration towards a NATO Membership Action Plan. Both of these developments were meant to mollify the Russian Federation.]
[The Party of Regions
It advocated a moderate pro-Russian political course, opposing itself to the Ukrainian national democratic camp. It held dominant positions in power in Crimea and in the southern and eastern regions of Ukraine. During the Revolution of Dignity, it launched the Antimaidan movement.]
https://www.encyclopediao***raine.com/display.asp?linkpath=pages%5CY%5CA%5CYanukovychViktor.htm
38 of his own party voted to impeach him, and shortly thereafter his party supported his ouster in full.
I've done the research. I've posted the research. You've read the research. Yet here we are...sombear said:You should do 5 minutes of research. Parliament passed the EU deal in a landslide. Y pulled out and signed with Russia instead. There is now wiggle room there. That is 100% fact.Sam Lowry said:Again, not true. Ukraine's parliament had refused to pass the EU agreement. Most of Yanukovych's party was absent from the impeachment vote due to fears of violence.sombear said:He campaigned on entering a much-publicized free trade agreement with the EU. And parliament passed it. I know this will really upset you . . . but Russia meddled big-time, and Yanukovych abruptly changed his mind, rejected the EU, and climbed in bed with Russia. He pulled similar 180s on domestic issue. His own party voted to oust him.Redbrickbear said:sombear said:No, he ran specifically on the EU agreement, more economic freedom, more citizen freedom, and anti-corruption. He did a complete and abrupt 180 on all of these once in office. We did not make him do that.Redbrickbear said:sombear said:Right, but Yanukovych ran on an even closer economic alliance with the west and on more freedoms in general. He did not run on any kind of pro-Russia platform.Redbrickbear said:sombear said:All of Ukraine, including Crimea, voted for independence in 1991..Redbrickbear said:sombear said:it is a free sovereign nation aligned with the free world.KaiBear said:trey3216 said:Ukraine shouldn't be allowed to attack military targets that used to target Ukrainian military and civilian targets??? Interesting angle....Doc Holliday said:So Ukraine should use the long range missiles that would be launched from Ukraine and are targeted and controlled by NATO?whiterock said:Catturd misses on that one.historian said:The fact that the Biden regime is trying to start WWIII right before Trump, who just won a historic landslide victory who ran on ending the Russia/Ukraine war, just shows how evil these POS treasonous traitors scumbags really are.
— Catturd ™ (@catturd2) November 17, 2024
Biden and Trump met a couple of days ago. Do we think Ukraine was discussed? Did Trump comment on any of that about Ukraine? One could reasonably read between the lines that Trump wanted all the aid delivered so he would not have to spend his own political capital to get it done.....to give him time to work his own plan.
Trump is in a little bit of a bind here. He pandered to anti-war sentiment to get elected, knowing full well that abandoning Ukraine would be an unfathomably stupid thing to do. i don't blame him at all for the pander. Pandering is an essential part of politics and those who think they're too good to do it aren't worth the proverbial bucket of warm spit. But now he has to figure out a way to avoid doing what a really big and noisy chunk of his base wants him to do - cut & run from Ukraine. For sure he has a plan for how to walk the tightrope, and pushing all that aid into Ukraine before he takes over will give him some room to maneuver.
Keep your eye on the ball here:
Trump does not want Ukraine to become Afghanistan 2.0
Trump wants to win so much that America gets tired of winning.
As far as I know, they did just that today and fired them at a military facility in the Bryansk border region.
Good grief dude……exactly what do you think any US administration would do if Russia was openly supplying long range missiles to Mexican Drug cartels and they were actively using them to attack targets in various US cities and states ?
Just once at least attempt to provide an honest / specific answer and not just some generic Rambo bull*****
Russia invaded it, knowing Ukraine had the support of the free world and knowing we would supply weapons.
1. It was not aligned to the West until a political coup in 2014 overthrew the old government.
Very strong evidence the CIA and State Department were involved in that coup.
2. Why would Moscow know that DC would spend billions to help Ukraine fight a proxy war?
Did Moscow send billions in weaponry to Iraq & Afghanistan after DC sent in troops in 2001 and 2003
Maybe they expected that DC would act like they did and largely stay out of it.
Sure
But those regions (Crimea and Donbas) were always the least supportive and the most supportive of the Party of regions (the pro-Moscow party)
Ukraine is a country that has always been pulled between East and West
But the coup in 2014 is what was decisive in setting off this decades long conflict (the purpose of which is to pull Ukriane forget into the Western orbit)
Russia was always going to oppose that and if necessary try and bite off parts (Crimea/Donbas)
All the more reason not to have supported a coup that over threw him and his party from power
(And technically he and his party supported closer economic ties to both EU and Russia
They were pretty moderate on that front)
10 years of conflict, trillions in war damage, hundreds of thousands of dead and wounded....seems like a disaster looking back
I don't see where ever campaigned on promising to join the EU
[in 1997 became head (governor) of the Donetsk oblast state administration. He retained this post until 2002. From then until January 2005 he served as prime minister under President Leonid Kuchma. With the latter's half-hearted support he contested the presidential election of 2004 against Viktor Yushchenko, but lost out on account of vote fraud exposed in the course of the Orange Revolution.
In April 2003, Yanukovych had become head of the Party of Regions on whose list he was elected to the Supreme Council of Ukraine in the general election of 2006. Later that year, because his party had won a plurality of seats in the Supreme Council, and together with the Communist Party of Ukraine and socialists was able to form a majority, he resigned his seat to become prime minister under President Viktor Yushchenko. A power struggle ensued between the latter two, and Yanukovych resigned in December 2007, being replaced by Yuliia Tymoshenko. Tymoshenko negotiated an unfavourable agreement for Russian gas, which provided the basis for later being charged with 'abuse of power' and sentenced to seven years in prison. Yanukovych bided his time as his popularity outstripped that of Tymoshenko. In the wake of the 2008 market crash…
In 2010 he again contested the presidency winning this time by a plurality of votes over his opponent, Yuliia Tymoshenko. It was a victory brought on not so much by his personal electoral appeal as by the self-defeating policies of Viktor Yushchenko whose record of incompetence and infighting while in office disappointed many former supporters of the Orange Revolution. In the decisive second round of presidential elections Yushchenko himself pleaded with voters not to elect Tymoshenko, his supposed ally. In both the 2010 and 2004 elections, Yanukovych ran as candidate of the Russian-speaking electorate in eastern and southern Ukraine as well as of the country's leading business tycoons such as Rinat Akhmetov, Dmytro Firtash, and Andrii Kliuiev, all of whom backed him.
Yanukovych's term as president was notable for reinstating the 1996 Constitution, reversing much of his predecessor's policies….
In foreign policy Yanukovych oscillated between the European Union (EU) and the Russian Federation. He paid his first official visit abroad to Brussels, but followed this up by signing the Kharkiv Agreement with Russian President Dmitri Medvedev. That document extended the Russian Federation's naval base lease in Sevastopol to 2042, and lowered the price of Russian gas by $100 per 1000 m3. This was followed by a law proclaiming Ukraine's non-aligned status (oddly incompatible with the Russian Federation's Black Sea Fleet being permanently in the Crimea), and rejection of Viktor Yushchenko's aspiration towards a NATO Membership Action Plan. Both of these developments were meant to mollify the Russian Federation.]
[The Party of Regions
It advocated a moderate pro-Russian political course, opposing itself to the Ukrainian national democratic camp. It held dominant positions in power in Crimea and in the southern and eastern regions of Ukraine. During the Revolution of Dignity, it launched the Antimaidan movement.]
https://www.encyclopediao***raine.com/display.asp?linkpath=pages%5CY%5CA%5CYanukovychViktor.htm
38 of his own party voted to impeach him, and shortly thereafter his party supported his ouster in full.
Let's do this again some time.Quote:
Ukraine has abruptly ditched its plans to sign a historic pact with the European Union aimed at shifting the country out of the Kremlin's orbit. The decision handed victory to President Vladimir Putin in the increasingly vicious tug of war between Russia and the west for Ukraine's future, and looked like turning a special EU summit next week focused on Ukraine into a debacle.
President Viktor Yanukovych ordered the suspension of preparations for the pact between Kiev and Brussels after talks between the Russian and Ukrainian prime ministers and after Yanukovych's party in parliament rejected six bills aimed at meeting the EU's terms.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/nov/21/ukraine-suspends-preparations-eu-trade-pact
Perhaps I should have suggested an hour or two of research instead of 5 minutes . . . .Sam Lowry said:I've done the research. I've posted the research. You've read the research. Yet here we are...sombear said:You should do 5 minutes of research. Parliament passed the EU deal in a landslide. Y pulled out and signed with Russia instead. There is now wiggle room there. That is 100% fact.Sam Lowry said:Again, not true. Ukraine's parliament had refused to pass the EU agreement. Most of Yanukovych's party was absent from the impeachment vote due to fears of violence.sombear said:He campaigned on entering a much-publicized free trade agreement with the EU. And parliament passed it. I know this will really upset you . . . but Russia meddled big-time, and Yanukovych abruptly changed his mind, rejected the EU, and climbed in bed with Russia. He pulled similar 180s on domestic issue. His own party voted to oust him.Redbrickbear said:sombear said:No, he ran specifically on the EU agreement, more economic freedom, more citizen freedom, and anti-corruption. He did a complete and abrupt 180 on all of these once in office. We did not make him do that.Redbrickbear said:sombear said:Right, but Yanukovych ran on an even closer economic alliance with the west and on more freedoms in general. He did not run on any kind of pro-Russia platform.Redbrickbear said:sombear said:All of Ukraine, including Crimea, voted for independence in 1991..Redbrickbear said:sombear said:it is a free sovereign nation aligned with the free world.KaiBear said:trey3216 said:Ukraine shouldn't be allowed to attack military targets that used to target Ukrainian military and civilian targets??? Interesting angle....Doc Holliday said:So Ukraine should use the long range missiles that would be launched from Ukraine and are targeted and controlled by NATO?whiterock said:Catturd misses on that one.historian said:The fact that the Biden regime is trying to start WWIII right before Trump, who just won a historic landslide victory who ran on ending the Russia/Ukraine war, just shows how evil these POS treasonous traitors scumbags really are.
— Catturd ™ (@catturd2) November 17, 2024
Biden and Trump met a couple of days ago. Do we think Ukraine was discussed? Did Trump comment on any of that about Ukraine? One could reasonably read between the lines that Trump wanted all the aid delivered so he would not have to spend his own political capital to get it done.....to give him time to work his own plan.
Trump is in a little bit of a bind here. He pandered to anti-war sentiment to get elected, knowing full well that abandoning Ukraine would be an unfathomably stupid thing to do. i don't blame him at all for the pander. Pandering is an essential part of politics and those who think they're too good to do it aren't worth the proverbial bucket of warm spit. But now he has to figure out a way to avoid doing what a really big and noisy chunk of his base wants him to do - cut & run from Ukraine. For sure he has a plan for how to walk the tightrope, and pushing all that aid into Ukraine before he takes over will give him some room to maneuver.
Keep your eye on the ball here:
Trump does not want Ukraine to become Afghanistan 2.0
Trump wants to win so much that America gets tired of winning.
As far as I know, they did just that today and fired them at a military facility in the Bryansk border region.
Good grief dude……exactly what do you think any US administration would do if Russia was openly supplying long range missiles to Mexican Drug cartels and they were actively using them to attack targets in various US cities and states ?
Just once at least attempt to provide an honest / specific answer and not just some generic Rambo bull*****
Russia invaded it, knowing Ukraine had the support of the free world and knowing we would supply weapons.
1. It was not aligned to the West until a political coup in 2014 overthrew the old government.
Very strong evidence the CIA and State Department were involved in that coup.
2. Why would Moscow know that DC would spend billions to help Ukraine fight a proxy war?
Did Moscow send billions in weaponry to Iraq & Afghanistan after DC sent in troops in 2001 and 2003
Maybe they expected that DC would act like they did and largely stay out of it.
Sure
But those regions (Crimea and Donbas) were always the least supportive and the most supportive of the Party of regions (the pro-Moscow party)
Ukraine is a country that has always been pulled between East and West
But the coup in 2014 is what was decisive in setting off this decades long conflict (the purpose of which is to pull Ukriane forget into the Western orbit)
Russia was always going to oppose that and if necessary try and bite off parts (Crimea/Donbas)
All the more reason not to have supported a coup that over threw him and his party from power
(And technically he and his party supported closer economic ties to both EU and Russia
They were pretty moderate on that front)
10 years of conflict, trillions in war damage, hundreds of thousands of dead and wounded....seems like a disaster looking back
I don't see where ever campaigned on promising to join the EU
[in 1997 became head (governor) of the Donetsk oblast state administration. He retained this post until 2002. From then until January 2005 he served as prime minister under President Leonid Kuchma. With the latter's half-hearted support he contested the presidential election of 2004 against Viktor Yushchenko, but lost out on account of vote fraud exposed in the course of the Orange Revolution.
In April 2003, Yanukovych had become head of the Party of Regions on whose list he was elected to the Supreme Council of Ukraine in the general election of 2006. Later that year, because his party had won a plurality of seats in the Supreme Council, and together with the Communist Party of Ukraine and socialists was able to form a majority, he resigned his seat to become prime minister under President Viktor Yushchenko. A power struggle ensued between the latter two, and Yanukovych resigned in December 2007, being replaced by Yuliia Tymoshenko. Tymoshenko negotiated an unfavourable agreement for Russian gas, which provided the basis for later being charged with 'abuse of power' and sentenced to seven years in prison. Yanukovych bided his time as his popularity outstripped that of Tymoshenko. In the wake of the 2008 market crash…
In 2010 he again contested the presidency winning this time by a plurality of votes over his opponent, Yuliia Tymoshenko. It was a victory brought on not so much by his personal electoral appeal as by the self-defeating policies of Viktor Yushchenko whose record of incompetence and infighting while in office disappointed many former supporters of the Orange Revolution. In the decisive second round of presidential elections Yushchenko himself pleaded with voters not to elect Tymoshenko, his supposed ally. In both the 2010 and 2004 elections, Yanukovych ran as candidate of the Russian-speaking electorate in eastern and southern Ukraine as well as of the country's leading business tycoons such as Rinat Akhmetov, Dmytro Firtash, and Andrii Kliuiev, all of whom backed him.
Yanukovych's term as president was notable for reinstating the 1996 Constitution, reversing much of his predecessor's policies….
In foreign policy Yanukovych oscillated between the European Union (EU) and the Russian Federation. He paid his first official visit abroad to Brussels, but followed this up by signing the Kharkiv Agreement with Russian President Dmitri Medvedev. That document extended the Russian Federation's naval base lease in Sevastopol to 2042, and lowered the price of Russian gas by $100 per 1000 m3. This was followed by a law proclaiming Ukraine's non-aligned status (oddly incompatible with the Russian Federation's Black Sea Fleet being permanently in the Crimea), and rejection of Viktor Yushchenko's aspiration towards a NATO Membership Action Plan. Both of these developments were meant to mollify the Russian Federation.]
