The Ukraine ‘peace deal’ is proving to be a scam

Ukraine has a right to self defense. Everyone does, but we (US) don't have a obligation to indefinitely fund their fighting.
The US also doesn't have the right to annex sovereign nations, such as Greenland or Canada. You have such "cafeteria morality". Also, defending Ukraine's sovereignty is good for the western world's security. Allowing Ukraine's resources to fall into Russia's hands is bad for America.
 
Last edited:
The US also doesn't have the right to annex sovereign nations, such as Greenland or Canada. You have such "cafeteria morality". Also, defending Ukraine's sovereignty is good for the western world's security.
The United States is not annexing either Greenland or Canada, moron. Ukraine has already lost the war.
 
Surely you've heard of what conflicts of interest can do? But perhaps what's needed here is not theory, but some actual facts. As you may know, Biden was in charge of the Ukrainian portfolio during his time as Obama's Vice President. Are you aware how closely he was tied in to the Euromaidan coup and the politicians who replaced the elected Ukrainian President of the time, Viktor Yanukovych?

There's an article I have linked to previously that gets into the details. It can be seen here:

Quoting a relevant portion:
**
FEBRUARY
7/2/2014 – A recorded phone call between Nuland and Pyatt is leaked to the press, famously dubbed the “fuck the EU” call.

In the conversation, dated January 28th, Nuland and Pyatt discuss at length the structure of the Ukrainian cabinet once Yanukovych is gone. This is still 25 days before Yanukovych was removed from power

A poll published that same day by the Kyiv Post found more Ukrainians opposed the Maidan protests than supported them.

**

If one goes to the first link from the article above, one gets the following BBC article:

Quoting from said article below. I quote a lot, so I've highlighted the part where Biden is mentioned in orange to make it easier to find if you'd like to skip some of the text:
**
An apparently bugged phone conversation in which a senior US diplomat disparages the EU over the Ukraine crisis has been posted online. The alleged conversation between Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland and the US Ambassador to Ukraine, Geoffrey Pyatt, appeared on YouTube, external on Thursday.

[snip]

Here is a transcript, with analysis by BBC diplomatic correspondent Jonathan Marcus:

Voice thought to be Nuland's: What do you think?
  • Jonathan Marcus: At the outset it should be clear that this is a fragment of what may well be a larger phone conversation. But the US has not denied its veracity and has been quick to point a finger at the Russian authorities for being behind its interception and leak.
Voice thought to be Pyatt's: I think we're in play. The Klitschko [Vitaly Klitschko, one of three main opposition leaders] piece is obviously the complicated electron here. Especially the announcement of him as deputy prime minister and you've seen some of my notes on the troubles in the marriage right now so we're trying to get a read really fast on where he is on this stuff. But I think your argument to him, which you'll need to make, I think that's the next phone call you want to set up, is exactly the one you made to Yats [Arseniy Yatseniuk, another opposition leader]. And I'm glad you sort of put him on the spot on where he fits in this scenario. And I'm very glad that he said what he said in response.
  • Jonathan Marcus: The US says that it is working with all sides in the crisis to reach a peaceful solution, noting that "ultimately it is up to the Ukrainian people to decide their future". However this transcript suggests that the US has very clear ideas about what the outcome should be and is striving to achieve these goals. Russian spokesmen have insisted that the US is meddling in Ukraine's affairs - no more than Moscow, the cynic might say - but Washington clearly has its own game-plan. The clear purpose in leaking this conversation is to embarrass Washington and for audiences susceptible to Moscow's message to portray the US as interfering in Ukraine's domestic affairs.
Nuland: Good. I don't think Klitsch should go into the government. I don't think it's necessary, I don't think it's a good idea.

[snip]

Nuland: OK... one more wrinkle for you Geoff. [A click can be heard] I can't remember if I told you this, or if I only told Washington this, that when I talked to Jeff Feltman [United Nations Under-Secretary-General for Political Affairs] this morning, he had a new name for the UN guy Robert Serry did I write you that this morning?
  • Jonathan Marcus: An intriguing insight into the foreign policy process with work going on at a number of levels: Various officials attempting to marshal the Ukrainian opposition; efforts to get the UN to play an active role in bolstering a deal; and (as you can see below) the big guns waiting in the wings - US Vice-President Joe Biden clearly being lined up to give private words of encouragement at the appropriate moment.
Pyatt: Yeah I saw that.

Nuland: OK. He's now gotten both Serry and [UN Secretary General] Ban Ki-moon to agree that Serry could come in Monday or Tuesday. So that would be great, I think, to help glue this thing and to have the UN help glue it and, you know, Fuck the EU.
  • Jonathan Marcus: Not for the first time in an international crisis, the US expresses frustration at the EU's efforts. Washington and Brussels have not been completely in step during the Ukraine crisis. The EU is divided and to some extent hesitant about picking a fight with Moscow. It certainly cannot win a short-term battle for Ukraine's affections with Moscow - it just does not have the cash inducements available. The EU has sought to play a longer game; banking on its attraction over time. But the US clearly is determined to take a much more activist role.
Pyatt: No, exactly. And I think we've got to do something to make it stick together because you can be pretty sure that if it does start to gain altitude, that the Russians will be working behind the scenes to try to torpedo it. And again the fact that this is out there right now, I'm still trying to figure out in my mind why Yanukovych (garbled) that. In the meantime there's a Party of Regions faction meeting going on right now and I'm sure there's a lively argument going on in that group at this point. But anyway we could land jelly side up on this one if we move fast. So let me work on Klitschko and if you can just keep... we want to try to get somebody with an international personality to come out here and help to midwife this thing. The other issue is some kind of outreach to Yanukovych but we probably regroup on that tomorrow as we see how things start to fall into place.

