Into a former Soviet republic after it had been toppled by an American-backed colour revolution? It's like denouncing American military expansion after they invade Alaska.
Ukraine has been an independent country for 32 years.
American-backed colour revolution
American had nothing to do with it. The Ukrainian people were fed up with being ruled by a Russian puppet.
It's like denouncing American military expansion after they invade Alaska.
Alaska is an American state. The better analogy would be if the US invaded the Philippines now in 2023 after the Philippines has been an independent country for many decades.
We have the Assistant Secretary of State on tape deciding who should be installed as the new leader.
The Ukrainian people were fed up with being ruled by a Russian puppet.
The Ukrainian people didn't revolt, Kievans did. Seven times more people voted for the Russian puppet than the guy installed in his place, but Yanukovych's support was out in the boondocks while Yatsenyuk's was concentrated in the capital. Imagine if 90% Democrat Washington, D.C. overthrew Trump - would that have been an expression of the will of the people?
We have the Assistant Secretary of State on tape deciding who should be installed as the new leader.
No, that's not what she said at all. She was talking to another person in the State Dept and described who she liked as candidates, which is an ordinary call for a diplomat to have. She didn't say anything about installing anyone.
The person who won, won as a result of a public vote taken by the Ukrainian parliament, not because of anything Nuland said in private.
The Ukrainian people didn't revolt, Kievans did.
No, large parts of the country did. More success was had in pro-EU areas and less in pro-Russia areas.
Seven times more people voted for the Russian puppet than the guy installed in his place
Yanukovych only got 48.95% in 2010 with 12,481,266, narrowly beating Yulia Tymoshenko who got 45.47%, to prevent her from running again.
The 2014 Ukrainian presidential election wasn't a 2-way race, it was a 5-way race, yet Petro Poroshenko still won with 54.70% & 9,857,308 votes. The vote total was SLIGHTLY lower (not 7x as you claim) because Russia invaded Crimea & Donbass, so those areas did not vote.
Yanukovych's support was out in the boondocks while Yatsenyuk's was concentrated in the capital.
I don't know why you are talking about comparing a President to Prime Minister Yatsenyuk when they are different positions & Petro Poroshenko, winner of the 2014 presidential election, is the relevant person to be talking about.
Imagine if 90% Democrat Washington, D.C. overthrew Trump - would that have been an expression of the will of the people?
Imagine if months later, they held a nationwide vote for President and someone else was democratically elected.
yes, "that have been an expression of the will of the people"
Ukraine has been an independent country for 32 years.
It was independent between 1992 and 2014. That's 22 years. It was part of Russia for over 200 years, so that still outweighs that.
The Ukrainian people were fed up with being ruled by a Russian puppet.
Yanukovich was no puppet, he was actually elected unlike the thugs who were installed at the command of Victoria Nuland.
Alaska is an American state
It is? It's been part of America for far shorter than Little Russia has been part of Russia, so Russia has greater claim to Ukraine than you do to Alaska.
The better analogy would be if the US invaded the Philippines now in 2023 after the Philippines has been an independent country for many decades.
Philippines are not American, either ethnically or linguistically. The best analogy is the Confederacy. It's funny how you don't give your own states the right to secede, but always demand for others the 'right' to secede in order to weaken other countries and wreck them.
And you claimed that Serbia invaded KOSOVO, and that Russia invaded CHECHNYA. Basically, it's an "invasion" whenever it suits your empire, and it's not whenever it doesn't.
I fail to see how the Russian invasion of Crimea & its clandestine invasion of parts of the Donbass in 2014 somehow ended Ukrainian statehood in that year. If so, why did Putin invade in 2022 if it wasn't independent anymore?
Oh, wait, you mean... that it was the US... LOL for fuck's sake. I'm sorry but if I'm not going to entertain the delusions of a tranny, I'm not going to entertain yours. It would be EASIER to believe that Rachel Levine is a woman than to believe your bullshit.
Yanukovich was no puppet
He was, he literally fled to Putin the moment people started to protest against him.
unlike the thugs who were installed at the command of Victoria Nuland.
Except they weren't thugs and they weren't installed, and your only "evidence" is a hacked phone call in which Nuland says she likes the already-favored candidate and thought he would be a good leader. A far cry from what you claim she said.
It is?
Alaska has been part of the US since 1867.
Ukraine has NOT been part of Russia since 1917.
Shit that happened back hundreds of years ago doesn't matter. If you want to play that game, Russia needs to submit to Mongolian rule.
Russia has greater claim to Ukraine than you do to Alaska.
Literally retarded.
Philippines are not American, either ethnically or linguistically.
Ukrainians are not Russian, either ethnically or linguistically.
Oh, wait, you mean... that it was the US... LOL for fuck's sake. I'm sorry but if I'm not going to entertain the delusions of a tranny, I'm not going to entertain yours. It would be EASIER to believe that Rachel Levine is a woman than to believe your bullshit.
The delusions of a tranny are easily refuted. There is a very good reason that you can't refute the fact that the Maidan coup was America's doing.
He was, he literally fled to Putin the moment people started to protest against him.
He fled because he feared for his life? You were assuring me that this was Very Democratic. And if you flee to a given country because America and EU sponsored mobs are threatening your life, does that make you a puppet of that country?
It's possible to be "elected", especially with cheating
Please show me the "cheatng" that Yanukovich engaged in in 2011, when his opponents controlled the state.
and to also be a puppet.
Well yeah, Zelensky was elected, after all.
