This has got to be a gish-gallop. I’ve never heard of any of this. 2014 was after Russia already invaded. And the only peace agreements I’m aware of is the one where Ukraine gave up their nukes for a agreement that Russia would never invade them, and that the US would support Ukraine if they did.
A quick search says that the Minsk agreement was never signed by anyone with the authority to do so. The “Maiden Coup” or “Maiden Revolution” can be framed any way you want, but I guess I would prefer to error on the side of democracy. People clearly wanted to work closer with the EU and Yanukovych was only gonna do what russia wanted. So once again, progressives supporting democracy is not a contradiction.
You don’t have to be well informed of every little detail to recognize Russian talking points. Yours is way too obvious. And I guess Wikipedia is “nafo script” whatever that is…
Yes, Wikipedia is notoriously edited by western intelligence.
I don’t think you know what “well informed” means. Looks like it just means ‘well trained to reflexively support the western narrative, even without knowing any details.’
“Notoriously”… this is now hilariously bad. This is what I mean about easily recognized. Wikipedia sites their sources. The details are there, and nothing you’ve said so far has made me any better informed.
About those claims, yes. I definitely don’t ever remember any nato troops amassing. I feel like that would’ve been pretty big news. And I have serious doubts about what you would consider “western provocations”.
It was big news. Obama was fortifying the Ukrainian border for years after the coup. Right before Obama left office, he put more troops there than could be sustained, and then when they were pulled back out the Obama officials said it proved Trump’s fealty to Russia.
It was all over the news for years. Couldn’t have been missed by anyone paying attention.
I not only don’t remember that, the thing I do remember was Obama being too soft with Russia. That’s one thing Romney ran on in 2012. A quick search mentions 300 troops being sent to Ukraine to help train Ukrainians after the invasion of Crimea…
Yeah, Romney and Obama both ran with a pledge to the war mongers that they’d escalate war with Russia. And Obama kept that promise.
I love how y’all try to play both ignorant and informed enough to argue every point. I hope they never take it out of the script, because it’s one of the quickest way to spot these accounts.
I certainly am ignorant of made of things…
Romney was the one who campaigned on being stronger towards Russia. Obama was the one caught on a hot mic talking about working with putin.
And then Obama immediately moved to organize the coup of Ukraine and escalate with missiles at the Russian border. I’m not really sure how that paints him as soft on Russia.
Obama did initially try to work with Putin in the first term. Then Russia refused to import US chicken, because Big Ag refused to stop washing them in bleach. And after a highly publicized abuse case, Russia cut off adoptions to the US, and the adoption lobby started pushing for regime change. Plus, the US gas companies wanted something done with the Russia-Europe pipeline competing, which Biden dutifully destroyed.
They always do. Claim to know nothing, and then suddenly know enough to push back against every point against Ukraine, even though they were acting confused a comment or two before. It’s part of the script.
This has got to be a gish-gallop. I’ve never heard of any of this. 2014 was after Russia already invaded. And the only peace agreements I’m aware of is the one where Ukraine gave up their nukes for a agreement that Russia would never invade them, and that the US would support Ukraine if they did.
Loool
LMAO
“I’m admit that I’m totally ignorant of the topic on hand, but I’m still going to insist that my uninformed opinion is the correct one.”
So you claim to be well informed on this topic, but haven’t heard of the Maiden Coup or the Minsk Agreements?
Never claimed to be well informed…
A quick search says that the Minsk agreement was never signed by anyone with the authority to do so. The “Maiden Coup” or “Maiden Revolution” can be framed any way you want, but I guess I would prefer to error on the side of democracy. People clearly wanted to work closer with the EU and Yanukovych was only gonna do what russia wanted. So once again, progressives supporting democracy is not a contradiction.
Ousting a democratically elected leader is the opposite of supporting democracy
If you’re not well informed, you’re not in a position to accuse anyone else of spreading propaganda about it.
And look at that, reliably pushing the nafo script anyway.
You don’t have to be well informed of every little detail to recognize Russian talking points. Yours is way too obvious. And I guess Wikipedia is “nafo script” whatever that is…
Yes, Wikipedia is notoriously edited by western intelligence.
I don’t think you know what “well informed” means. Looks like it just means ‘well trained to reflexively support the western narrative, even without knowing any details.’
“Notoriously”… this is now hilariously bad. This is what I mean about easily recognized. Wikipedia sites their sources. The details are there, and nothing you’ve said so far has made me any better informed.
Yeah, they’ve been known to be censoring Wikipedia for almost 20 years.
And now you’re defending western intelligence agencies. You guys are so, so bad at this.
https://www.reuters.com/article/technology/cia-and-fbi-computers-used-for-wikipedia-edits-idUSN16428960/
So at this point you’re just claiming ignorance?
About those claims, yes. I definitely don’t ever remember any nato troops amassing. I feel like that would’ve been pretty big news. And I have serious doubts about what you would consider “western provocations”.
It was big news. Obama was fortifying the Ukrainian border for years after the coup. Right before Obama left office, he put more troops there than could be sustained, and then when they were pulled back out the Obama officials said it proved Trump’s fealty to Russia.
It was all over the news for years. Couldn’t have been missed by anyone paying attention.
I not only don’t remember that, the thing I do remember was Obama being too soft with Russia. That’s one thing Romney ran on in 2012. A quick search mentions 300 troops being sent to Ukraine to help train Ukrainians after the invasion of Crimea…
Yeah, Romney and Obama both ran with a pledge to the war mongers that they’d escalate war with Russia. And Obama kept that promise.
I love how y’all try to play both ignorant and informed enough to argue every point. I hope they never take it out of the script, because it’s one of the quickest way to spot these accounts.
I certainly am ignorant of made of things… Romney was the one who campaigned on being stronger towards Russia. Obama was the one caught on a hot mic talking about working with putin.
And then Obama immediately moved to organize the coup of Ukraine and escalate with missiles at the Russian border. I’m not really sure how that paints him as soft on Russia.
Obama did initially try to work with Putin in the first term. Then Russia refused to import US chicken, because Big Ag refused to stop washing them in bleach. And after a highly publicized abuse case, Russia cut off adoptions to the US, and the adoption lobby started pushing for regime change. Plus, the US gas companies wanted something done with the Russia-Europe pipeline competing, which Biden dutifully destroyed.
They always do. Claim to know nothing, and then suddenly know enough to push back against every point against Ukraine, even though they were acting confused a comment or two before. It’s part of the script.