[The Party of Regions
It advocated a moderate pro-Russian political course, opposing itself to the Ukrainian national democratic camp. It held dominant positions in power in Crimea and in the southern and eastern regions of Ukraine. During the Revolution of Dignity, it launched the Antimaidan movement.]
https://www.encyclopediao***raine.com/display.asp?linkpath=pages%5CY%5CA%5CYanukovychViktor.htm
38 of his own party voted to impeach him, and shortly thereafter his party supported his ouster in full.Let's do this again some time.Quote:
Ukraine has abruptly ditched its plans to sign a historic pact with the European Union aimed at shifting the country out of the Kremlin's orbit. The decision handed victory to President Vladimir Putin in the increasingly vicious tug of war between Russia and the west for Ukraine's future, and looked like turning a special EU summit next week focused on Ukraine into a debacle.
President Viktor Yanukovych ordered the suspension of preparations for the pact between Kiev and Brussels after talks between the Russian and Ukrainian prime ministers and after Yanukovych's party in parliament rejected six bills aimed at meeting the EU's terms.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/nov/21/ukraine-suspends-preparations-eu-trade-pact
Parliament overwhelmingly passed the statement in February of 2013. What are you are referencing are the game Yanukovych and his minions played as they abruptly pulled out and climbed into bed with Russia.
Everything you posted supports the facts: Yanukovych ran on aligning with the EU, rooting out corruption, and working with other parties. He pulled 180s on all of his campaign promises.
A total of 315 of the 349 MPs registered in the sitting hall supported the document on Friday.
The draft document reads that the Verkhovna Rada "within its powers, will ensure that the recommendations concerning the signing of the Association Agreement between Ukraine and the EU, which are stipulated in the resolutions of the European Parliament and the conclusions of the Council of the EU approved on December 10, 2012, at a meeting of the EU foreign ministers, will be fulfilled."
The draft document also reads that while expecting positive results from the EU-Ukraine Summit due on February 25 and the Eastern Partnership Summit due on November 28-29, 2013, the Ukrainian parliament will assist in completing the fulfillment of the tasks agreed upon with the EU, first of all, within the EU-Ukraine Association Agenda and the EU-Ukraine Visa Liberalization Action Plan (VLAP), and will ensure that amendments to the EU-Ukraine Visa Facilitation Agreement are ratified.
Advertisement
The Ukrainian parliament also promised to intensify its work on the adoption of laws aimed at streamlining Ukrainian legislation with the EU's laws, particularly those envisaged by the relevant national program for the harmonization of the Ukrainian legislation with the EU legislation, as well as those related to reforms of justice, criminal justice, and elections legislation.
Passing a "statement" and actually passing the agreement are different things, as it turns out.sombear said:Perhaps I should have suggested an hour or two of research instead of 5 minutes . . . .Sam Lowry said:I've done the research. I've posted the research. You've read the research. Yet here we are...sombear said:You should do 5 minutes of research. Parliament passed the EU deal in a landslide. Y pulled out and signed with Russia instead. There is now wiggle room there. That is 100% fact.Sam Lowry said:Again, not true. Ukraine's parliament had refused to pass the EU agreement. Most of Yanukovych's party was absent from the impeachment vote due to fears of violence.sombear said:He campaigned on entering a much-publicized free trade agreement with the EU. And parliament passed it. I know this will really upset you . . . but Russia meddled big-time, and Yanukovych abruptly changed his mind, rejected the EU, and climbed in bed with Russia. He pulled similar 180s on domestic issue. His own party voted to oust him.Redbrickbear said:sombear said:No, he ran specifically on the EU agreement, more economic freedom, more citizen freedom, and anti-corruption. He did a complete and abrupt 180 on all of these once in office. We did not make him do that.Redbrickbear said:sombear said:Right, but Yanukovych ran on an even closer economic alliance with the west and on more freedoms in general. He did not run on any kind of pro-Russia platform.Redbrickbear said:sombear said:All of Ukraine, including Crimea, voted for independence in 1991..Redbrickbear said:sombear said:it is a free sovereign nation aligned with the free world.KaiBear said:trey3216 said:Ukraine shouldn't be allowed to attack military targets that used to target Ukrainian military and civilian targets??? Interesting angle....Doc Holliday said:So Ukraine should use the long range missiles that would be launched from Ukraine and are targeted and controlled by NATO?whiterock said:Catturd misses on that one.historian said:The fact that the Biden regime is trying to start WWIII right before Trump, who just won a historic landslide victory who ran on ending the Russia/Ukraine war, just shows how evil these POS treasonous traitors scumbags really are.
— Catturd ™ (@catturd2) November 17, 2024
Biden and Trump met a couple of days ago. Do we think Ukraine was discussed? Did Trump comment on any of that about Ukraine? One could reasonably read between the lines that Trump wanted all the aid delivered so he would not have to spend his own political capital to get it done.....to give him time to work his own plan.
Trump is in a little bit of a bind here. He pandered to anti-war sentiment to get elected, knowing full well that abandoning Ukraine would be an unfathomably stupid thing to do. i don't blame him at all for the pander. Pandering is an essential part of politics and those who think they're too good to do it aren't worth the proverbial bucket of warm spit. But now he has to figure out a way to avoid doing what a really big and noisy chunk of his base wants him to do - cut & run from Ukraine. For sure he has a plan for how to walk the tightrope, and pushing all that aid into Ukraine before he takes over will give him some room to maneuver.
Keep your eye on the ball here:
Trump does not want Ukraine to become Afghanistan 2.0
Trump wants to win so much that America gets tired of winning.
As far as I know, they did just that today and fired them at a military facility in the Bryansk border region.
Good grief dude……exactly what do you think any US administration would do if Russia was openly supplying long range missiles to Mexican Drug cartels and they were actively using them to attack targets in various US cities and states ?
Just once at least attempt to provide an honest / specific answer and not just some generic Rambo bull*****
Russia invaded it, knowing Ukraine had the support of the free world and knowing we would supply weapons.
1. It was not aligned to the West until a political coup in 2014 overthrew the old government.
Very strong evidence the CIA and State Department were involved in that coup.
2. Why would Moscow know that DC would spend billions to help Ukraine fight a proxy war?
Did Moscow send billions in weaponry to Iraq & Afghanistan after DC sent in troops in 2001 and 2003
Maybe they expected that DC would act like they did and largely stay out of it.
Sure
But those regions (Crimea and Donbas) were always the least supportive and the most supportive of the Party of regions (the pro-Moscow party)
Ukraine is a country that has always been pulled between East and West
But the coup in 2014 is what was decisive in setting off this decades long conflict (the purpose of which is to pull Ukriane forget into the Western orbit)
Russia was always going to oppose that and if necessary try and bite off parts (Crimea/Donbas)
All the more reason not to have supported a coup that over threw him and his party from power
(And technically he and his party supported closer economic ties to both EU and Russia
They were pretty moderate on that front)
10 years of conflict, trillions in war damage, hundreds of thousands of dead and wounded....seems like a disaster looking back
I don't see where ever campaigned on promising to join the EU
[in 1997 became head (governor) of the Donetsk oblast state administration. He retained this post until 2002. From then until January 2005 he served as prime minister under President Leonid Kuchma. With the latter's half-hearted support he contested the presidential election of 2004 against Viktor Yushchenko, but lost out on account of vote fraud exposed in the course of the Orange Revolution.
In April 2003, Yanukovych had become head of the Party of Regions on whose list he was elected to the Supreme Council of Ukraine in the general election of 2006. Later that year, because his party had won a plurality of seats in the Supreme Council, and together with the Communist Party of Ukraine and socialists was able to form a majority, he resigned his seat to become prime minister under President Viktor Yushchenko. A power struggle ensued between the latter two, and Yanukovych resigned in December 2007, being replaced by Yuliia Tymoshenko. Tymoshenko negotiated an unfavourable agreement for Russian gas, which provided the basis for later being charged with 'abuse of power' and sentenced to seven years in prison. Yanukovych bided his time as his popularity outstripped that of Tymoshenko. In the wake of the 2008 market crash…
In 2010 he again contested the presidency winning this time by a plurality of votes over his opponent, Yuliia Tymoshenko. It was a victory brought on not so much by his personal electoral appeal as by the self-defeating policies of Viktor Yushchenko whose record of incompetence and infighting while in office disappointed many former supporters of the Orange Revolution. In the decisive second round of presidential elections Yushchenko himself pleaded with voters not to elect Tymoshenko, his supposed ally. In both the 2010 and 2004 elections, Yanukovych ran as candidate of the Russian-speaking electorate in eastern and southern Ukraine as well as of the country's leading business tycoons such as Rinat Akhmetov, Dmytro Firtash, and Andrii Kliuiev, all of whom backed him.
Yanukovych's term as president was notable for reinstating the 1996 Constitution, reversing much of his predecessor's policies….
In foreign policy Yanukovych oscillated between the European Union (EU) and the Russian Federation. He paid his first official visit abroad to Brussels, but followed this up by signing the Kharkiv Agreement with Russian President Dmitri Medvedev. That document extended the Russian Federation's naval base lease in Sevastopol to 2042, and lowered the price of Russian gas by $100 per 1000 m3. This was followed by a law proclaiming Ukraine's non-aligned status (oddly incompatible with the Russian Federation's Black Sea Fleet being permanently in the Crimea), and rejection of Viktor Yushchenko's aspiration towards a NATO Membership Action Plan. Both of these developments were meant to mollify the Russian Federation.]
[The Party of Regions
It advocated a moderate pro-Russian political course, opposing itself to the Ukrainian national democratic camp. It held dominant positions in power in Crimea and in the southern and eastern regions of Ukraine. During the Revolution of Dignity, it launched the Antimaidan movement.]
https://www.encyclopediao***raine.com/display.asp?linkpath=pages%5CY%5CA%5CYanukovychViktor.htm
38 of his own party voted to impeach him, and shortly thereafter his party supported his ouster in full.Let's do this again some time.Quote:
Ukraine has abruptly ditched its plans to sign a historic pact with the European Union aimed at shifting the country out of the Kremlin's orbit. The decision handed victory to President Vladimir Putin in the increasingly vicious tug of war between Russia and the west for Ukraine's future, and looked like turning a special EU summit next week focused on Ukraine into a debacle.
President Viktor Yanukovych ordered the suspension of preparations for the pact between Kiev and Brussels after talks between the Russian and Ukrainian prime ministers and after Yanukovych's party in parliament rejected six bills aimed at meeting the EU's terms.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/nov/21/ukraine-suspends-preparations-eu-trade-pact
Parliament overwhelmingly passed the statement in February of 2013. What are you are referencing are the game Yanukovych and his minions played as they abruptly pulled out and climbed into bed with Russia.
Everything you posted supports the facts: Yanukovych ran on aligning with the EU, rooting out corruption, and working with other parties. He pulled 180s on all of his campaign promises.
A total of 315 of the 349 MPs registered in the sitting hall supported the document on Friday.
The draft document reads that the Verkhovna Rada "within its powers, will ensure that the recommendations concerning the signing of the Association Agreement between Ukraine and the EU, which are stipulated in the resolutions of the European Parliament and the conclusions of the Council of the EU approved on December 10, 2012, at a meeting of the EU foreign ministers, will be fulfilled."
The draft document also reads that while expecting positive results from the EU-Ukraine Summit due on February 25 and the Eastern Partnership Summit due on November 28-29, 2013, the Ukrainian parliament will assist in completing the fulfillment of the tasks agreed upon with the EU, first of all, within the EU-Ukraine Association Agenda and the EU-Ukraine Visa Liberalization Action Plan (VLAP), and will ensure that amendments to the EU-Ukraine Visa Facilitation Agreement are ratified.
Advertisement
The Ukrainian parliament also promised to intensify its work on the adoption of laws aimed at streamlining Ukrainian legislation with the EU's laws, particularly those envisaged by the relevant national program for the harmonization of the Ukrainian legislation with the EU legislation, as well as those related to reforms of justice, criminal justice, and elections legislation.
More to the point, agreeing or not agreeing is no grounds for the government to be overthrown. We're all about sovereignty, remember?
My point - and it happens to be the truth - is that Y ran on key issues and did 180s on all of them, including the EU agreement. Parliament supported his key initiatives, including the EU deal, from the start. At the very end, Y and some of his party did 180s. The "terms" they supposedly opposed at the end were no different than what had been contemplated for years. They were red herrings.Sam Lowry said:Passing a "statement" and actually passing the agreement are different things, as it turns out.sombear said:Perhaps I should have suggested an hour or two of research instead of 5 minutes . . . .Sam Lowry said:I've done the research. I've posted the research. You've read the research. Yet here we are...sombear said:You should do 5 minutes of research. Parliament passed the EU deal in a landslide. Y pulled out and signed with Russia instead. There is now wiggle room there. That is 100% fact.Sam Lowry said:Again, not true. Ukraine's parliament had refused to pass the EU agreement. Most of Yanukovych's party was absent from the impeachment vote due to fears of violence.sombear said:He campaigned on entering a much-publicized free trade agreement with the EU. And parliament passed it. I know this will really upset you . . . but Russia meddled big-time, and Yanukovych abruptly changed his mind, rejected the EU, and climbed in bed with Russia. He pulled similar 180s on domestic issue. His own party voted to oust him.Redbrickbear said:sombear said:No, he ran specifically on the EU agreement, more economic freedom, more citizen freedom, and anti-corruption. He did a complete and abrupt 180 on all of these once in office. We did not make him do that.Redbrickbear said:sombear said:Right, but Yanukovych ran on an even closer economic alliance with the west and on more freedoms in general. He did not run on any kind of pro-Russia platform.Redbrickbear said:sombear said:All of Ukraine, including Crimea, voted for independence in 1991..Redbrickbear said:sombear said:it is a free sovereign nation aligned with the free world.KaiBear said:trey3216 said:Ukraine shouldn't be allowed to attack military targets that used to target Ukrainian military and civilian targets??? Interesting angle....Doc Holliday said:So Ukraine should use the long range missiles that would be launched from Ukraine and are targeted and controlled by NATO?whiterock said:Catturd misses on that one.historian said:The fact that the Biden regime is trying to start WWIII right before Trump, who just won a historic landslide victory who ran on ending the Russia/Ukraine war, just shows how evil these POS treasonous traitors scumbags really are.
— Catturd ™ (@catturd2) November 17, 2024
Biden and Trump met a couple of days ago. Do we think Ukraine was discussed? Did Trump comment on any of that about Ukraine? One could reasonably read between the lines that Trump wanted all the aid delivered so he would not have to spend his own political capital to get it done.....to give him time to work his own plan.
