Did the USA play a significantly negative role in events leading to Ukraine invasion?
-
13-03-2022 2:46pm#1
Disclosure: main title edited from “war in Ukraine is primarily USA fault”
Is this a conspiracy or is there strong merit to the accusation?
I put this in here because quite frankly I’m not sure many people want to really explore or understand how we are where we are outside of “Putin is bad, end of”. Even saying that I feel I have to add that the war in Ukraine is a tragedy and absolutely nothing condones what Putin is doing (even if the Americans have been adding fuel to tensions).
Ive been reading and watching different sources on the topic. I don’t have any knowledge in Ukrainian and Russian history so I’m not able to argue or rebut things that are said by more informed folk.
I’ve read a piece that talks about what looks like a copy and paste USA proxy war. From our perspective (because it’s close to Europe) this is knew, but it’s all part of the game for the US.
One question that really is a proper conspiracy is whether or not this conflict actually suits the Americans? Europe is generally considered one of the strongest allies (culturally and historically) to the US but we aren’t strong from a military perspective.
Many scholars would say that China is gonna be the biggest challange to USAs super power dominance. A war on European fringes may end up strengthening USA alliance but more importantly (in this theory) force the EU to start building up its attacking capabilities.
I generally try to take a neutral stance when my understanding on something is limited. I can’t help but feel on some level we are all being played a bit because the truth is difficult to ascertain. Do people honestly think this is simply an autocrat who craves power or land? Is it really that simple or is that just an easier and more comforting way of trying to understand what’s going on without actually fully understanding what’s going on?
And before anybody attacks me, I’m asking a question, I’m not implying it’s correct , considering the shocking images coming from Ukraine I didn’t want anybody thinking I want to take away from the war which is why this is in the CT forum.
Post edited by Big Bag of Chips on8
Comments
-
Historically can say it's the legacy of Nato-led expansion that has led to this conflict. End of the day it's not good look for Russia to see these pictures of kids and children leaving in a hurry to escape on trains and buses and seeing young and old killed in Ukraine. There is a bit of human denial to be seen on certain threads. Never saw this outpour of despair or grief for people who got killed in Yemen or Syria or countries elsewhere. Humans living in Europe tend to attach more significance to conflicts be considered closer to home.
The war in Ukraine is dangerous though as it has world-impacting complications. I do believe US influence in helping the Maidan coup succeed has made Russia more suspicious of the west intentions. Ukraine may have felt safer in a relationship with the West after the coup, but it actually only brought about a war. The best policy for Ukraine was to stay neutral unfortunately they pushed and pushed for closer ties with Nato and Putin as we see now willing to destroy Ukraine and make it a puppet state then it be allowed to join a military alliance that's hostile.
Think west was very naive to think Russia would just allow Ukraine to come to a hostile state. The US is partly to blame but you have never seen those headlines, plus never now as Russia engaged in an aggressive war. But Putin has got all the fuel he needs to sell this war to the Russian people. “See my comrades the west giving weapons to Ukraine to kill Russian soldiers there not neutral!!!
I think the war is bad for all. Russia and the west.
16 -
We are talking here about a butcher who revels in his work, not someone who just does it for a living.
Nato were never threatening Russia by their expansion as it was always done in a defensive capacity and not offensive. Countless nations have military and bases from other countries within their borders and that's being going on since WW2. It doesn't imply that the intention is to intimidate or otherwise. Ukraine was never a threat to Russia, and was a long, long way off from joining Nato, if ever. And the USA have enough of their own problems so I don't see them as having provoked anything. Russian agents going around the world assassinating people and killing them with polonium and the like have been doing the provoking.
Putin has had thoughts of restoring Russia to its former USSR glory likely since before he even came to power. These thoughts have been festering away within him for years, and he's built such an unopposed seat of power for himself with suppression in his own backyard that he now believes his vision for former glories (liberally sprinkled with paranoia) is both justified and achievable in his mind, and would cement his place in Russian folklore. He'd come to believe he was invincible. Exactly as with Hitler, it's effectively power gone to the head. He's raped his country of cash and more than three-quarters of it is poverty stricken and still living in the Stone Age. Time to turn his attentions elsewhere. You can add that to the fact that during his tenancy as president he's seen the importance of Russia on the world stage diminish, as the EU flourishes in tandem with China and the West becomes more and more free. He feels left behind, but self-importance and arrogance compels him forwards into yet another confrontation - only this time, realising that Russia simply doesn't carry the weight any more, he uses the nuclear threat.
People attempting to imply or analyse other reasoning for his actions would do well to simply remember one fact: there was absolutely no reason at that time to even remotely legitimise an unprovoked attack and start a war with a country that had done nothing to warrant it. To hypothesise that it is primarily USA's fault would be ridiculous.
It's the classic little man syndrome with an inferiority complex. Hey, don't look over my head. Look at me.
16 -
That’s not absolutely true., Joining Nato means are permitted to be upgraded, have all the best weapons Nato has in its arsenal. That means patriots for anti-air, all defensive and attack ballistic missiles, new aircraft, tanks, ships the whole lot. That would interfere with Russia's security defensive response in a time of war.
I agree somewhat with what you detailed.,
Russia sadly feels isolated from the west and partly is based on the legacy leftover from the cold war period. East vs West.,. Unfortunate fact in the back mind of these people there is always the fear west wants to colonize Russia and make it an American puppet state. Naivety was thinking Putin would do nothing and just let Nato keep providing weapons to the Ukraine government prior to the invasion.
