[Negotiator]

If people want to inform themselves, here's some links.

Victoria Nuland get's caught talking about how the coup regime in Ukraine should look like, before it had actually happened:

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26079957

Obama points out that you cannot win a war against Russia in Ukraine, because it's a national interest to them - that means they see this issue as a threat to their existence - and because they have escalatory dominance.

https://www.theatlantic.com/press-relea ... ns/473151/

Obama declares Ukraine to be not a core American interest and that he is reluctant to intervene in the country, because Russia will always be able to maintain escalatory dominance there. “The fact is that Ukraine, which is a non-NATO country, is going to be vulnerable to military domination by Russia no matter what we do.”—President Obama

This means there is no way to win the war, because Russia is a nuclear superpower. If we managed to win against Russia in a conventional war - we are thankfully far from this ability - they would by their nuclear doctrine use nuclear weapons.

Zulushny (leader of the ukrainian military) interview in New Economist
https://www.newgeopolitics.org/2022/12/ ... be-killed/

For us, for the military, the war began in 2014.

And that's just the first thing he says. Already completely opposite to western propaganda, which acts as if Putin woke up someday and for no reason, after not starting any war of aggression ever before, decided to conquer Ukraine. The article is full of other interesting information, too. Towards the end for example Zulushny says how many weapons he would need for an invasion. But over half a year later he still didn't get that many weapons from the west.

There's a lot more that's interesting, including a lot of stuff that far predates the conflict and explains why Nazis in Ukraine are so powerful, though that stuff probably can't be found online (I only heard from Scott Ritter about that), but these are the three links I would deem the most important.

[Negotiator]

Oh whow.

https://thegrayzone.com/2023/06/29/nucl ... y-council/

This is a friggin awesome summary of the Ukraine war as a whole by one of our best journalists worldwide.

Unfortunately I know even much more bad stuff that happened during all this time, but this is still a great summary of why this war is going on and who is benefitting from it.

Hopefully this nightmare will soon end.

As Donald Trump put it so simple and pointnantly: I want to stop people dying.

[Szabo]

The Grayzone, a fringe website, is known for misleading reporting and sympathetic coverage of authoritarian regimes. The Grayzone has denied human rights abuses, posted conspiracy theories and pro-Russian propaganda during the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

Grayzone writers such as Max Blumenthal and Aaron Mate acted as briefers on behalf of the Permanent Mission of the Russian Federation to the United Nations at UN meetings organised by Russia.

Contributors to The Grayzone include Aaron Maté, Anya Parampil and Alex Rubinstein, the latter two being known for their work for the Russian state-owned television station RT.

[late]

Oh whow.

Max works for RT, he's does propaganda for them.

You do know Russia was deeply involved in Ukraine long before Nuland showed up? You're ignoring most of the story...

[Rancid]

The Grayzone, a fringe website, is known for misleading reporting and sympathetic coverage of authoritarian regimes. The Grayzone has denied human rights abuses, posted conspiracy theories and pro-Russian propaganda during the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

Grayzone writers such as Max Blumenthal and Aaron Mate acted as briefers on behalf of the Permanent Mission of the Russian Federation to the United Nations at UN meetings organised by Russia.

Contributors to The Grayzone include Aaron Maté, Anya Parampil and Alex Rubinstein, the latter two being known for their work for the Russian state-owned television station RT.

Indeed. At this point we know that @Negotiator has fallen hard for the pro russian imperialism position though. I think most people on pofo know he posts nonsense.

[Wellsy]

I find this take interesting in summarizing Lenin's approach in the specific historical context he found himself in and what he put forth which can be generalized as not taking a side with any country that seeks to invade a smaller one under any pretense.
http://mccaine.org/2023/02/21/lenin-and-the-ukrainian-war/

We see then that the ‘neutralist’ position is partially right and partially wrong in drawing from Lenin. It is wrong insofar as it neglects to fully incorporate the necessity to support the success of Ukraine, as a nation fighting a struggle against an imperialist invader with territorial-annexationist claims against it and seeking to subjugate it into its sphere of influence, regardless of whether Zelensky’s government has any progressive qualities (which it may well not have). It is right, on the other hand, when discussing the larger context of a real or potential conflict, whether directly or via proxy, between the rival imperialist camps of US/NATO and Russia (and perhaps China also, at some point). In that specific conflict, the position of neutralism and refusal is absolutely correct from the viewpoint of Lenin’s argumentation. And indeed just as the Entente was selling out Serbia in its own interests, so NATO (and the EU) are manipulating, deceiving, and instrumentalizing Ukraine’s struggle for their own ends. But equally, just as with Serbia in WWI, the “national element” of justified defense against imperialism and annexationism remains even within that context, in the case of Ukraine’s defense against Russia.