Except they weren't thugs and they weren't installed, and your only "evidence" is a hacked phone call in which Nuland says she likes the already-favored candidate and thought he would be a good leader.
Your only evidence is a hacked phone call from before the coup in which Nuland appoints someone who became PM after the coup!
And what was John McCain doing in Kiev?
You claim not to be a neocon, but you defend Victoria Nuland to the hilt.
Alaska has been part of the US since 1867.
Ukraine has NOT been part of Russia since 1917.
Nope, 1992. You know full well that the constituent republicus in the USSR had no autonomy, and that Ukraine then was as independent from Moscow as it is now from Washington. So between the late 19th century and 1992. That is 200 years. From 1867 to this point is not 200 years.
Into a former Soviet republic after it had been toppled by an American-backed colour revolution? It's like denouncing American military expansion after they invade Alaska.
Ukraine has been an independent country for 32 years.
American had nothing to do with it. The Ukrainian people were fed up with being ruled by a Russian puppet.
Alaska is an American state. The better analogy would be if the US invaded the Philippines now in 2023 after the Philippines has been an independent country for many decades.
We have the Assistant Secretary of State on tape deciding who should be installed as the new leader.
The Ukrainian people didn't revolt, Kievans did. Seven times more people voted for the Russian puppet than the guy installed in his place, but Yanukovych's support was out in the boondocks while Yatsenyuk's was concentrated in the capital. Imagine if 90% Democrat Washington, D.C. overthrew Trump - would that have been an expression of the will of the people?
No, that's not what she said at all. She was talking to another person in the State Dept and described who she liked as candidates, which is an ordinary call for a diplomat to have. She didn't say anything about installing anyone.
The person who won, won as a result of a public vote taken by the Ukrainian parliament, not because of anything Nuland said in private.
No, large parts of the country did. More success was had in pro-EU areas and less in pro-Russia areas.
Yanukovych only got 48.95% in 2010 with 12,481,266, narrowly beating Yulia Tymoshenko who got 45.47%, to prevent her from running again.
The 2014 Ukrainian presidential election wasn't a 2-way race, it was a 5-way race, yet Petro Poroshenko still won with 54.70% & 9,857,308 votes. The vote total was SLIGHTLY lower (not 7x as you claim) because Russia invaded Crimea & Donbass, so those areas did not vote.
I don't know why you are talking about comparing a President to Prime Minister Yatsenyuk when they are different positions & Petro Poroshenko, winner of the 2014 presidential election, is the relevant person to be talking about.
Imagine if months later, they held a nationwide vote for President and someone else was democratically elected.
yes, "that have been an expression of the will of the people"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Ukrainian_presidential_election
It was independent between 1992 and 2014. That's 22 years. It was part of Russia for over 200 years, so that still outweighs that.
Yanukovich was no puppet, he was actually elected unlike the thugs who were installed at the command of Victoria Nuland.
It is? It's been part of America for far shorter than Little Russia has been part of Russia, so Russia has greater claim to Ukraine than you do to Alaska.
Philippines are not American, either ethnically or linguistically. The best analogy is the Confederacy. It's funny how you don't give your own states the right to secede, but always demand for others the 'right' to secede in order to weaken other countries and wreck them.
And you claimed that Serbia invaded KOSOVO, and that Russia invaded CHECHNYA. Basically, it's an "invasion" whenever it suits your empire, and it's not whenever it doesn't.
I fail to see how the Russian invasion of Crimea & its clandestine invasion of parts of the Donbass in 2014 somehow ended Ukrainian statehood in that year. If so, why did Putin invade in 2022 if it wasn't independent anymore?
Oh, wait, you mean... that it was the US... LOL for fuck's sake. I'm sorry but if I'm not going to entertain the delusions of a tranny, I'm not going to entertain yours. It would be EASIER to believe that Rachel Levine is a woman than to believe your bullshit.
He was, he literally fled to Putin the moment people started to protest against him.
It's possible to be "elected", especially with cheating, and to also be a puppet. Russia had a huge amount of subversive influence in Ukraine at the time and Yanukovich threw his biggest opponent in prison to silence the opposition.
Except they weren't thugs and they weren't installed, and your only "evidence" is a hacked phone call in which Nuland says she likes the already-favored candidate and thought he would be a good leader. A far cry from what you claim she said.
Alaska has been part of the US since 1867.
Ukraine has NOT been part of Russia since 1917.
Shit that happened back hundreds of years ago doesn't matter. If you want to play that game, Russia needs to submit to Mongolian rule.
Literally retarded.
Ukrainians are not Russian, either ethnically or linguistically.
The delusions of a tranny are easily refuted. There is a very good reason that you can't refute the fact that the Maidan coup was America's doing.
He fled because he feared for his life? You were assuring me that this was Very Democratic. And if you flee to a given country because America and EU sponsored mobs are threatening your life, does that make you a puppet of that country?
Please show me the "cheatng" that Yanukovich engaged in in 2011, when his opponents controlled the state.
Well yeah, Zelensky was elected, after all.
Your only evidence is a hacked phone call from before the coup in which Nuland appoints someone who became PM after the coup!
And what was John McCain doing in Kiev?
You claim not to be a neocon, but you defend Victoria Nuland to the hilt.
Nope, 1992. You know full well that the constituent republicus in the USSR had no autonomy, and that Ukraine then was as independent from Moscow as it is now from Washington. So between the late 19th century and 1992. That is 200 years. From 1867 to this point is not 200 years.