Trump is in a little bit of a bind here. He pandered to anti-war sentiment to get elected, knowing full well that abandoning Ukraine would be an unfathomably stupid thing to do. i don't blame him at all for the pander. Pandering is an essential part of politics and those who think they're too good to do it aren't worth the proverbial bucket of warm spit. But now he has to figure out a way to avoid doing what a really big and noisy chunk of his base wants him to do - cut & run from Ukraine. For sure he has a plan for how to walk the tightrope, and pushing all that aid into Ukraine before he takes over will give him some room to maneuver.
Keep your eye on the ball here:
Trump does not want Ukraine to become Afghanistan 2.0
Trump wants to win so much that America gets tired of winning.
As far as I know, they did just that today and fired them at a military facility in the Bryansk border region.
Good grief dude……exactly what do you think any US administration would do if Russia was openly supplying long range missiles to Mexican Drug cartels and they were actively using them to attack targets in various US cities and states ?
Just once at least attempt to provide an honest / specific answer and not just some generic Rambo bull*****
Russia invaded it, knowing Ukraine had the support of the free world and knowing we would supply weapons.
1. It was not aligned to the West until a political coup in 2014 overthrew the old government.
Very strong evidence the CIA and State Department were involved in that coup.
2. Why would Moscow know that DC would spend billions to help Ukraine fight a proxy war?
Did Moscow send billions in weaponry to Iraq & Afghanistan after DC sent in troops in 2001 and 2003
Maybe they expected that DC would act like they did and largely stay out of it.
Sure
But those regions (Crimea and Donbas) were always the least supportive and the most supportive of the Party of regions (the pro-Moscow party)
Ukraine is a country that has always been pulled between East and West
But the coup in 2014 is what was decisive in setting off this decades long conflict (the purpose of which is to pull Ukriane forget into the Western orbit)
Russia was always going to oppose that and if necessary try and bite off parts (Crimea/Donbas)
All the more reason not to have supported a coup that over threw him and his party from power
(And technically he and his party supported closer economic ties to both EU and Russia
They were pretty moderate on that front)
10 years of conflict, trillions in war damage, hundreds of thousands of dead and wounded....seems like a disaster looking back
I don't see where ever campaigned on promising to join the EU
[in 1997 became head (governor) of the Donetsk oblast state administration. He retained this post until 2002. From then until January 2005 he served as prime minister under President Leonid Kuchma. With the latter's half-hearted support he contested the presidential election of 2004 against Viktor Yushchenko, but lost out on account of vote fraud exposed in the course of the Orange Revolution.
In April 2003, Yanukovych had become head of the Party of Regions on whose list he was elected to the Supreme Council of Ukraine in the general election of 2006. Later that year, because his party had won a plurality of seats in the Supreme Council, and together with the Communist Party of Ukraine and socialists was able to form a majority, he resigned his seat to become prime minister under President Viktor Yushchenko. A power struggle ensued between the latter two, and Yanukovych resigned in December 2007, being replaced by Yuliia Tymoshenko. Tymoshenko negotiated an unfavourable agreement for Russian gas, which provided the basis for later being charged with 'abuse of power' and sentenced to seven years in prison. Yanukovych bided his time as his popularity outstripped that of Tymoshenko. In the wake of the 2008 market crash…
In 2010 he again contested the presidency winning this time by a plurality of votes over his opponent, Yuliia Tymoshenko. It was a victory brought on not so much by his personal electoral appeal as by the self-defeating policies of Viktor Yushchenko whose record of incompetence and infighting while in office disappointed many former supporters of the Orange Revolution. In the decisive second round of presidential elections Yushchenko himself pleaded with voters not to elect Tymoshenko, his supposed ally. In both the 2010 and 2004 elections, Yanukovych ran as candidate of the Russian-speaking electorate in eastern and southern Ukraine as well as of the country's leading business tycoons such as Rinat Akhmetov, Dmytro Firtash, and Andrii Kliuiev, all of whom backed him.
Yanukovych's term as president was notable for reinstating the 1996 Constitution, reversing much of his predecessor's policies….
In foreign policy Yanukovych oscillated between the European Union (EU) and the Russian Federation. He paid his first official visit abroad to Brussels, but followed this up by signing the Kharkiv Agreement with Russian President Dmitri Medvedev. That document extended the Russian Federation's naval base lease in Sevastopol to 2042, and lowered the price of Russian gas by $100 per 1000 m3. This was followed by a law proclaiming Ukraine's non-aligned status (oddly incompatible with the Russian Federation's Black Sea Fleet being permanently in the Crimea), and rejection of Viktor Yushchenko's aspiration towards a NATO Membership Action Plan. Both of these developments were meant to mollify the Russian Federation.]
[The Party of Regions
It advocated a moderate pro-Russian political course, opposing itself to the Ukrainian national democratic camp. It held dominant positions in power in Crimea and in the southern and eastern regions of Ukraine. During the Revolution of Dignity, it launched the Antimaidan movement.]
https://www.encyclopediao***raine.com/display.asp?linkpath=pages%5CY%5CA%5CYanukovychViktor.htm
38 of his own party voted to impeach him, and shortly thereafter his party supported his ouster in full.Let's do this again some time.Quote:
Ukraine has abruptly ditched its plans to sign a historic pact with the European Union aimed at shifting the country out of the Kremlin's orbit. The decision handed victory to President Vladimir Putin in the increasingly vicious tug of war between Russia and the west for Ukraine's future, and looked like turning a special EU summit next week focused on Ukraine into a debacle.
President Viktor Yanukovych ordered the suspension of preparations for the pact between Kiev and Brussels after talks between the Russian and Ukrainian prime ministers and after Yanukovych's party in parliament rejected six bills aimed at meeting the EU's terms.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/nov/21/ukraine-suspends-preparations-eu-trade-pact
Parliament overwhelmingly passed the statement in February of 2013. What are you are referencing are the game Yanukovych and his minions played as they abruptly pulled out and climbed into bed with Russia.
Everything you posted supports the facts: Yanukovych ran on aligning with the EU, rooting out corruption, and working with other parties. He pulled 180s on all of his campaign promises.
A total of 315 of the 349 MPs registered in the sitting hall supported the document on Friday.
The draft document reads that the Verkhovna Rada "within its powers, will ensure that the recommendations concerning the signing of the Association Agreement between Ukraine and the EU, which are stipulated in the resolutions of the European Parliament and the conclusions of the Council of the EU approved on December 10, 2012, at a meeting of the EU foreign ministers, will be fulfilled."
The draft document also reads that while expecting positive results from the EU-Ukraine Summit due on February 25 and the Eastern Partnership Summit due on November 28-29, 2013, the Ukrainian parliament will assist in completing the fulfillment of the tasks agreed upon with the EU, first of all, within the EU-Ukraine Association Agenda and the EU-Ukraine Visa Liberalization Action Plan (VLAP), and will ensure that amendments to the EU-Ukraine Visa Facilitation Agreement are ratified.
Advertisement
The Ukrainian parliament also promised to intensify its work on the adoption of laws aimed at streamlining Ukrainian legislation with the EU's laws, particularly those envisaged by the relevant national program for the harmonization of the Ukrainian legislation with the EU legislation, as well as those related to reforms of justice, criminal justice, and elections legislation.
More to the point, agreeing or not agreeing is no grounds for the government to be overthrown. We're all about sovereignty, remember?
I don't dictate what free people do. In addition to the EU issue, Y was arguably the most corrupt leader in Ukraine history . . . and that is saying something. He was worth over $10 billions, yet stole more. He imprisoned political opponents. Stacked federal and regional governments with cronies. He restricted freedoms.
Again, his own party ultimately voted against him.
I can understand why the people rose up. It's happened in similar circumstances throughout history in all regions of the world.
JUST IN - Ukraine fires British missiles into Russia.
— Disclose.tv (@disclosetv) November 20, 2024
You (or we, as Americans) are trying to dictate what free people do. The terms of the EU deal were absolutely not red herrings. They were widely criticized throughout Ukraine and the West. Yanukovych tried desperately to negotiate and was rudely rejected by the EU. He had every right to pause the deal as a result. He even had a right to "do a 180," though that's not at all what happened.sombear said:My point - and it happens to be the truth - is that Y ran on key issues and did 180s on all of them, including the EU agreement. Parliament supported his key initiatives, including the EU deal, from the start. At the very end, Y and some of his party did 180s. The "terms" they supposedly opposed at the end were no different than what had been contemplated for years. They were red herrings.Sam Lowry said:Passing a "statement" and actually passing the agreement are different things, as it turns out.sombear said:Perhaps I should have suggested an hour or two of research instead of 5 minutes . . . .Sam Lowry said:I've done the research. I've posted the research. You've read the research. Yet here we are...sombear said:You should do 5 minutes of research. Parliament passed the EU deal in a landslide. Y pulled out and signed with Russia instead. There is now wiggle room there. That is 100% fact.Sam Lowry said:Again, not true. Ukraine's parliament had refused to pass the EU agreement. Most of Yanukovych's party was absent from the impeachment vote due to fears of violence.sombear said:He campaigned on entering a much-publicized free trade agreement with the EU. And parliament passed it. I know this will really upset you . . . but Russia meddled big-time, and Yanukovych abruptly changed his mind, rejected the EU, and climbed in bed with Russia. He pulled similar 180s on domestic issue. His own party voted to oust him.Redbrickbear said:sombear said:No, he ran specifically on the EU agreement, more economic freedom, more citizen freedom, and anti-corruption. He did a complete and abrupt 180 on all of these once in office. We did not make him do that.Redbrickbear said:sombear said:Right, but Yanukovych ran on an even closer economic alliance with the west and on more freedoms in general. He did not run on any kind of pro-Russia platform.Redbrickbear said:sombear said:All of Ukraine, including Crimea, voted for independence in 1991..Redbrickbear said:sombear said:it is a free sovereign nation aligned with the free world.KaiBear said:trey3216 said:Ukraine shouldn't be allowed to attack military targets that used to target Ukrainian military and civilian targets??? Interesting angle....Doc Holliday said:So Ukraine should use the long range missiles that would be launched from Ukraine and are targeted and controlled by NATO?whiterock said:Catturd misses on that one.historian said:The fact that the Biden regime is trying to start WWIII right before Trump, who just won a historic landslide victory who ran on ending the Russia/Ukraine war, just shows how evil these POS treasonous traitors scumbags really are.
— Catturd ™ (@catturd2) November 17, 2024
Biden and Trump met a couple of days ago. Do we think Ukraine was discussed? Did Trump comment on any of that about Ukraine? One could reasonably read between the lines that Trump wanted all the aid delivered so he would not have to spend his own political capital to get it done.....to give him time to work his own plan.
Trump is in a little bit of a bind here. He pandered to anti-war sentiment to get elected, knowing full well that abandoning Ukraine would be an unfathomably stupid thing to do. i don't blame him at all for the pander. Pandering is an essential part of politics and those who think they're too good to do it aren't worth the proverbial bucket of warm spit. But now he has to figure out a way to avoid doing what a really big and noisy chunk of his base wants him to do - cut & run from Ukraine. For sure he has a plan for how to walk the tightrope, and pushing all that aid into Ukraine before he takes over will give him some room to maneuver.
Keep your eye on the ball here:
Trump does not want Ukraine to become Afghanistan 2.0
Trump wants to win so much that America gets tired of winning.
As far as I know, they did just that today and fired them at a military facility in the Bryansk border region.
Good grief dude……exactly what do you think any US administration would do if Russia was openly supplying long range missiles to Mexican Drug cartels and they were actively using them to attack targets in various US cities and states ?
Just once at least attempt to provide an honest / specific answer and not just some generic Rambo bull*****
Russia invaded it, knowing Ukraine had the support of the free world and knowing we would supply weapons.
1. It was not aligned to the West until a political coup in 2014 overthrew the old government.
Very strong evidence the CIA and State Department were involved in that coup.
2. Why would Moscow know that DC would spend billions to help Ukraine fight a proxy war?
Did Moscow send billions in weaponry to Iraq & Afghanistan after DC sent in troops in 2001 and 2003
Maybe they expected that DC would act like they did and largely stay out of it.
Sure
But those regions (Crimea and Donbas) were always the least supportive and the most supportive of the Party of regions (the pro-Moscow party)
Ukraine is a country that has always been pulled between East and West
But the coup in 2014 is what was decisive in setting off this decades long conflict (the purpose of which is to pull Ukriane forget into the Western orbit)
Russia was always going to oppose that and if necessary try and bite off parts (Crimea/Donbas)
All the more reason not to have supported a coup that over threw him and his party from power
(And technically he and his party supported closer economic ties to both EU and Russia
They were pretty moderate on that front)
10 years of conflict, trillions in war damage, hundreds of thousands of dead and wounded....seems like a disaster looking back
I don't see where ever campaigned on promising to join the EU
[in 1997 became head (governor) of the Donetsk oblast state administration. He retained this post until 2002. From then until January 2005 he served as prime minister under President Leonid Kuchma. With the latter's half-hearted support he contested the presidential election of 2004 against Viktor Yushchenko, but lost out on account of vote fraud exposed in the course of the Orange Revolution.
In April 2003, Yanukovych had become head of the Party of Regions on whose list he was elected to the Supreme Council of Ukraine in the general election of 2006. Later that year, because his party had won a plurality of seats in the Supreme Council, and together with the Communist Party of Ukraine and socialists was able to form a majority, he resigned his seat to become prime minister under President Viktor Yushchenko. A power struggle ensued between the latter two, and Yanukovych resigned in December 2007, being replaced by Yuliia Tymoshenko. Tymoshenko negotiated an unfavourable agreement for Russian gas, which provided the basis for later being charged with 'abuse of power' and sentenced to seven years in prison. Yanukovych bided his time as his popularity outstripped that of Tymoshenko. In the wake of the 2008 market crash…
In 2010 he again contested the presidency winning this time by a plurality of votes over his opponent, Yuliia Tymoshenko. It was a victory brought on not so much by his personal electoral appeal as by the self-defeating policies of Viktor Yushchenko whose record of incompetence and infighting while in office disappointed many former supporters of the Orange Revolution. In the decisive second round of presidential elections Yushchenko himself pleaded with voters not to elect Tymoshenko, his supposed ally. In both the 2010 and 2004 elections, Yanukovych ran as candidate of the Russian-speaking electorate in eastern and southern Ukraine as well as of the country's leading business tycoons such as Rinat Akhmetov, Dmytro Firtash, and Andrii Kliuiev, all of whom backed him.
Yanukovych's term as president was notable for reinstating the 1996 Constitution, reversing much of his predecessor's policies….
In foreign policy Yanukovych oscillated between the European Union (EU) and the Russian Federation. He paid his first official visit abroad to Brussels, but followed this up by signing the Kharkiv Agreement with Russian President Dmitri Medvedev. That document extended the Russian Federation's naval base lease in Sevastopol to 2042, and lowered the price of Russian gas by $100 per 1000 m3. This was followed by a law proclaiming Ukraine's non-aligned status (oddly incompatible with the Russian Federation's Black Sea Fleet being permanently in the Crimea), and rejection of Viktor Yushchenko's aspiration towards a NATO Membership Action Plan. Both of these developments were meant to mollify the Russian Federation.]