[noemon]

Indeed. At this point we know that @Negotiator has fallen hard for the pro russian imperialism position though. I think most people on pofo know he posts nonsense.

No dude. You should do a bit more research on Blumenthal and Rubinstein, they are very interesting characters, far more interesting than both western and russian propaganda.

They are far more realistic, honest, pragmatist than 99% of whatever exists out there.

Also, it is huge fail to dismiss everything you dislike as propaganda.

Both of them are brave American Jews that regularly write for the NYT, WAPO, etcetera and both of them have confronted the more radical elements of both Israel and the western apparatus with serious risk to their persons.

At the very least, give them a moment before you dismiss them as invalids, they are far more brave than probably anyone you know.

[Rancid]

No dude. You should do a bit more research on Blumenthal and Rubinstein, they are very interesting characters, far more interesting than both western and russian propaganda.

They are far more realistic, honest, pragmatist than 99% of whatever exists out there.

Also, it is huge fail to dismiss everything you dislike as propaganda.

Both of them are brave American Jews that regularly write for the NYT, WAPO, etcetera and both of them have confronted the more radical elements of both Israel and the western apparatus with serious risk to their persons.

At the very least, give them a moment before you dismiss them as invalids, they are far more brave than probably anyone you know.

I can give them a moment.

The issue is when someone with little credibility to me (Negotaitor) posts something. I tend write off what they have to say, because odds are, they are posting/talking bullshit. Bullshitters will bullshit after all. That said, even a bullshitter can be reasoned/right occasionally.

[Negotiator]

Why yes, the Grayzone isnt part of the luegenpresse. Duh ?

Why would you think I would point to the standard press ? I keep pointing out their lies, constantly.

[skinster]

Max works for RT, he's does propaganda for them.

You do know Russia was deeply involved in Ukraine long before Nuland showed up? You're ignoring most of the story...

Max doesn't work for RT and never has as far as I'm aware. He may have been interviewed by them but that's about it. And even if he did, so what? People like you no doubt enjoy The New York Times and BBC so it's not like you're in any credible position. Maybe try dealing with their arguments instead of dismissing them like Russiagate-dorks in the U.S. government do that people like you bootlick for. Particularly because the Russiagate conspiracy theory has been proving to be complete nonsense.

Russia was not "deeply involved in Ukraine" before the 2014 U.S. coup that psychotic Nuland is the face of. Post coup and the abolition of the Official Languages Act (Kivalov-Kolesnichenko law) in Ukraine, which then banned Russian as a language in Ukraine alongside the Ukrainian language, is what caused the people in the Donbass to demand autonomy from Ukraine (read: not Russian control) because it violated the friendship Treaty of Friendship between Ukraine and Russia that was signed in 1997

Russia was not involved then despite the requests of the people in Donetsk, Lugansk and Crimea. Russia instead aimed for peaceful negotionations with the Minsks 1 & 2 Accords which the Ukrainian government and it's military and fascist paramilitaries violated by bombing the people in those two oblasts from 2014 onwards. It was only until the Azov and Aidar nazis in the Ukrainian armies began ground invasions of the Donbass that they entered last year.

But the facts don't matter to people like you. Still, they are the facts and if you can challenge them without ad-homs then please do, though I doubt you can given your previous posting history which is embarrassing at a minimum.

No dude. You should do a bit more research on Blumenthal and Rubinstein, they are very interesting characters, far more interesting than both western and russian propaganda.

They are far more realistic, honest, pragmatist than 99% of whatever exists out there.

Also, it is huge fail to dismiss everything you dislike as propaganda.

Both of them are brave American Jews that regularly write for the NYT, WAPO, etcetera and both of them have confronted the more radical elements of both Israel and the western apparatus with serious risk to their persons.

