he was citing historical precedent for Ukraine and Crimea.
Russia has a legitimate case for war, but this isn't it. Point to the pro-Russian candidate winning the 2010 election, being overthrown on the grounds that his opponent's supporters lived within rioting distance of the capital and his did not with the direct support of the US State Department via Victoria Nuland (in violation of the Budapest memorandum), the subsequent killings of thousands of ethnic Russians and the revolutionary government's declaration that two out of three democratically elected presidents are traitors against their anti-democratic rule. Point out that the American-backed coup to force Ukraine into the Western sphere of influence isn't the same as Finland or Poland choosing of their own volition to side with NATO but part of a deliberate strategy of regime change by Obama's State Department starting with Russia's allies in Ukraine and Syria that would have ended with the overthrow of Russia itself.
Russia has a legitimate case for war, but this isn't it. Point to the pro-Russian candidate winning the 2010 election, being overthrown on the grounds that his opponent's supporters lived within rioting distance of the capital and his did not with the direct support of the US State Department via Victoria Nuland (in violation of the Budapest memorandum), the subsequent killings of thousands of ethnic Russians and the revolutionary government's declaration that two out of three democratically elected presidents are traitors against their anti-democratic rule. Point out that the American-backed coup to force Ukraine into the Western sphere of influence isn't the same as Finland or Poland choosing of their own volition to side with NATO but part of a deliberate strategy of regime change by Obama's State Department starting with Russia's allies in Ukraine and Syria that would have ended with the overthrow of Russia itself.