[The Party of Regions
It advocated a moderate pro-Russian political course, opposing itself to the Ukrainian national democratic camp. It held dominant positions in power in Crimea and in the southern and eastern regions of Ukraine. During the Revolution of Dignity, it launched the Antimaidan movement.]
https://www.encyclopediao***raine.com/display.asp?linkpath=pages%5CY%5CA%5CYanukovychViktor.htm
38 of his own party voted to impeach him, and shortly thereafter his party supported his ouster in full.Let's do this again some time.Quote:
Ukraine has abruptly ditched its plans to sign a historic pact with the European Union aimed at shifting the country out of the Kremlin's orbit. The decision handed victory to President Vladimir Putin in the increasingly vicious tug of war between Russia and the west for Ukraine's future, and looked like turning a special EU summit next week focused on Ukraine into a debacle.
President Viktor Yanukovych ordered the suspension of preparations for the pact between Kiev and Brussels after talks between the Russian and Ukrainian prime ministers and after Yanukovych's party in parliament rejected six bills aimed at meeting the EU's terms.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/nov/21/ukraine-suspends-preparations-eu-trade-pact
Parliament overwhelmingly passed the statement in February of 2013. What are you are referencing are the game Yanukovych and his minions played as they abruptly pulled out and climbed into bed with Russia.
Everything you posted supports the facts: Yanukovych ran on aligning with the EU, rooting out corruption, and working with other parties. He pulled 180s on all of his campaign promises.
A total of 315 of the 349 MPs registered in the sitting hall supported the document on Friday.
The draft document reads that the Verkhovna Rada "within its powers, will ensure that the recommendations concerning the signing of the Association Agreement between Ukraine and the EU, which are stipulated in the resolutions of the European Parliament and the conclusions of the Council of the EU approved on December 10, 2012, at a meeting of the EU foreign ministers, will be fulfilled."
The draft document also reads that while expecting positive results from the EU-Ukraine Summit due on February 25 and the Eastern Partnership Summit due on November 28-29, 2013, the Ukrainian parliament will assist in completing the fulfillment of the tasks agreed upon with the EU, first of all, within the EU-Ukraine Association Agenda and the EU-Ukraine Visa Liberalization Action Plan (VLAP), and will ensure that amendments to the EU-Ukraine Visa Facilitation Agreement are ratified.
Advertisement
The Ukrainian parliament also promised to intensify its work on the adoption of laws aimed at streamlining Ukrainian legislation with the EU's laws, particularly those envisaged by the relevant national program for the harmonization of the Ukrainian legislation with the EU legislation, as well as those related to reforms of justice, criminal justice, and elections legislation.
More to the point, agreeing or not agreeing is no grounds for the government to be overthrown. We're all about sovereignty, remember?
I don't dictate what free people do. In addition to the EU issue, Y was arguably the most corrupt leader in Ukraine history . . . and that is saying something. He was worth over $10 billions, yet stole more. He imprisoned political opponents. Stacked federal and regional governments with cronies. He restricted freedoms.
Again, his own party ultimately voted against him.
I can understand why the people rose up. It's happened in similar circumstances throughout history in all regions of the world.
The idea that the people rose up against their own government is pure mythology. Maidan was a corrupt, violent power grab by a bunch of prototypical fascist thugs who walked right out of central casting with a CIA script in their hands. Heck, they even have an actor supposedly running the show now. Not that Zelensky really runs anything. They blackmailed him into abandoning the Minsk Agreements despite an overwhelming popular mandate. If you want to see a 180, that one will make your head spin.
The results have obviously been disastrous. "Corrupt" isn't even adequate to describe the current government's mismanagement and betrayal. From a Ukrainian point of view it's nothing short of treasonous.
JUST IN: The United States closes its embassy in Kyiv urgently warning of a ‘significant’ air attack.
— Collin Rugg (@CollinRugg) November 20, 2024
The development comes after Ukraine used U.S. made ballistic missiles to strike Russia, a move that Putin said would mean the U.S. is at war with Russia.
On Wednesday, the U.S.… pic.twitter.com/0VW59LZSJC
FOAB?
Yea its a pretty wild argument to be making.Sam Lowry said:Passing a "statement" and actually passing the agreement are different things, as it turns out.sombear said:Perhaps I should have suggested an hour or two of research instead of 5 minutes . . . .Sam Lowry said:I've done the research. I've posted the research. You've read the research. Yet here we are...sombear said:You should do 5 minutes of research. Parliament passed the EU deal in a landslide. Y pulled out and signed with Russia instead. There is now wiggle room there. That is 100% fact.Sam Lowry said:Again, not true. Ukraine's parliament had refused to pass the EU agreement. Most of Yanukovych's party was absent from the impeachment vote due to fears of violence.sombear said:He campaigned on entering a much-publicized free trade agreement with the EU. And parliament passed it. I know this will really upset you . . . but Russia meddled big-time, and Yanukovych abruptly changed his mind, rejected the EU, and climbed in bed with Russia. He pulled similar 180s on domestic issue. His own party voted to oust him.Redbrickbear said:sombear said:No, he ran specifically on the EU agreement, more economic freedom, more citizen freedom, and anti-corruption. He did a complete and abrupt 180 on all of these once in office. We did not make him do that.Redbrickbear said:sombear said:Right, but Yanukovych ran on an even closer economic alliance with the west and on more freedoms in general. He did not run on any kind of pro-Russia platform.Redbrickbear said:sombear said:All of Ukraine, including Crimea, voted for independence in 1991..Redbrickbear said:sombear said:it is a free sovereign nation aligned with the free world.KaiBear said:trey3216 said:Ukraine shouldn't be allowed to attack military targets that used to target Ukrainian military and civilian targets??? Interesting angle....Doc Holliday said:So Ukraine should use the long range missiles that would be launched from Ukraine and are targeted and controlled by NATO?whiterock said:Catturd misses on that one.historian said:The fact that the Biden regime is trying to start WWIII right before Trump, who just won a historic landslide victory who ran on ending the Russia/Ukraine war, just shows how evil these POS treasonous traitors scumbags really are.
— Catturd ™ (@catturd2) November 17, 2024
Biden and Trump met a couple of days ago. Do we think Ukraine was discussed? Did Trump comment on any of that about Ukraine? One could reasonably read between the lines that Trump wanted all the aid delivered so he would not have to spend his own political capital to get it done.....to give him time to work his own plan.
Trump is in a little bit of a bind here. He pandered to anti-war sentiment to get elected, knowing full well that abandoning Ukraine would be an unfathomably stupid thing to do. i don't blame him at all for the pander. Pandering is an essential part of politics and those who think they're too good to do it aren't worth the proverbial bucket of warm spit. But now he has to figure out a way to avoid doing what a really big and noisy chunk of his base wants him to do - cut & run from Ukraine. For sure he has a plan for how to walk the tightrope, and pushing all that aid into Ukraine before he takes over will give him some room to maneuver.
Keep your eye on the ball here:
Trump does not want Ukraine to become Afghanistan 2.0
Trump wants to win so much that America gets tired of winning.
As far as I know, they did just that today and fired them at a military facility in the Bryansk border region.
Good grief dude……exactly what do you think any US administration would do if Russia was openly supplying long range missiles to Mexican Drug cartels and they were actively using them to attack targets in various US cities and states ?
Just once at least attempt to provide an honest / specific answer and not just some generic Rambo bull*****
Russia invaded it, knowing Ukraine had the support of the free world and knowing we would supply weapons.
1. It was not aligned to the West until a political coup in 2014 overthrew the old government.
Very strong evidence the CIA and State Department were involved in that coup.
2. Why would Moscow know that DC would spend billions to help Ukraine fight a proxy war?
Did Moscow send billions in weaponry to Iraq & Afghanistan after DC sent in troops in 2001 and 2003
Maybe they expected that DC would act like they did and largely stay out of it.
Sure
But those regions (Crimea and Donbas) were always the least supportive and the most supportive of the Party of regions (the pro-Moscow party)
Ukraine is a country that has always been pulled between East and West
But the coup in 2014 is what was decisive in setting off this decades long conflict (the purpose of which is to pull Ukriane forget into the Western orbit)
Russia was always going to oppose that and if necessary try and bite off parts (Crimea/Donbas)
All the more reason not to have supported a coup that over threw him and his party from power
(And technically he and his party supported closer economic ties to both EU and Russia
They were pretty moderate on that front)
10 years of conflict, trillions in war damage, hundreds of thousands of dead and wounded....seems like a disaster looking back
I don't see where ever campaigned on promising to join the EU
[in 1997 became head (governor) of the Donetsk oblast state administration. He retained this post until 2002. From then until January 2005 he served as prime minister under President Leonid Kuchma. With the latter's half-hearted support he contested the presidential election of 2004 against Viktor Yushchenko, but lost out on account of vote fraud exposed in the course of the Orange Revolution.
In April 2003, Yanukovych had become head of the Party of Regions on whose list he was elected to the Supreme Council of Ukraine in the general election of 2006. Later that year, because his party had won a plurality of seats in the Supreme Council, and together with the Communist Party of Ukraine and socialists was able to form a majority, he resigned his seat to become prime minister under President Viktor Yushchenko. A power struggle ensued between the latter two, and Yanukovych resigned in December 2007, being replaced by Yuliia Tymoshenko. Tymoshenko negotiated an unfavourable agreement for Russian gas, which provided the basis for later being charged with 'abuse of power' and sentenced to seven years in prison. Yanukovych bided his time as his popularity outstripped that of Tymoshenko. In the wake of the 2008 market crash…
In 2010 he again contested the presidency winning this time by a plurality of votes over his opponent, Yuliia Tymoshenko. It was a victory brought on not so much by his personal electoral appeal as by the self-defeating policies of Viktor Yushchenko whose record of incompetence and infighting while in office disappointed many former supporters of the Orange Revolution. In the decisive second round of presidential elections Yushchenko himself pleaded with voters not to elect Tymoshenko, his supposed ally. In both the 2010 and 2004 elections, Yanukovych ran as candidate of the Russian-speaking electorate in eastern and southern Ukraine as well as of the country's leading business tycoons such as Rinat Akhmetov, Dmytro Firtash, and Andrii Kliuiev, all of whom backed him.
Yanukovych's term as president was notable for reinstating the 1996 Constitution, reversing much of his predecessor's policies….
In foreign policy Yanukovych oscillated between the European Union (EU) and the Russian Federation. He paid his first official visit abroad to Brussels, but followed this up by signing the Kharkiv Agreement with Russian President Dmitri Medvedev. That document extended the Russian Federation's naval base lease in Sevastopol to 2042, and lowered the price of Russian gas by $100 per 1000 m3. This was followed by a law proclaiming Ukraine's non-aligned status (oddly incompatible with the Russian Federation's Black Sea Fleet being permanently in the Crimea), and rejection of Viktor Yushchenko's aspiration towards a NATO Membership Action Plan. Both of these developments were meant to mollify the Russian Federation.]
[The Party of Regions
It advocated a moderate pro-Russian political course, opposing itself to the Ukrainian national democratic camp. It held dominant positions in power in Crimea and in the southern and eastern regions of Ukraine. During the Revolution of Dignity, it launched the Antimaidan movement.]
https://www.encyclopediao***raine.com/display.asp?linkpath=pages%5CY%5CA%5CYanukovychViktor.htm
38 of his own party voted to impeach him, and shortly thereafter his party supported his ouster in full.Let's do this again some time.Quote:
Ukraine has abruptly ditched its plans to sign a historic pact with the European Union aimed at shifting the country out of the Kremlin's orbit. The decision handed victory to President Vladimir Putin in the increasingly vicious tug of war between Russia and the west for Ukraine's future, and looked like turning a special EU summit next week focused on Ukraine into a debacle.
President Viktor Yanukovych ordered the suspension of preparations for the pact between Kiev and Brussels after talks between the Russian and Ukrainian prime ministers and after Yanukovych's party in parliament rejected six bills aimed at meeting the EU's terms.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/nov/21/ukraine-suspends-preparations-eu-trade-pact
Parliament overwhelmingly passed the statement in February of 2013. What are you are referencing are the game Yanukovych and his minions played as they abruptly pulled out and climbed into bed with Russia.
Everything you posted supports the facts: Yanukovych ran on aligning with the EU, rooting out corruption, and working with other parties. He pulled 180s on all of his campaign promises.
A total of 315 of the 349 MPs registered in the sitting hall supported the document on Friday.
The draft document reads that the Verkhovna Rada "within its powers, will ensure that the recommendations concerning the signing of the Association Agreement between Ukraine and the EU, which are stipulated in the resolutions of the European Parliament and the conclusions of the Council of the EU approved on December 10, 2012, at a meeting of the EU foreign ministers, will be fulfilled."
The draft document also reads that while expecting positive results from the EU-Ukraine Summit due on February 25 and the Eastern Partnership Summit due on November 28-29, 2013, the Ukrainian parliament will assist in completing the fulfillment of the tasks agreed upon with the EU, first of all, within the EU-Ukraine Association Agenda and the EU-Ukraine Visa Liberalization Action Plan (VLAP), and will ensure that amendments to the EU-Ukraine Visa Facilitation Agreement are ratified.
Advertisement
The Ukrainian parliament also promised to intensify its work on the adoption of laws aimed at streamlining Ukrainian legislation with the EU's laws, particularly those envisaged by the relevant national program for the harmonization of the Ukrainian legislation with the EU legislation, as well as those related to reforms of justice, criminal justice, and elections legislation.
More to the point, agreeing or not agreeing is no grounds for the government to be overthrown. We're all about sovereignty, remember?
"The President of the country would not sign a pro-EU deal....so 2 months of violent riots in the capital...including the storming of the Presidential residence was justified to remove him from power without constitutional process"
Hell armed protestors even took over regional government buildings all over Ukraine.
[As part of the Euromaidan movement, regional state administration (RSA) buildings in various oblasts of Ukraine were occupied by protesters, starting on 23 January 2014.