At the very least, give them a moment before you dismiss them as invalids, they are far more brave than probably anyone you know.

You are expecting people like the person you're responding to think for themselves, which will lead to disappointment on your part. When people only have ad-homs against these excellent investigative journalists, it just displays that that is all they have and what they're saying is basically just shite.

Also, I don't know if Blumenthal has wrote for NYT previously but I can't imagine he has for a long time. The last corporate places he wrote for was places like Salon and TruthDig! I think. Rubinstein has only wrote for The Grayzone as far as I'm aware...

The issue is when someone with little credibility to me (Negotaitor) posts something. I tend write off what they have to say, because odds are, they are posting/talking bullshit. Bullshitters will bullshit after all. That said, even a bullshitter can be reasoned/right occasionally.

If you're going to attack something, maybe go beyond the ad-homs. It just makes you look weak AF. Instead, you can do what I did above and includes facts in your posts, which might make for interesting reading for others.

[late]

Russia was not "deeply involved in Ukraine" before the 2014 U.S. coup

So, on Feb 24, 2014, they conquered Crimea without getting deeply involved.

The reality is that Ukraine was trying to become a country, and Russia was having none of it...

The reality is that Russia was deeply involved with all it's neighbors, because Putin wanted to rebuild the Russian empire. There was assassinations, bribery, intimidation, money for insurections, and more.

Assuming you have some vague relationship with the real world, of course.

[skinster]

So, on Feb 24, 2014, they conquered Crimea without getting deeply involved.

Nobody "conquered" Crimea. The Crimeans voted with over 90% to be a part of Russia.

The reality is that Ukraine was trying to become a country, and Russia was having none of it...

No, that's the not the reality. If that were true, how do you explain the U.S. coup in 2014 against the country?

The reality is that Russia was deeply involved with all it's neighbors, because Putin wanted to rebuild the Russian empire. There was assassinations, bribery, intimidation, money for insurections, and more.

These types of posts show that you're borderline senile at best, since none of what you say is rooted in reality. But if it were true, I'm sure you'd be able to prove it with citing...something...anything. But that's beyond your level of...intelligence, if I can use that word...

[late]

Nobody "conquered" Crimea. The Crimeans voted with over 90% to be a part of Russia.

I watched it live, as it happened. Russian troops without insignia carrying Russian weapons invaded.

This is nothing new, and it didn't stop in 2014. Putin has a history of trying to topple governments he doesn't like, and and trying to neutralise countries he can't topple.

The lovely irony is his efforts have boomeranged on him, and now the Russian sphere faces a growing instability.

[skinster]

Your problem is that you watch too much TV and therefore believe everything you see, when Cable news in general is dogshit fed to you by billionaires who have no care for your interests, so why you would bootlick their point of view, when you don't even benefit from it, is beyond me. Can you explain what your interests are here since as far as I'm aware, you don't benefit at all?

Still, the report you shared gave a few things away:

1. The militias were pro-Russia, this is true. They were not Russians but pro-Russian Crimeans.
2. The report states most people there are Russian. It was almost correct. The people in Crimea identify as Russian because of their history as Soviets but they are not Russian per se. The same is true of the people in the Donbass (what was until recently called East Ukraine) and this was why they were also suffering bombs by their government from 2014 - to present, although much less so since the Russians went in to provide them security from the Ukrainian military and its fascist battalions.
3. The marches of people carrying flags in Crimea. Do you know what flag that is? It certainly was not the U.S. flag. Or the Ukrainian flag. Those are Russian flags. Why are people in Crimea marching with Russian flags? Because the people in Crimea seek to be a part of Russia.
4. The first man speaking to the U.S. reporter says the Russians are "his family". He doesn't seem to fear an "invasion" like you claim or the reporter tries to suggest.
4. Why do the dopes in the studio talk as though Crimea was ever a part of Ukraine, when it never was?

If that's the best you have, that was unfortunate.

[Sceptic]

No dude. You should do a bit more research on Blumenthal and Rubinstein, they are very interesting characters, far more interesting than both western and russian propaganda.

I have not been able to find a lot on them or the Grayzone beyond what is written on wikipedia. Blumenthal is basically dismissed as having been involved in the Permanent Mission of the Russian Federation to the United Nations.