Nuland: So on that piece Geoff, when I wrote the note [US vice-president's national security adviser Jake] Sullivan's come back to me VFR [direct to me], saying you need [US Vice-President Joe] Biden and I said probably tomorrow for an atta-boy and to get the deets [details] to stick. So Biden's willing.

Pyatt: OK. Great. Thanks.
  • Jonathan Marcus: Overall this is a damaging episode between Washington and Moscow. Nobody really emerges with any credit. The US is clearly much more involved in trying to broker a deal in Ukraine than it publicly lets on. There is some embarrassment too for the Americans given the ease with which their communications were hacked.
[snip]
**

What I -personally- would like to know is how much involvement the United States had in the Euromaidan massacre. An American military operative certainly appeared to be involved, but to date, I haven't been able to find out whether he was backed by an American intelligence agency. Regardless, it's clear that the Ukrainian President of the time was -not- involved, but was certainly framed. A good article on this subject can be seen here:

It's also clear that Christopher Boyenger continued to appear in news articles after that, such as this one:
So what! Putin invaded Ukraine! We either Support Putin or Ukraine!

The reason I brought up all of this history is to provide some context as to why Trump wouldn't be as interested as Biden in continuing the war in Ukraine. That doesn't mean that the United States' will stop contributing financial and military support, only that I believe it is waning. As to your notion that we either support Putin or Ukraine, I disagree. I think one can easily support or at least understand Putin's reasons for starting Russia's military operation in Ukraine as well as be supporting of regular Ukrainians in Ukraine as well. What I am -not- supportive of is the warmongers who are the cause of this war.

It has frequently been said in the western mainstream media that Russia's incursion into Ukraine was "unprovoked". Do you believe this?
 
The reason I brought up all of this history is to provide some context as to why Trump wouldn't be as interested as Biden in continuing the war in Ukraine. That doesn't mean that the United States' will stop contributing financial and military support, only that I believe it is waning. As to your notion that we either support Putin or Ukraine, I disagree. I think one can easily support or at least understand Putin's reasons for starting Russia's military operation in Ukraine as well as be supporting of regular Ukrainians in Ukraine as well. What I am -not- supportive of is the warmongers who are the cause of this war.

It has frequently been said in the western mainstream media that Russia's incursion into Ukraine was "unprovoked". Do you believe this?
Margot believes in this propaganda and in these sources as a Holy Oracle.
She mindlessly chants whatever the Democrats tell her to chant.
 
Wow. Unless you're being sarcastic, I agree with you for once! Unfortunately, trump loves him some Putin and feels "might makes right". No way will trump get tough on Putin.
Oil isn't going any lower. Putin has been forced to sell to China/India at bargain basement prices. By the fall his economy is predicted to finally come apart at the seams. Which is why trump will ease sanctions before summer.
 
Because I don't need to care; the former Presidents didn't start the war, you stupid tard, Putin did. It's not about Ukraine it's about shutting down Russian imperialism, a 300 year issue for Europe and the ME. Uneducated dumbasses like yourself never bother with facts, you're just here to parrot what you're told, is all.

The US also doesn't have the right to annex sovereign nations, such as Greenland or Canada. You have such "cafeteria morality". Also, defending Ukraine's sovereignty is good for the western world's security. Allowing Ukraine's resources to fall into Russia's hands is bad for America.
Stating the obvious has no effect on ideologues. Their 'brain trust' tells them what to parrot, so that's what they do. In the case of Ukraine, Trump is going against the majority of Republicans and catering to the isolationist nutjobs, which of course is odd considering his policies elsewhere, especially in the ME and Asia and here in our own hemisphere.

But nobody's perfect 100% of the time; in the aggregate he's doing great. Even the left wing industrial unions are getting on board. He will achieve more national unity in the next year or two than the last 60 years combined, hence all the crying and sniveling from assorted deviants, commies, Russian socks, etc.
 
And now he 'couldn't care less' if prices don't go down.
I know. trumptards are like "Lucy and the football". "No way can he do us harm again.. he's learned from last time, right?".

It's so much worse than the first time, due mainly to the fact no current Republican has the balls to stand up to his insanity".

Every GOP interview praising trump reminds me of a hostage video!
 
Oil isn't going any lower. Putin has been forced to sell to China/India at bargain basement prices. By the fall his economy is predicted to finally come apart at the seams. Which is why trump will ease sanctions before summer.
Yep, trump fancies himself Putin's BFF. He's like a little boy starved for Putin's praise. As long as Putin keeps giving trump fake praise there is no way trump will do anything to hurt Putin.
 
The reason I brought up all of this history is to provide some context as to why Trump wouldn't be as interested as Biden in continuing the war in Ukraine. That doesn't mean that the United States' will stop contributing financial and military support, only that I believe it is waning. As to your notion that we either support Putin or Ukraine, I disagree. I think one can easily support or at least understand Putin's reasons for starting Russia's military operation in Ukraine as well as be supporting of regular Ukrainians in Ukraine as well. What I am -not- supportive of is the warmongers who are the cause of this war.

It has frequently been said in the western mainstream media that Russia's incursion into Ukraine was "unprovoked". Do you believe this?
Although walking away would have been the right thing to do, but Trump went with the fiction that this is a war between Russian and Ukraine and tried to build on top of that the Trump is a Peacemaker brand by playing the role of negotiating a deal between them....

And now he is stuck, because the Russians are not willing to play that con game, they want what they have always wanted, a negotiated deal between NATO (Which is America, the Europeans dont matter) and Russia.
 
Back
Top