By 27 January, ten of the country's twenty-seven RSAs had been overthrown, and others had come under threat]
Crazy how our own liberal regime in DC still freaks out about the anti-government protests on Jan. 6th (rowdy tourists they are still throwing into prison)......yet supports overseas what was a very lawless, very bloody, vey extra legal insurrection in Ukraine in 2014
100% wrong. Please name those new key issues.Sam Lowry said:You (or we, as Americans) are trying to dictate what free people do. The terms of the EU deal were absolutely not red herrings. They were widely criticized throughout Ukraine and the West. Yanukovych tried desperately to negotiate and was rudely rejected by the EU. He had every right to pause the deal as a result. He even had a right to "do a 180," though that's not at all what happened.sombear said:My point - and it happens to be the truth - is that Y ran on key issues and did 180s on all of them, including the EU agreement. Parliament supported his key initiatives, including the EU deal, from the start. At the very end, Y and some of his party did 180s. The "terms" they supposedly opposed at the end were no different than what had been contemplated for years. They were red herrings.Sam Lowry said:Passing a "statement" and actually passing the agreement are different things, as it turns out.sombear said:Perhaps I should have suggested an hour or two of research instead of 5 minutes . . . .Sam Lowry said:I've done the research. I've posted the research. You've read the research. Yet here we are...sombear said:You should do 5 minutes of research. Parliament passed the EU deal in a landslide. Y pulled out and signed with Russia instead. There is now wiggle room there. That is 100% fact.Sam Lowry said:Again, not true. Ukraine's parliament had refused to pass the EU agreement. Most of Yanukovych's party was absent from the impeachment vote due to fears of violence.sombear said:He campaigned on entering a much-publicized free trade agreement with the EU. And parliament passed it. I know this will really upset you . . . but Russia meddled big-time, and Yanukovych abruptly changed his mind, rejected the EU, and climbed in bed with Russia. He pulled similar 180s on domestic issue. His own party voted to oust him.Redbrickbear said:sombear said:No, he ran specifically on the EU agreement, more economic freedom, more citizen freedom, and anti-corruption. He did a complete and abrupt 180 on all of these once in office. We did not make him do that.Redbrickbear said:sombear said:Right, but Yanukovych ran on an even closer economic alliance with the west and on more freedoms in general. He did not run on any kind of pro-Russia platform.Redbrickbear said:sombear said:All of Ukraine, including Crimea, voted for independence in 1991..Redbrickbear said:sombear said:it is a free sovereign nation aligned with the free world.KaiBear said:trey3216 said:Ukraine shouldn't be allowed to attack military targets that used to target Ukrainian military and civilian targets??? Interesting angle....Doc Holliday said:So Ukraine should use the long range missiles that would be launched from Ukraine and are targeted and controlled by NATO?whiterock said:Catturd misses on that one.historian said:The fact that the Biden regime is trying to start WWIII right before Trump, who just won a historic landslide victory who ran on ending the Russia/Ukraine war, just shows how evil these POS treasonous traitors scumbags really are.
— Catturd ™ (@catturd2) November 17, 2024
Biden and Trump met a couple of days ago. Do we think Ukraine was discussed? Did Trump comment on any of that about Ukraine? One could reasonably read between the lines that Trump wanted all the aid delivered so he would not have to spend his own political capital to get it done.....to give him time to work his own plan.
Trump is in a little bit of a bind here. He pandered to anti-war sentiment to get elected, knowing full well that abandoning Ukraine would be an unfathomably stupid thing to do. i don't blame him at all for the pander. Pandering is an essential part of politics and those who think they're too good to do it aren't worth the proverbial bucket of warm spit. But now he has to figure out a way to avoid doing what a really big and noisy chunk of his base wants him to do - cut & run from Ukraine. For sure he has a plan for how to walk the tightrope, and pushing all that aid into Ukraine before he takes over will give him some room to maneuver.
Keep your eye on the ball here:
Trump does not want Ukraine to become Afghanistan 2.0
Trump wants to win so much that America gets tired of winning.
As far as I know, they did just that today and fired them at a military facility in the Bryansk border region.
Good grief dude……exactly what do you think any US administration would do if Russia was openly supplying long range missiles to Mexican Drug cartels and they were actively using them to attack targets in various US cities and states ?
Just once at least attempt to provide an honest / specific answer and not just some generic Rambo bull*****
Russia invaded it, knowing Ukraine had the support of the free world and knowing we would supply weapons.
1. It was not aligned to the West until a political coup in 2014 overthrew the old government.
Very strong evidence the CIA and State Department were involved in that coup.
2. Why would Moscow know that DC would spend billions to help Ukraine fight a proxy war?
Did Moscow send billions in weaponry to Iraq & Afghanistan after DC sent in troops in 2001 and 2003
Maybe they expected that DC would act like they did and largely stay out of it.
Sure
But those regions (Crimea and Donbas) were always the least supportive and the most supportive of the Party of regions (the pro-Moscow party)
Ukraine is a country that has always been pulled between East and West
But the coup in 2014 is what was decisive in setting off this decades long conflict (the purpose of which is to pull Ukriane forget into the Western orbit)
Russia was always going to oppose that and if necessary try and bite off parts (Crimea/Donbas)
All the more reason not to have supported a coup that over threw him and his party from power
(And technically he and his party supported closer economic ties to both EU and Russia
They were pretty moderate on that front)
10 years of conflict, trillions in war damage, hundreds of thousands of dead and wounded....seems like a disaster looking back
I don't see where ever campaigned on promising to join the EU
[in 1997 became head (governor) of the Donetsk oblast state administration. He retained this post until 2002. From then until January 2005 he served as prime minister under President Leonid Kuchma. With the latter's half-hearted support he contested the presidential election of 2004 against Viktor Yushchenko, but lost out on account of vote fraud exposed in the course of the Orange Revolution.
In April 2003, Yanukovych had become head of the Party of Regions on whose list he was elected to the Supreme Council of Ukraine in the general election of 2006. Later that year, because his party had won a plurality of seats in the Supreme Council, and together with the Communist Party of Ukraine and socialists was able to form a majority, he resigned his seat to become prime minister under President Viktor Yushchenko. A power struggle ensued between the latter two, and Yanukovych resigned in December 2007, being replaced by Yuliia Tymoshenko. Tymoshenko negotiated an unfavourable agreement for Russian gas, which provided the basis for later being charged with 'abuse of power' and sentenced to seven years in prison. Yanukovych bided his time as his popularity outstripped that of Tymoshenko. In the wake of the 2008 market crash…
In 2010 he again contested the presidency winning this time by a plurality of votes over his opponent, Yuliia Tymoshenko. It was a victory brought on not so much by his personal electoral appeal as by the self-defeating policies of Viktor Yushchenko whose record of incompetence and infighting while in office disappointed many former supporters of the Orange Revolution. In the decisive second round of presidential elections Yushchenko himself pleaded with voters not to elect Tymoshenko, his supposed ally. In both the 2010 and 2004 elections, Yanukovych ran as candidate of the Russian-speaking electorate in eastern and southern Ukraine as well as of the country's leading business tycoons such as Rinat Akhmetov, Dmytro Firtash, and Andrii Kliuiev, all of whom backed him.
Yanukovych's term as president was notable for reinstating the 1996 Constitution, reversing much of his predecessor's policies….
In foreign policy Yanukovych oscillated between the European Union (EU) and the Russian Federation. He paid his first official visit abroad to Brussels, but followed this up by signing the Kharkiv Agreement with Russian President Dmitri Medvedev. That document extended the Russian Federation's naval base lease in Sevastopol to 2042, and lowered the price of Russian gas by $100 per 1000 m3. This was followed by a law proclaiming Ukraine's non-aligned status (oddly incompatible with the Russian Federation's Black Sea Fleet being permanently in the Crimea), and rejection of Viktor Yushchenko's aspiration towards a NATO Membership Action Plan. Both of these developments were meant to mollify the Russian Federation.]
[The Party of Regions
It advocated a moderate pro-Russian political course, opposing itself to the Ukrainian national democratic camp. It held dominant positions in power in Crimea and in the southern and eastern regions of Ukraine. During the Revolution of Dignity, it launched the Antimaidan movement.]
https://www.encyclopediao***raine.com/display.asp?linkpath=pages%5CY%5CA%5CYanukovychViktor.htm
38 of his own party voted to impeach him, and shortly thereafter his party supported his ouster in full.Let's do this again some time.Quote:
Ukraine has abruptly ditched its plans to sign a historic pact with the European Union aimed at shifting the country out of the Kremlin's orbit. The decision handed victory to President Vladimir Putin in the increasingly vicious tug of war between Russia and the west for Ukraine's future, and looked like turning a special EU summit next week focused on Ukraine into a debacle.
President Viktor Yanukovych ordered the suspension of preparations for the pact between Kiev and Brussels after talks between the Russian and Ukrainian prime ministers and after Yanukovych's party in parliament rejected six bills aimed at meeting the EU's terms.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/nov/21/ukraine-suspends-preparations-eu-trade-pact
Parliament overwhelmingly passed the statement in February of 2013. What are you are referencing are the game Yanukovych and his minions played as they abruptly pulled out and climbed into bed with Russia.
Everything you posted supports the facts: Yanukovych ran on aligning with the EU, rooting out corruption, and working with other parties. He pulled 180s on all of his campaign promises.
A total of 315 of the 349 MPs registered in the sitting hall supported the document on Friday.
The draft document reads that the Verkhovna Rada "within its powers, will ensure that the recommendations concerning the signing of the Association Agreement between Ukraine and the EU, which are stipulated in the resolutions of the European Parliament and the conclusions of the Council of the EU approved on December 10, 2012, at a meeting of the EU foreign ministers, will be fulfilled."
The draft document also reads that while expecting positive results from the EU-Ukraine Summit due on February 25 and the Eastern Partnership Summit due on November 28-29, 2013, the Ukrainian parliament will assist in completing the fulfillment of the tasks agreed upon with the EU, first of all, within the EU-Ukraine Association Agenda and the EU-Ukraine Visa Liberalization Action Plan (VLAP), and will ensure that amendments to the EU-Ukraine Visa Facilitation Agreement are ratified.
Advertisement
The Ukrainian parliament also promised to intensify its work on the adoption of laws aimed at streamlining Ukrainian legislation with the EU's laws, particularly those envisaged by the relevant national program for the harmonization of the Ukrainian legislation with the EU legislation, as well as those related to reforms of justice, criminal justice, and elections legislation.
More to the point, agreeing or not agreeing is no grounds for the government to be overthrown. We're all about sovereignty, remember?
I don't dictate what free people do. In addition to the EU issue, Y was arguably the most corrupt leader in Ukraine history . . . and that is saying something. He was worth over $10 billions, yet stole more. He imprisoned political opponents. Stacked federal and regional governments with cronies. He restricted freedoms.
Again, his own party ultimately voted against him.
I can understand why the people rose up. It's happened in similar circumstances throughout history in all regions of the world.
The idea that the people rose up against their own government is pure mythology. Maidan was a corrupt, violent power grab by a bunch of prototypical fascist thugs who walked right out of central casting with a CIA script in their hands. Heck, they even have an actor supposedly running the show now. Not that Zelensky really runs anything. They blackmailed him into abandoning the Minsk Agreements despite an overwhelming popular mandate. If you want to see a 180, that one will make your head spin.
The results have obviously been disastrous. "Corrupt" isn't even adequate to describe the current government's mismanagement and betrayal. From a Ukrainian point of view it's nothing short of treasonous.
And he did not pause it. He backed out and signed with Russia.
Uh . . . Zelensky wasn't elected until 2019 and was the 3rd Pres after Yanukovych.
If all the 180s and corruption were fabricated nothingburgers, why did Y's own party abandon him?
And your position is millions of people were manipulated?
Ukraine now launching US supplied missiles deep into Russia.
Ukraine now launching UK supplied missiles deep into Russia.
Biden now supplies anti personnel mines to Ukraine.
Russia now accelerating their advance into Ukraine.
Ukrainian President says they will lose the war if US funding is cut off.
What does Putin-Biden do next ?
Ukraine now launching UK supplied missiles deep into Russia.
Biden now supplies anti personnel mines to Ukraine.
Russia now accelerating their advance into Ukraine.
Ukrainian President says they will lose the war if US funding is cut off.
What does Putin-Biden do next ?
sombear said:Sam Lowry said:You (or we, as Americans) are trying to dictate what free people do. The terms of the EU deal were absolutely not red herrings. They were widely criticized throughout Ukraine and the West. Yanukovych tried desperately to negotiate and was rudely rejected by the EU. He had every right to pause the deal as a result. He even had a right to "do a 180," though that's not at all what happened.sombear said:My point - and it happens to be the truth - is that Y ran on key issues and did 180s on all of them, including the EU agreement. Parliament supported his key initiatives, including the EU deal, from the start. At the very end, Y and some of his party did 180s. The "terms" they supposedly opposed at the end were no different than what had been contemplated for years. They were red herrings.Sam Lowry said:Passing a "statement" and actually passing the agreement are different things, as it turns out.sombear said:Perhaps I should have suggested an hour or two of research instead of 5 minutes . . . .Sam Lowry said:I've done the research. I've posted the research. You've read the research. Yet here we are...sombear said:You should do 5 minutes of research. Parliament passed the EU deal in a landslide. Y pulled out and signed with Russia instead. There is now wiggle room there. That is 100% fact.Sam Lowry said:Again, not true. Ukraine's parliament had refused to pass the EU agreement. Most of Yanukovych's party was absent from the impeachment vote due to fears of violence.sombear said:He campaigned on entering a much-publicized free trade agreement with the EU. And parliament passed it. I know this will really upset you . . . but Russia meddled big-time, and Yanukovych abruptly changed his mind, rejected the EU, and climbed in bed with Russia. He pulled similar 180s on domestic issue. His own party voted to oust him.Redbrickbear said:sombear said:No, he ran specifically on the EU agreement, more economic freedom, more citizen freedom, and anti-corruption. He did a complete and abrupt 180 on all of these once in office. We did not make him do that.Redbrickbear said:sombear said:Right, but Yanukovych ran on an even closer economic alliance with the west and on more freedoms in general. He did not run on any kind of pro-Russia platform.Redbrickbear said:sombear said:All of Ukraine, including Crimea, voted for independence in 1991..Redbrickbear said:sombear said:it is a free sovereign nation aligned with the free world.KaiBear said:trey3216 said:Ukraine shouldn't be allowed to attack military targets that used to target Ukrainian military and civilian targets??? Interesting angle....Doc Holliday said:So Ukraine should use the long range missiles that would be launched from Ukraine and are targeted and controlled by NATO?whiterock said:Catturd misses on that one.historian said:The fact that the Biden regime is trying to start WWIII right before Trump, who just won a historic landslide victory who ran on ending the Russia/Ukraine war, just shows how evil these POS treasonous traitors scumbags really are.
— Catturd ™ (@catturd2) November 17, 2024
Biden and Trump met a couple of days ago. Do we think Ukraine was discussed? Did Trump comment on any of that about Ukraine? One could reasonably read between the lines that Trump wanted all the aid delivered so he would not have to spend his own political capital to get it done.....to give him time to work his own plan.
Trump is in a little bit of a bind here. He pandered to anti-war sentiment to get elected, knowing full well that abandoning Ukraine would be an unfathomably stupid thing to do. i don't blame him at all for the pander. Pandering is an essential part of politics and those who think they're too good to do it aren't worth the proverbial bucket of warm spit. But now he has to figure out a way to avoid doing what a really big and noisy chunk of his base wants him to do - cut & run from Ukraine. For sure he has a plan for how to walk the tightrope, and pushing all that aid into Ukraine before he takes over will give him some room to maneuver.