Do you have any other information about them?

__________________________________________________________________________________________________

The Grayzone is an independent news website dedicated to original investigative journalism and analysis on politics and empire.

It was founded and is edited by award-winning journalist and author Max Blumenthal.

From January 2016 to January 2018, AlterNet.org sponsored the Grayzone Project. Since then, The Grayzone has been fully independent.

https://thegrayzone.com/about/

[Sceptic]

You do know Russia was deeply involved in Ukraine long before Nuland showed up? You're ignoring most of the story...

For the rest of the story:

How Pre-WW II Ukrainian Fascists Pioneered Brutal Terror Techniques; Later Improved By CIA, Now Ironically Taught to Descendants

And before then:

Ukrainian Nationalists have long history of anti-semitism which the Soviet Union tried to combat

[Sceptic]

@skinster

Additionally:

There was undeniable, popular support for the Crimea referendum—even Western media sources and US exit polls at the time had to concede this—it isn't even a debate, but that doesn't prevent the NATO-expansionists from using this as a talking point.

[late]

For the rest of the story:

How Pre-WW II Ukrainian Fascists Pioneered Brutal Terror Techniques; Later Improved By CIA, Now Ironically Taught to Descendants

And before then:

Ukrainian Nationalists have long history of anti-semitism which the Soviet Union tried to combat

Pre-WW2???

There is a lot of anti-semitism on the continent. It's regrettable, but that doesn't do a damn thing for you.

Russians send teams in, in waves. The first wave just takes notes. The second wave kills and bribes. The third wave intimidates whats left, and funds groups that will work for Russia. That's what happened in Crimea.

Putin has a long history of doing this shit, and in a lot of countries. Shortly after gaining power he wanted Chechen oil. But how to get it? He had his people plant fake terrorist bombs so he could pretend the army was going in for revenge. But the FSB agents got caught by the regular police.

That's right, Putin was willing to kill his own people to get what he wanted.

Now back to your propaganda...

[Sceptic]

Pre-WW2???

You wanted to talk history... Regardless, the first link was actually one of a three-part history of CIA influence and funding of those war criminals like Shukhevych, Lebed, Stetsko and Bandera (who Allen Dulles helped escape justice at the Nuremburg trials) and all their groups like the ABN and OUN-B which evolved into the Black Committees during the 2014 Maidan.

There is a lot of anti-semitism on the continent.

Yes, anti-semitism in Ukraine has always been problematic for Russia. The later article shows how even a dictator like Stalin tried to quash it. This is exactly why the CIA knew they could use Banderite nationalists as anti-Russian antagonists to destabilise the USSR, they did the same thing Mujahideen during the Soviet-Afghan wars, this is well documented, there was an interview with Polish-American Brzezinski (foreign policy advisor to the CIA) where he admits all of this and says it was a necessary evil. This was all part of his "geopolitical chessboard theory" about making sure the US retains its power as an international hegemon.

Kyiv Post even did a piece whitewashing the whole issue of Banderite nationalism, saying it is not the same thing as Neo-Nazism, and that there was no historical evidence of Bandera killing thousands of jews:

Putin has a long history of doing this shit, and in a lot of countries. Shortly after gaining power he wanted Chechen oil. But how to get it? He had his people plant fake terrorist bombs so he could pretend the army was going in for revenge. But the FSB agents got caught by the regular police.

Chechnya also had insurgents, and we know at least some of these came from Al Qaeda in Afghanistan, which we know had their roots in the Mujahideen. On the other hand, whereas Chechnya was an internal Russian conflict, we look at a country like Georgia and we know that the peace agreements between Russia and the Georgian government were maintained. Abkhazia and South Ossetia are now independent, autonomous republics. So the question is, why the hell do we want to prolong a conflict in Ukraine with lethal aid when the government was bombing their own peoples in the Donbas and they have a whole history of Neo-Nazi militias that we know would attack the Russian speaking populations and Western media are whitewashing:

Now back to your NATO propaganda...

[late]

You wanted to talk history...

Sure, stuff that has some relevance. Which is not what you are serving...

You mentioned the CIA. America has done a lot that's bad.

But we didn't invade Ukraine twice, which threatens WW3.

"If you can't blind them with your brilliance, bury them in BS."