Keep your eye on the ball here:
Trump does not want Ukraine to become Afghanistan 2.0
Trump wants to win so much that America gets tired of winning.
As far as I know, they did just that today and fired them at a military facility in the Bryansk border region.
Good grief dude……exactly what do you think any US administration would do if Russia was openly supplying long range missiles to Mexican Drug cartels and they were actively using them to attack targets in various US cities and states ?
Just once at least attempt to provide an honest / specific answer and not just some generic Rambo bull*****
Russia invaded it, knowing Ukraine had the support of the free world and knowing we would supply weapons.
1. It was not aligned to the West until a political coup in 2014 overthrew the old government.
Very strong evidence the CIA and State Department were involved in that coup.
2. Why would Moscow know that DC would spend billions to help Ukraine fight a proxy war?
Did Moscow send billions in weaponry to Iraq & Afghanistan after DC sent in troops in 2001 and 2003
Maybe they expected that DC would act like they did and largely stay out of it.
Sure
But those regions (Crimea and Donbas) were always the least supportive and the most supportive of the Party of regions (the pro-Moscow party)
Ukraine is a country that has always been pulled between East and West
But the coup in 2014 is what was decisive in setting off this decades long conflict (the purpose of which is to pull Ukriane forget into the Western orbit)
Russia was always going to oppose that and if necessary try and bite off parts (Crimea/Donbas)
All the more reason not to have supported a coup that over threw him and his party from power
(And technically he and his party supported closer economic ties to both EU and Russia
They were pretty moderate on that front)
10 years of conflict, trillions in war damage, hundreds of thousands of dead and wounded....seems like a disaster looking back
I don't see where ever campaigned on promising to join the EU
[in 1997 became head (governor) of the Donetsk oblast state administration. He retained this post until 2002. From then until January 2005 he served as prime minister under President Leonid Kuchma. With the latter's half-hearted support he contested the presidential election of 2004 against Viktor Yushchenko, but lost out on account of vote fraud exposed in the course of the Orange Revolution.
In April 2003, Yanukovych had become head of the Party of Regions on whose list he was elected to the Supreme Council of Ukraine in the general election of 2006. Later that year, because his party had won a plurality of seats in the Supreme Council, and together with the Communist Party of Ukraine and socialists was able to form a majority, he resigned his seat to become prime minister under President Viktor Yushchenko. A power struggle ensued between the latter two, and Yanukovych resigned in December 2007, being replaced by Yuliia Tymoshenko. Tymoshenko negotiated an unfavourable agreement for Russian gas, which provided the basis for later being charged with 'abuse of power' and sentenced to seven years in prison. Yanukovych bided his time as his popularity outstripped that of Tymoshenko. In the wake of the 2008 market crash…
In 2010 he again contested the presidency winning this time by a plurality of votes over his opponent, Yuliia Tymoshenko. It was a victory brought on not so much by his personal electoral appeal as by the self-defeating policies of Viktor Yushchenko whose record of incompetence and infighting while in office disappointed many former supporters of the Orange Revolution. In the decisive second round of presidential elections Yushchenko himself pleaded with voters not to elect Tymoshenko, his supposed ally. In both the 2010 and 2004 elections, Yanukovych ran as candidate of the Russian-speaking electorate in eastern and southern Ukraine as well as of the country's leading business tycoons such as Rinat Akhmetov, Dmytro Firtash, and Andrii Kliuiev, all of whom backed him.
Yanukovych's term as president was notable for reinstating the 1996 Constitution, reversing much of his predecessor's policies….
In foreign policy Yanukovych oscillated between the European Union (EU) and the Russian Federation. He paid his first official visit abroad to Brussels, but followed this up by signing the Kharkiv Agreement with Russian President Dmitri Medvedev. That document extended the Russian Federation's naval base lease in Sevastopol to 2042, and lowered the price of Russian gas by $100 per 1000 m3. This was followed by a law proclaiming Ukraine's non-aligned status (oddly incompatible with the Russian Federation's Black Sea Fleet being permanently in the Crimea), and rejection of Viktor Yushchenko's aspiration towards a NATO Membership Action Plan. Both of these developments were meant to mollify the Russian Federation.]
[The Party of Regions
It advocated a moderate pro-Russian political course, opposing itself to the Ukrainian national democratic camp. It held dominant positions in power in Crimea and in the southern and eastern regions of Ukraine. During the Revolution of Dignity, it launched the Antimaidan movement.]
https://www.encyclopediao***raine.com/display.asp?linkpath=pages%5CY%5CA%5CYanukovychViktor.htm
38 of his own party voted to impeach him, and shortly thereafter his party supported his ouster in full.Let's do this again some time.Quote:
Ukraine has abruptly ditched its plans to sign a historic pact with the European Union aimed at shifting the country out of the Kremlin's orbit. The decision handed victory to President Vladimir Putin in the increasingly vicious tug of war between Russia and the west for Ukraine's future, and looked like turning a special EU summit next week focused on Ukraine into a debacle.
President Viktor Yanukovych ordered the suspension of preparations for the pact between Kiev and Brussels after talks between the Russian and Ukrainian prime ministers and after Yanukovych's party in parliament rejected six bills aimed at meeting the EU's terms.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/nov/21/ukraine-suspends-preparations-eu-trade-pact
Parliament overwhelmingly passed the statement in February of 2013. What are you are referencing are the game Yanukovych and his minions played as they abruptly pulled out and climbed into bed with Russia.
Everything you posted supports the facts: Yanukovych ran on aligning with the EU, rooting out corruption, and working with other parties. He pulled 180s on all of his campaign promises.
A total of 315 of the 349 MPs registered in the sitting hall supported the document on Friday.
The draft document reads that the Verkhovna Rada "within its powers, will ensure that the recommendations concerning the signing of the Association Agreement between Ukraine and the EU, which are stipulated in the resolutions of the European Parliament and the conclusions of the Council of the EU approved on December 10, 2012, at a meeting of the EU foreign ministers, will be fulfilled."
The draft document also reads that while expecting positive results from the EU-Ukraine Summit due on February 25 and the Eastern Partnership Summit due on November 28-29, 2013, the Ukrainian parliament will assist in completing the fulfillment of the tasks agreed upon with the EU, first of all, within the EU-Ukraine Association Agenda and the EU-Ukraine Visa Liberalization Action Plan (VLAP), and will ensure that amendments to the EU-Ukraine Visa Facilitation Agreement are ratified.
Advertisement
The Ukrainian parliament also promised to intensify its work on the adoption of laws aimed at streamlining Ukrainian legislation with the EU's laws, particularly those envisaged by the relevant national program for the harmonization of the Ukrainian legislation with the EU legislation, as well as those related to reforms of justice, criminal justice, and elections legislation.
More to the point, agreeing or not agreeing is no grounds for the government to be overthrown. We're all about sovereignty, remember?
I don't dictate what free people do. In addition to the EU issue, Y was arguably the most corrupt leader in Ukraine history . . . and that is saying something. He was worth over $10 billions, yet stole more. He imprisoned political opponents. Stacked federal and regional governments with cronies. He restricted freedoms.
Again, his own party ultimately voted against him.
I can understand why the people rose up. It's happened in similar circumstances throughout history in all regions of the world.
The idea that the people rose up against their own government is pure mythology. Maidan was a corrupt, violent power grab by a bunch of prototypical fascist thugs who walked right out of central casting with a CIA script in their hands. Heck, they even have an actor supposedly running the show now. Not that Zelensky really runs anything. They blackmailed him into abandoning the Minsk Agreements despite an overwhelming popular mandate. If you want to see a 180, that one will make your head spin.
The results have obviously been disastrous. "Corrupt" isn't even adequate to describe the current government's mismanagement and betrayal. From a Ukrainian point of view it's nothing short of treasonous.
If all the 180s and corruption were fabricated nothingburgers, why did Y's own party abandon him?
And your position is millions of people were manipulated?
Of course there was a lot of corruption going on
Ukraine is one of the most corrupt countries on earth lol
Yanukovych and the Party of Regions were of course both ludicrously corrupt.
That is not the point.
The point is why did the US alphabet agencies get involved in supporting a coup there against the very corrupt (but legally legitimate) government in Kyiv?
A series of events in 2014 that has led us to 10 years of conflict....and US taxpayers having to spend more than $175 billion dollars on this ****hole country ( a figure of money that keeps growing with no end in sight)
I've never seen any real evidence we supported a coup. I've seen evidence that we (and 100 other countries) wanted to influence the existing and new administrations.Redbrickbear said:sombear said:Sam Lowry said:You (or we, as Americans) are trying to dictate what free people do. The terms of the EU deal were absolutely not red herrings. They were widely criticized throughout Ukraine and the West. Yanukovych tried desperately to negotiate and was rudely rejected by the EU. He had every right to pause the deal as a result. He even had a right to "do a 180," though that's not at all what happened.sombear said:My point - and it happens to be the truth - is that Y ran on key issues and did 180s on all of them, including the EU agreement. Parliament supported his key initiatives, including the EU deal, from the start. At the very end, Y and some of his party did 180s. The "terms" they supposedly opposed at the end were no different than what had been contemplated for years. They were red herrings.Sam Lowry said:Passing a "statement" and actually passing the agreement are different things, as it turns out.sombear said:Perhaps I should have suggested an hour or two of research instead of 5 minutes . . . .Sam Lowry said:I've done the research. I've posted the research. You've read the research. Yet here we are...sombear said:You should do 5 minutes of research. Parliament passed the EU deal in a landslide. Y pulled out and signed with Russia instead. There is now wiggle room there. That is 100% fact.Sam Lowry said:Again, not true. Ukraine's parliament had refused to pass the EU agreement. Most of Yanukovych's party was absent from the impeachment vote due to fears of violence.sombear said:He campaigned on entering a much-publicized free trade agreement with the EU. And parliament passed it. I know this will really upset you . . . but Russia meddled big-time, and Yanukovych abruptly changed his mind, rejected the EU, and climbed in bed with Russia. He pulled similar 180s on domestic issue. His own party voted to oust him.Redbrickbear said:sombear said:No, he ran specifically on the EU agreement, more economic freedom, more citizen freedom, and anti-corruption. He did a complete and abrupt 180 on all of these once in office. We did not make him do that.Redbrickbear said:sombear said:Right, but Yanukovych ran on an even closer economic alliance with the west and on more freedoms in general. He did not run on any kind of pro-Russia platform.Redbrickbear said:sombear said:All of Ukraine, including Crimea, voted for independence in 1991..Redbrickbear said:sombear said:it is a free sovereign nation aligned with the free world.KaiBear said:trey3216 said:Ukraine shouldn't be allowed to attack military targets that used to target Ukrainian military and civilian targets??? Interesting angle....Doc Holliday said:So Ukraine should use the long range missiles that would be launched from Ukraine and are targeted and controlled by NATO?whiterock said:Catturd misses on that one.historian said:The fact that the Biden regime is trying to start WWIII right before Trump, who just won a historic landslide victory who ran on ending the Russia/Ukraine war, just shows how evil these POS treasonous traitors scumbags really are.
— Catturd ™ (@catturd2) November 17, 2024
Biden and Trump met a couple of days ago. Do we think Ukraine was discussed? Did Trump comment on any of that about Ukraine? One could reasonably read between the lines that Trump wanted all the aid delivered so he would not have to spend his own political capital to get it done.....to give him time to work his own plan.
Trump is in a little bit of a bind here. He pandered to anti-war sentiment to get elected, knowing full well that abandoning Ukraine would be an unfathomably stupid thing to do. i don't blame him at all for the pander. Pandering is an essential part of politics and those who think they're too good to do it aren't worth the proverbial bucket of warm spit. But now he has to figure out a way to avoid doing what a really big and noisy chunk of his base wants him to do - cut & run from Ukraine. For sure he has a plan for how to walk the tightrope, and pushing all that aid into Ukraine before he takes over will give him some room to maneuver.
Keep your eye on the ball here:
Trump does not want Ukraine to become Afghanistan 2.0
Trump wants to win so much that America gets tired of winning.
As far as I know, they did just that today and fired them at a military facility in the Bryansk border region.
Good grief dude……exactly what do you think any US administration would do if Russia was openly supplying long range missiles to Mexican Drug cartels and they were actively using them to attack targets in various US cities and states ?
Just once at least attempt to provide an honest / specific answer and not just some generic Rambo bull*****
Russia invaded it, knowing Ukraine had the support of the free world and knowing we would supply weapons.
1. It was not aligned to the West until a political coup in 2014 overthrew the old government.
Very strong evidence the CIA and State Department were involved in that coup.
2. Why would Moscow know that DC would spend billions to help Ukraine fight a proxy war?
Did Moscow send billions in weaponry to Iraq & Afghanistan after DC sent in troops in 2001 and 2003
Maybe they expected that DC would act like they did and largely stay out of it.
Sure
But those regions (Crimea and Donbas) were always the least supportive and the most supportive of the Party of regions (the pro-Moscow party)
Ukraine is a country that has always been pulled between East and West
But the coup in 2014 is what was decisive in setting off this decades long conflict (the purpose of which is to pull Ukriane forget into the Western orbit)
Russia was always going to oppose that and if necessary try and bite off parts (Crimea/Donbas)
All the more reason not to have supported a coup that over threw him and his party from power
(And technically he and his party supported closer economic ties to both EU and Russia
They were pretty moderate on that front)
10 years of conflict, trillions in war damage, hundreds of thousands of dead and wounded....seems like a disaster looking back
I don't see where ever campaigned on promising to join the EU
[in 1997 became head (governor) of the Donetsk oblast state administration. He retained this post until 2002. From then until January 2005 he served as prime minister under President Leonid Kuchma. With the latter's half-hearted support he contested the presidential election of 2004 against Viktor Yushchenko, but lost out on account of vote fraud exposed in the course of the Orange Revolution.
In April 2003, Yanukovych had become head of the Party of Regions on whose list he was elected to the Supreme Council of Ukraine in the general election of 2006. Later that year, because his party had won a plurality of seats in the Supreme Council, and together with the Communist Party of Ukraine and socialists was able to form a majority, he resigned his seat to become prime minister under President Viktor Yushchenko. A power struggle ensued between the latter two, and Yanukovych resigned in December 2007, being replaced by Yuliia Tymoshenko. Tymoshenko negotiated an unfavourable agreement for Russian gas, which provided the basis for later being charged with 'abuse of power' and sentenced to seven years in prison. Yanukovych bided his time as his popularity outstripped that of Tymoshenko. In the wake of the 2008 market crash…
In 2010 he again contested the presidency winning this time by a plurality of votes over his opponent, Yuliia Tymoshenko. It was a victory brought on not so much by his personal electoral appeal as by the self-defeating policies of Viktor Yushchenko whose record of incompetence and infighting while in office disappointed many former supporters of the Orange Revolution. In the decisive second round of presidential elections Yushchenko himself pleaded with voters not to elect Tymoshenko, his supposed ally. In both the 2010 and 2004 elections, Yanukovych ran as candidate of the Russian-speaking electorate in eastern and southern Ukraine as well as of the country's leading business tycoons such as Rinat Akhmetov, Dmytro Firtash, and Andrii Kliuiev, all of whom backed him.
Yanukovych's term as president was notable for reinstating the 1996 Constitution, reversing much of his predecessor's policies….
In foreign policy Yanukovych oscillated between the European Union (EU) and the Russian Federation. He paid his first official visit abroad to Brussels, but followed this up by signing the Kharkiv Agreement with Russian President Dmitri Medvedev. That document extended the Russian Federation's naval base lease in Sevastopol to 2042, and lowered the price of Russian gas by $100 per 1000 m3. This was followed by a law proclaiming Ukraine's non-aligned status (oddly incompatible with the Russian Federation's Black Sea Fleet being permanently in the Crimea), and rejection of Viktor Yushchenko's aspiration towards a NATO Membership Action Plan. Both of these developments were meant to mollify the Russian Federation.]
[The Party of Regions
It advocated a moderate pro-Russian political course, opposing itself to the Ukrainian national democratic camp. It held dominant positions in power in Crimea and in the southern and eastern regions of Ukraine. During the Revolution of Dignity, it launched the Antimaidan movement.]
https://www.encyclopediao***raine.com/display.asp?linkpath=pages%5CY%5CA%5CYanukovychViktor.htm
38 of his own party voted to impeach him, and shortly thereafter his party supported his ouster in full.Let's do this again some time.Quote:
Ukraine has abruptly ditched its plans to sign a historic pact with the European Union aimed at shifting the country out of the Kremlin's orbit. The decision handed victory to President Vladimir Putin in the increasingly vicious tug of war between Russia and the west for Ukraine's future, and looked like turning a special EU summit next week focused on Ukraine into a debacle.
President Viktor Yanukovych ordered the suspension of preparations for the pact between Kiev and Brussels after talks between the Russian and Ukrainian prime ministers and after Yanukovych's party in parliament rejected six bills aimed at meeting the EU's terms.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/nov/21/ukraine-suspends-preparations-eu-trade-pact
Parliament overwhelmingly passed the statement in February of 2013. What are you are referencing are the game Yanukovych and his minions played as they abruptly pulled out and climbed into bed with Russia.
Everything you posted supports the facts: Yanukovych ran on aligning with the EU, rooting out corruption, and working with other parties. He pulled 180s on all of his campaign promises.
A total of 315 of the 349 MPs registered in the sitting hall supported the document on Friday.
The draft document reads that the Verkhovna Rada "within its powers, will ensure that the recommendations concerning the signing of the Association Agreement between Ukraine and the EU, which are stipulated in the resolutions of the European Parliament and the conclusions of the Council of the EU approved on December 10, 2012, at a meeting of the EU foreign ministers, will be fulfilled."
The draft document also reads that while expecting positive results from the EU-Ukraine Summit due on February 25 and the Eastern Partnership Summit due on November 28-29, 2013, the Ukrainian parliament will assist in completing the fulfillment of the tasks agreed upon with the EU, first of all, within the EU-Ukraine Association Agenda and the EU-Ukraine Visa Liberalization Action Plan (VLAP), and will ensure that amendments to the EU-Ukraine Visa Facilitation Agreement are ratified.
Advertisement
The Ukrainian parliament also promised to intensify its work on the adoption of laws aimed at streamlining Ukrainian legislation with the EU's laws, particularly those envisaged by the relevant national program for the harmonization of the Ukrainian legislation with the EU legislation, as well as those related to reforms of justice, criminal justice, and elections legislation.
More to the point, agreeing or not agreeing is no grounds for the government to be overthrown. We're all about sovereignty, remember?
I don't dictate what free people do. In addition to the EU issue, Y was arguably the most corrupt leader in Ukraine history . . . and that is saying something. He was worth over $10 billions, yet stole more. He imprisoned political opponents. Stacked federal and regional governments with cronies. He restricted freedoms.
Again, his own party ultimately voted against him.
I can understand why the people rose up. It's happened in similar circumstances throughout history in all regions of the world.
The idea that the people rose up against their own government is pure mythology. Maidan was a corrupt, violent power grab by a bunch of prototypical fascist thugs who walked right out of central casting with a CIA script in their hands. Heck, they even have an actor supposedly running the show now. Not that Zelensky really runs anything. They blackmailed him into abandoning the Minsk Agreements despite an overwhelming popular mandate. If you want to see a 180, that one will make your head spin.
The results have obviously been disastrous. "Corrupt" isn't even adequate to describe the current government's mismanagement and betrayal. From a Ukrainian point of view it's nothing short of treasonous.
If all the 180s and corruption were fabricated nothingburgers, why did Y's own party abandon him?
And your position is millions of people were manipulated?
Of course there was a lot of corruption going on
Ukraine is one of the most corrupt countries on earth lol
Yanukovych and the Party of Regions were of course both ludicrously corrupt.
That is not the point.
The point is why did the US alphabet agencies get involved in supporting a coup there against the very corrupt (but legally legitimate) government in Kyiv?
A series of events in 2014 that has led us to 10 years of conflict....and US taxpayers having to spend more than $175 billion dollars on this ****hole country ( a figure of money that keeps growing with no end in sight)
I've been waiting for two years for someone to answer how we could engineer a coup when (1) Ukraine's intel was full of Russian ops, (2) no Americans or alleged conspirators were ever arrested for the alleged plot, (3) nobody, not even Russia, predicted that Yanukovych would do his infamous 180s, and (4) Yanukovych's own Party (no great friend of the U.S.) unanimously rejected him.
Bookmark this. Keep this. Remember this. Watch it often. Memorize it. Learn it. Understand it. Grasp it. Believe it. And never forget it. Ever. pic.twitter.com/U25wYjTBTL
— 🇺🇸Lionel🇺🇸 (@LionelMedia) November 18, 2024
There were no new key issues. Ukraine raised the same issues throughout the negotiations, e.g. austerity measures and compensation for lost trade with Russia. If anyone was surprised, it was only because they weren't listening. And again, these were widely recognized as serious issues by Western commentators. It's only now that history is being rewritten and they're being dismissed as red herrings.sombear said:100% wrong. Please name those new key issues.Sam Lowry said:You (or we, as Americans) are trying to dictate what free people do. The terms of the EU deal were absolutely not red herrings. They were widely criticized throughout Ukraine and the West. Yanukovych tried desperately to negotiate and was rudely rejected by the EU. He had every right to pause the deal as a result. He even had a right to "do a 180," though that's not at all what happened.sombear said:My point - and it happens to be the truth - is that Y ran on key issues and did 180s on all of them, including the EU agreement. Parliament supported his key initiatives, including the EU deal, from the start. At the very end, Y and some of his party did 180s. The "terms" they supposedly opposed at the end were no different than what had been contemplated for years. They were red herrings.Sam Lowry said:Passing a "statement" and actually passing the agreement are different things, as it turns out.sombear said:Perhaps I should have suggested an hour or two of research instead of 5 minutes . . . .Sam Lowry said:I've done the research. I've posted the research. You've read the research. Yet here we are...sombear said:You should do 5 minutes of research. Parliament passed the EU deal in a landslide. Y pulled out and signed with Russia instead. There is now wiggle room there. That is 100% fact.Sam Lowry said:Again, not true. Ukraine's parliament had refused to pass the EU agreement. Most of Yanukovych's party was absent from the impeachment vote due to fears of violence.sombear said:He campaigned on entering a much-publicized free trade agreement with the EU. And parliament passed it. I know this will really upset you . . . but Russia meddled big-time, and Yanukovych abruptly changed his mind, rejected the EU, and climbed in bed with Russia. He pulled similar 180s on domestic issue. His own party voted to oust him.Redbrickbear said:sombear said:No, he ran specifically on the EU agreement, more economic freedom, more citizen freedom, and anti-corruption. He did a complete and abrupt 180 on all of these once in office. We did not make him do that.Redbrickbear said:sombear said:Right, but Yanukovych ran on an even closer economic alliance with the west and on more freedoms in general. He did not run on any kind of pro-Russia platform.Redbrickbear said:sombear said:All of Ukraine, including Crimea, voted for independence in 1991..Redbrickbear said:sombear said:it is a free sovereign nation aligned with the free world.KaiBear said:trey3216 said:Ukraine shouldn't be allowed to attack military targets that used to target Ukrainian military and civilian targets??? Interesting angle....Doc Holliday said:So Ukraine should use the long range missiles that would be launched from Ukraine and are targeted and controlled by NATO?whiterock said:Catturd misses on that one.historian said:The fact that the Biden regime is trying to start WWIII right before Trump, who just won a historic landslide victory who ran on ending the Russia/Ukraine war, just shows how evil these POS treasonous traitors scumbags really are.
— Catturd ™ (@catturd2) November 17, 2024
Biden and Trump met a couple of days ago. Do we think Ukraine was discussed? Did Trump comment on any of that about Ukraine? One could reasonably read between the lines that Trump wanted all the aid delivered so he would not have to spend his own political capital to get it done.....to give him time to work his own plan.
Trump is in a little bit of a bind here. He pandered to anti-war sentiment to get elected, knowing full well that abandoning Ukraine would be an unfathomably stupid thing to do. i don't blame him at all for the pander. Pandering is an essential part of politics and those who think they're too good to do it aren't worth the proverbial bucket of warm spit. But now he has to figure out a way to avoid doing what a really big and noisy chunk of his base wants him to do - cut & run from Ukraine. For sure he has a plan for how to walk the tightrope, and pushing all that aid into Ukraine before he takes over will give him some room to maneuver.
Keep your eye on the ball here:
Trump does not want Ukraine to become Afghanistan 2.0
Trump wants to win so much that America gets tired of winning.
As far as I know, they did just that today and fired them at a military facility in the Bryansk border region.
Good grief dude……exactly what do you think any US administration would do if Russia was openly supplying long range missiles to Mexican Drug cartels and they were actively using them to attack targets in various US cities and states ?
Just once at least attempt to provide an honest / specific answer and not just some generic Rambo bull*****
Russia invaded it, knowing Ukraine had the support of the free world and knowing we would supply weapons.
1. It was not aligned to the West until a political coup in 2014 overthrew the old government.
Very strong evidence the CIA and State Department were involved in that coup.
2. Why would Moscow know that DC would spend billions to help Ukraine fight a proxy war?
Did Moscow send billions in weaponry to Iraq & Afghanistan after DC sent in troops in 2001 and 2003
Maybe they expected that DC would act like they did and largely stay out of it.
Sure
But those regions (Crimea and Donbas) were always the least supportive and the most supportive of the Party of regions (the pro-Moscow party)
Ukraine is a country that has always been pulled between East and West
But the coup in 2014 is what was decisive in setting off this decades long conflict (the purpose of which is to pull Ukriane forget into the Western orbit)
Russia was always going to oppose that and if necessary try and bite off parts (Crimea/Donbas)
All the more reason not to have supported a coup that over threw him and his party from power
(And technically he and his party supported closer economic ties to both EU and Russia
They were pretty moderate on that front)
10 years of conflict, trillions in war damage, hundreds of thousands of dead and wounded....seems like a disaster looking back
I don't see where ever campaigned on promising to join the EU
[in 1997 became head (governor) of the Donetsk oblast state administration. He retained this post until 2002. From then until January 2005 he served as prime minister under President Leonid Kuchma. With the latter's half-hearted support he contested the presidential election of 2004 against Viktor Yushchenko, but lost out on account of vote fraud exposed in the course of the Orange Revolution.
In April 2003, Yanukovych had become head of the Party of Regions on whose list he was elected to the Supreme Council of Ukraine in the general election of 2006. Later that year, because his party had won a plurality of seats in the Supreme Council, and together with the Communist Party of Ukraine and socialists was able to form a majority, he resigned his seat to become prime minister under President Viktor Yushchenko. A power struggle ensued between the latter two, and Yanukovych resigned in December 2007, being replaced by Yuliia Tymoshenko. Tymoshenko negotiated an unfavourable agreement for Russian gas, which provided the basis for later being charged with 'abuse of power' and sentenced to seven years in prison. Yanukovych bided his time as his popularity outstripped that of Tymoshenko. In the wake of the 2008 market crash…
In 2010 he again contested the presidency winning this time by a plurality of votes over his opponent, Yuliia Tymoshenko. It was a victory brought on not so much by his personal electoral appeal as by the self-defeating policies of Viktor Yushchenko whose record of incompetence and infighting while in office disappointed many former supporters of the Orange Revolution. In the decisive second round of presidential elections Yushchenko himself pleaded with voters not to elect Tymoshenko, his supposed ally. In both the 2010 and 2004 elections, Yanukovych ran as candidate of the Russian-speaking electorate in eastern and southern Ukraine as well as of the country's leading business tycoons such as Rinat Akhmetov, Dmytro Firtash, and Andrii Kliuiev, all of whom backed him.
Yanukovych's term as president was notable for reinstating the 1996 Constitution, reversing much of his predecessor's policies….
In foreign policy Yanukovych oscillated between the European Union (EU) and the Russian Federation. He paid his first official visit abroad to Brussels, but followed this up by signing the Kharkiv Agreement with Russian President Dmitri Medvedev. That document extended the Russian Federation's naval base lease in Sevastopol to 2042, and lowered the price of Russian gas by $100 per 1000 m3. This was followed by a law proclaiming Ukraine's non-aligned status (oddly incompatible with the Russian Federation's Black Sea Fleet being permanently in the Crimea), and rejection of Viktor Yushchenko's aspiration towards a NATO Membership Action Plan. Both of these developments were meant to mollify the Russian Federation.]
[The Party of Regions
It advocated a moderate pro-Russian political course, opposing itself to the Ukrainian national democratic camp. It held dominant positions in power in Crimea and in the southern and eastern regions of Ukraine. During the Revolution of Dignity, it launched the Antimaidan movement.]
https://www.encyclopediao***raine.com/display.asp?linkpath=pages%5CY%5CA%5CYanukovychViktor.htm
38 of his own party voted to impeach him, and shortly thereafter his party supported his ouster in full.Let's do this again some time.Quote:
Ukraine has abruptly ditched its plans to sign a historic pact with the European Union aimed at shifting the country out of the Kremlin's orbit. The decision handed victory to President Vladimir Putin in the increasingly vicious tug of war between Russia and the west for Ukraine's future, and looked like turning a special EU summit next week focused on Ukraine into a debacle.
President Viktor Yanukovych ordered the suspension of preparations for the pact between Kiev and Brussels after talks between the Russian and Ukrainian prime ministers and after Yanukovych's party in parliament rejected six bills aimed at meeting the EU's terms.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/nov/21/ukraine-suspends-preparations-eu-trade-pact
Parliament overwhelmingly passed the statement in February of 2013. What are you are referencing are the game Yanukovych and his minions played as they abruptly pulled out and climbed into bed with Russia.
Everything you posted supports the facts: Yanukovych ran on aligning with the EU, rooting out corruption, and working with other parties. He pulled 180s on all of his campaign promises.
A total of 315 of the 349 MPs registered in the sitting hall supported the document on Friday.
The draft document reads that the Verkhovna Rada "within its powers, will ensure that the recommendations concerning the signing of the Association Agreement between Ukraine and the EU, which are stipulated in the resolutions of the European Parliament and the conclusions of the Council of the EU approved on December 10, 2012, at a meeting of the EU foreign ministers, will be fulfilled."
The draft document also reads that while expecting positive results from the EU-Ukraine Summit due on February 25 and the Eastern Partnership Summit due on November 28-29, 2013, the Ukrainian parliament will assist in completing the fulfillment of the tasks agreed upon with the EU, first of all, within the EU-Ukraine Association Agenda and the EU-Ukraine Visa Liberalization Action Plan (VLAP), and will ensure that amendments to the EU-Ukraine Visa Facilitation Agreement are ratified.
Advertisement
The Ukrainian parliament also promised to intensify its work on the adoption of laws aimed at streamlining Ukrainian legislation with the EU's laws, particularly those envisaged by the relevant national program for the harmonization of the Ukrainian legislation with the EU legislation, as well as those related to reforms of justice, criminal justice, and elections legislation.
More to the point, agreeing or not agreeing is no grounds for the government to be overthrown. We're all about sovereignty, remember?
I don't dictate what free people do. In addition to the EU issue, Y was arguably the most corrupt leader in Ukraine history . . . and that is saying something. He was worth over $10 billions, yet stole more. He imprisoned political opponents. Stacked federal and regional governments with cronies. He restricted freedoms.
Again, his own party ultimately voted against him.
I can understand why the people rose up. It's happened in similar circumstances throughout history in all regions of the world.
The idea that the people rose up against their own government is pure mythology. Maidan was a corrupt, violent power grab by a bunch of prototypical fascist thugs who walked right out of central casting with a CIA script in their hands. Heck, they even have an actor supposedly running the show now. Not that Zelensky really runs anything. They blackmailed him into abandoning the Minsk Agreements despite an overwhelming popular mandate. If you want to see a 180, that one will make your head spin.
The results have obviously been disastrous. "Corrupt" isn't even adequate to describe the current government's mismanagement and betrayal. From a Ukrainian point of view it's nothing short of treasonous.
And he did not pause it. He backed out and signed with Russia.
Uh . . . Zelensky wasn't elected until 2019 and was the 3rd Pres after Yanukovych.
If all the 180s and corruption were fabricated nothingburgers, why did Y's own party abandon him?
And your position is millions of people were manipulated?
Yanukovych and other officials made it clear again and again that they still intended to sign with the EU. What they signed with Russia was a stopgap measure to bail out Ukraine's economy until an agreement could be reached. If they had gone and joined the Eurasian Economic Union, you might have a better point. But nothing like that was even discussed at the time. Yanukovych was working for a better deal and closer ties with both Russia and the EU, which is what the Ukrainian people unequivocally wanted.
I'm not sure what you mean by Yanukovych's own party abandoning him. He fled the country in fear for his life. The parliament ousted him under duress without the required number of votes to impeach. At some point the country needed a new president. The new party leader, Oleksandr Yefremov, criticized Yanukovych for instigating violence during the protests, though we now have good reason to believe he was mistaken on that point. Whatever his reasons, they certainly had nothing to do with opposing Russia or supporting the coup. The party refused to participate in the 2014 parliamentary elections because the Donbas didn't get a vote. Yefremov was later charged with treason for supporting Luhansk. He has resided in Russia since 2022.
Ukraine's intel was full of American ops, too. No one was arrested for the plot because it succeeded. That's how coups are supposed to work. As for the rest, see above.
Sam Lowry said:
Ukraine's intel was full of American ops, too. No one was arrested for the plot because it succeeded. That's how coups are supposed to work. As for the rest, see above.
I've tried to keep an open mind. I've studied Maidan and related events for years and truly have never come across an American coup theory that made any sense at all.
Sounds like your theory is that it wasn't really planned in advance but came together during the protests. I don't buy that because there just is not time for that, but at least that theory addresses mary primary points. It is a stronger theory than the more prevalent "planned all along" theory, which truly is untenable.
I appreciate your responses on this.
Oh yeah, we've got Putler right where we want him. Backed into the corner with his nuclear weapons! https://t.co/sQG1K5K8P8
— Second City Bureaucrat (@CityBureaucrat) November 20, 2024
Thank you, and likewise.sombear said:Sam Lowry said:
Ukraine's intel was full of American ops, too. No one was arrested for the plot because it succeeded. That's how coups are supposed to work. As for the rest, see above.
I've tried to keep an open mind. I've studied Maidan and related events for years and truly have never come across an American coup theory that made any sense at all.
Sounds like your theory is that it wasn't really planned in advance but came together during the protests. I don't buy that because there just is not time for that, but at least that theory addresses mary primary points. It is a stronger theory than the more prevalent "planned all along" theory, which truly is untenable.
I appreciate your responses on this.
Let me recommend this interview with a former Ukrainian diplomat who was there at the time. The US has suppressed his testimony to the best of its ability, but they've never refuted or even really denied his claims.
Quote:
Unfortunately, I was a big part of it because I was young, I'd just came back from the United States, I wanted Ukraine to be democratic. I took on the hook of this whole full-scale democracy that US is bringing to the world, and I was part of the Ukrainian opposition to [Viktor] Yanukovych at the time. And they offered me to be a coordinator of the international relations of Maidan, the unofficial part where I worked closely with the US Embassy, with the US Ambassador [Geoffrey] Pyatt. I worked closely with US government officials, like the invitation of Senator John McCain, and his security was on my watch, and I coordinated that process. The unfortunate "Nuland cookies" was my idea. In December 2013, when she [Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs Victoria Nuland] was in Kiev, she wanted to give out bread. I recommended her to divert from that process, you're not Jesus, you should come out to the people with something more to the ground, and that's how the cookies process came out.
So, I was involved in that, and the US government was full-scale involved in that, not only US government but the G7 ambassadors which are controlled by the US. But I was there when the US Ambassador Pyatt would come to Maidan, I would have to be there to get him through the crowd, to get him to the building where we sat and made our decisions, show him where the money was, show him where the Right Sector was, where they're preparing the Molotovs and the explosives. I was witnessing all that process, and that's why they offered me a job right after the Maidan coup, to be part of the Ukrainian government. And that's how I continued my work with the Deep State people, and that's how I saw. For them I was a good guy at that time because I was part of their team. They had no problems with me being a Ukrainian or speaking out because I was not speaking about them. I was part of the coup. And I got my security process that if something happens to me during the coup, the US embassy would help to evacuate me if needed. That's not even as a US citizen; they just offered to do that because we had those kinds of relationships. If I needed Pyatt to meet with somebody from the Ukrainian side, I'd just give him a call on a cell phone to him or to his assistant, and that meeting would happen within a couple of hours. Or vice versa, if he needed to meet with somebody from the Ukrainian side, that would happen, and that continued after the Maidan.
But I have to tell you, Maidan was fully coordinated and controlled by the US government and the US Embassy in Kiev on the ground. They had the official side with the pro-Soros people who did the PR, but all those things behind closed doors were happening with the involvement of the US Embassy officials. So then came US government officials at the White House like Elisabeth Zentos, who I was continuing to do my work with while I was in the Ukraine Embassy in Washington, and she was part of the national security team of Joe Biden.
https://thegrayzone.com/2023/07/13/bidens-corruption-led-to-ukraines-destruction-fmr-kiev-diplomat/
Vatnik conspiracy theorist posts more pro-Russian conspiracy theories from a pro-Russian site. ROFL.
And Greyzone....Might as well post Weekly World News, it would probably be more accurate anyways:
"Coverage of The Grayzone has focused on its misleading[25][26][27] reporting, its criticism of American foreign policy,[1][4] and its sympathetic coverage of the Russian, Chinese and Syrian governments.[32] The Grayzone has been accused of downplaying and justifying the persecution of Uyghurs in China,[33][37] of publishing conspiracy theories about Xinjiang, Syria and other regions,[38][39][40][1] and of publishing pro-Russian propaganda and disinformation, especially during the Russian invasion of Ukraine.[36][40][31][1][41]"
And Greyzone....Might as well post Weekly World News, it would probably be more accurate anyways:
"Coverage of The Grayzone has focused on its misleading[25][26][27] reporting, its criticism of American foreign policy,[1][4] and its sympathetic coverage of the Russian, Chinese and Syrian governments.[32] The Grayzone has been accused of downplaying and justifying the persecution of Uyghurs in China,[33][37] of publishing conspiracy theories about Xinjiang, Syria and other regions,[38][39][40][1] and of publishing pro-Russian propaganda and disinformation, especially during the Russian invasion of Ukraine.[36][40][31][1][41]"
Too many fallacies to unpack right now. Maybe later.Bear8084 said:
Vatnik conspiracy theorist posts more pro-Russian conspiracy theories from a pro-Russian site. ROFL.
And Greyzone....Might as well post Weekly World News, it would probably be more accurate anyways:
"Coverage of The Grayzone has focused on its misleading[25][26][27] reporting, its criticism of American foreign policy,[1][4] and its sympathetic coverage of the Russian, Chinese and Syrian governments.[32] The Grayzone has been accused of downplaying and justifying the persecution of Uyghurs in China,[33][37] of publishing conspiracy theories about Xinjiang, Syria and other regions,[38][39][40][1] and of publishing pro-Russian propaganda and disinformation, especially during the Russian invasion of Ukraine.[36][40][31][1][41]"
Redbrickbear said:Oh yeah, we've got Putler right where we want him. Backed into the corner with his nuclear weapons! https://t.co/sQG1K5K8P8
— Second City Bureaucrat (@CityBureaucrat) November 20, 2024
The McCain institute... sound like the perfect location for a firebombing.
Sam Lowry said:Too many fallacies to unpack right now. Maybe later.Bear8084 said:
Vatnik conspiracy theorist posts more pro-Russian conspiracy theories from a pro-Russian site. ROFL.
And Greyzone....Might as well post Weekly World News, it would probably be more accurate anyways:
"Coverage of The Grayzone has focused on its misleading[25][26][27] reporting, its criticism of American foreign policy,[1][4] and its sympathetic coverage of the Russian, Chinese and Syrian governments.[32] The Grayzone has been accused of downplaying and justifying the persecution of Uyghurs in China,[33][37] of publishing conspiracy theories about Xinjiang, Syria and other regions,[38][39][40][1] and of publishing pro-Russian propaganda and disinformation, especially during the Russian invasion of Ukraine.[36][40][31][1][41]"
LOL good grief.
Doc Holliday said:Bookmark this. Keep this. Remember this. Watch it often. Memorize it. Learn it. Understand it. Grasp it. Believe it. And never forget it. Ever. pic.twitter.com/U25wYjTBTL
— 🇺🇸Lionel🇺🇸 (@LionelMedia) November 18, 2024
Jesus, you folks kill me. Analyzing immediate post Berlin Wall backdrops against a power that can't give up the hope of it still being there and the neighboring countries wanting no part of that is not a fool's errand, its textbook. Y'all act like **** doesn't change. These people lived under Soviet Rule, and they didn't want to live under russian influence. It's absurd to blame them for wanting to move westward. Y'all are literal blaming the rape victim for not wanting to be chained to the bed any longer.
Mr. Treehorn treats objects like women, man.
trey3216 said:Doc Holliday said:Bookmark this. Keep this. Remember this. Watch it often. Memorize it. Learn it. Understand it. Grasp it. Believe it. And never forget it. Ever. pic.twitter.com/U25wYjTBTL
— 🇺🇸Lionel🇺🇸 (@LionelMedia) November 18, 2024
Jesus, you folks kill me. Analyzing immediate post Berlin Wall backdrops against a power that can't give up the hope of it still being there and the neighboring countries wanting no part of that is not a fool's errand, its textbook. Y'all act like **** doesn't change. These people lived under Soviet Rule, and they didn't want to live under russian influence. It's absurd to blame them for wanting to move westward. Y'all are literal blaming the rape victim for not wanting to be chained to the bed any longer.
Understandable sure
Who but losers would want to be in bed with some vodka soaked oligarchs in Moscow
That being said we were all basically cool with NATO expansion of Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Poland, Hungary, etc
But anyone could see that trying to pull Ukraine, Belarus, Georgia out of their sphere of influence was gonna be a bloody and probably fruitless endeavor
And 10 years of conflict, trillions in damage, billions in military equipment, and tens of thousands dead and wounded….and here we are still with Ukraine not in NATO and with Russian troops occupying 20% of the country (maybe forever)
What has it all been for?
The status quo in 2013 looks good in comparison
trey3216 said:Doc Holliday said:Bookmark this. Keep this. Remember this. Watch it often. Memorize it. Learn it. Understand it. Grasp it. Believe it. And never forget it. Ever. pic.twitter.com/U25wYjTBTL
— 🇺🇸Lionel🇺🇸 (@LionelMedia) November 18, 2024
Jesus, you folks kill me. Analyzing immediate post Berlin Wall backdrops against a power that can't give up the hope of it still being there and the neighboring countries wanting no part of that is not a fool's errand, its textbook. Y'all act like **** doesn't change. These people lived under Soviet Rule, and they didn't want to live under russian influence. It's absurd to blame them for wanting to move westward. Y'all are literal blaming the rape victim for not wanting to be chained to the bed any longer.
You are lucky Putin is the adult in the room.
If any other influential political figure in Russia was in charge they would have already gone nuclear and I certainly wouldnt blame them after this latest stunt. The people provoking them are the same people provoking me and the 1/3 of Americans who have deep roots and whose families have given the most for this country.
Anthony Blinken isnt just a puppet of the Zionists. He is one of them. We have a Mossad double agent as our Secretary of State who will be running our government for the next 60 days and he wants to punish Russia for sending weapons to Iran, Syria, and Lebanon. He is defending another Mossad double agent, Zelensky, who is the figurehead of the largest money laundering scheme in human history, transferring enormous amounts of wealth away from Americans and into Zionist pockets.
I've seen hundreds of photos and videos from people living in Ukraine and you would never know there was supposedly some war going on in their country. This is in stark contrast to Gaza where no building remains standing. This war has been very fake and gay for two years... but as their power is about to weaken slightly when Trump takes over, the Zionists have decided to turn a fake war into a real one out of malice and spite over aforementioned weapons transfers to their regional enemies.
I believe Putin is too intelligent to take the bait and will hunker down and tolerate these provocations bcs he knows in 60 days the Zionist Blinken is out and the new administration will negotiate with him bcs it's in the best interests of American AND Ukrainians.
The only people who want this war to continue are the Zionists and their mentally ill/******ed useful idiots.