For Russia( their mind) there fighting against an invalid Ukraine government has a problem with Russian / Ukrainian-born people in Crimea and Donbas who want to have a separate part of space to call their own and be left alone. West and the rest of Ukraine have their intention a closer relationship and make Russia weakened ( don't think that is any way true your naive to world politics, especially in the United States).
Do I agree with Putin killing civilians to complete his aims ( no war is awful and tragic) but it's just silly to have opinions that the west never does this stuff to others around the world too. Iraq war in 2003 was a complete fabrication, make-believe, yet you see the difference is what taken place against Russia. in terms of economic war and other stuff. We justify our opinions a lot because it country we dislike rather than look at why is it there going to war there and gone mad.
14 -
Just so people are aware, cheerful here is an avowed and proud holocaust denier.
That's about the level of knowledge and honesty you can expect from him.
21 -
@Cheerful S - That’s not absolutely true., Joining Nato means are permitted to be upgraded, have all the best weapons Nato has in its arsenal. That means patriots for anti-air, all defensive and attack ballistic missiles, new aircraft, tanks, ships the whole lot. That would interfere with Russia's security defensive response in a time of war.
But it's fine for Russia to have 6,000 nuclear warheads?
You sound like a Putin apologist. My conversation with you ends here.
15 -
Advertisement
-
That would interfere with Russia's security defensive response in a time of war.
what war? who on the nato side wanted a war? the only one looking to start a war was Putin and you think it is wrong for a country like Ukraine to want to be able to defend itself properly. as somebody else said, you are just parroting putin talking points. you deserve your own spot on RT.
8 -
Plus I don't buy into the Putin Hitler description. Putin held power since 1999 his wars have pretty much stayed in the east. After some fighting he agreed to ceasefires and peace was re-established in Georgia. He could have taken the entire country. You can see his mindset very defensive in nature, Syria was probably the only war Russia moved outside the east but the war they fought there was mostly an air campaign to protect an ally. Putin's mindset is defending Russia from security threats, Hitler's mindset was to take land and make a greater Germany for its people plus he hated humans with different ideologies and religions Putin was not a hitler.
Putin moves against Poland and Baltic states don't matter we are in a whole different ball game. Russia accepted those red lines for a long time. Ukraine, many sensible people knew that would spark war but how fast it happened shocked me never expected this soon. Putin does the unthinkable and crosses the west red lines. Then he be met with the full force of Nato. That's WW3- so even if you believe the USSR bring back narrative it's never going to work.
7 -
Do you do not realize Nato was sending military observers and weapons to Ukraine prior to an Invasion?
The only difference they have increased now since the war began
All these weapons are used against people Russa supports..
Ukraine could defend itself against Donbas without NATO help., nonsense suggest otherwise.
Minsk agreement was signed in 2014. Russia ceased military operations for eight years,.
Ukraine's government never accepted the states as separate entities and both groups remained hostile and Ukraine started to move closer to Nato., Doesnt matter what you think Ukraine the fairly thick to think Nato membership was good idea. Where Nato now? Now Russia is involved in an aggressive war to takeover the entire country. Instead of fostering good ties with West and Russia and accepting some realities had occurred that made unification impossible,they chose this? Frankly your mindset got Ukraine in this hole that could bring the whole global system down with it if WW3 occurs.
6 -
It's kind of sad that on a site for debate, that this kind of topic has to be put into a conspiracy theory forum.
And already, less than 9 posts in the words "putin apologist" has been muttered.
I was called a Putin apologist and a supporter of the invasion because I said I was trying to understand why Putin decided to invade Ukraine. Apparantly wondering exactly why Putin did it makes you a supporter of his now.
32 -
When Ukrainians overthrew Yanukovych, individuals on the internet (and Russian propaganda) blamed the West
When Putin annexed Crimea, individuals on the internet (and Russian propaganda) blamed the West
When Putin sparked an uprising in S.E. Ukraine, the same
When Litvinenko was poisoned with polonium, when the Skripals were poisoned with Novichok, when Navalny was poisoned - the same
Note the pattern?
Apparently Putin is always the victim of a grand Western plot, okay, in your own words can you sum up what the conspiracy is this time? (Not watching a 1 hour 30 minute video)
On a side note, almost every one of these types of conspiracies is prefaced by: "I don't know much about the whole thing, but I have a 'feeling' something isn't right" - that's not a coincidence
Post edited by Dohnjoe on8 -
Advertisement
-
People are allowed to feel what they like about the war. I understand their side too. Not good looking at residential cities destroyed and people murdered by Russian forces. Fact is Russia is involved in aggressive war today and uninvolved ordinary citizens people are caught up in it. That's the real tragedy of this. Global states and Leaders don't often make good decisions and we see the consequences of it on TV today. People choose sides. I can see the west side but I hear Russia's motives for war. A lot of people don't and that's a complication. Don't want to be objective it only gets worse and worse.
War with Russia that moves into other countries is WW3 and that's international. I don't see any good leaders about to negotiate with Putin. Biden asleep his terrible. That's what worries me Biden's worst possible president to have at this time to return Russia back to the negotiating table. Less hope Ukraine make an alternative wise choice that country getting destroyed and be better to accept a real peace.
I dont support the Putin war think it's bad for everyone. We need to bring down the madness level before it's too late.
4 -
And most e.g. anti-vaxxers claim they are just "trying to understand" vaccines or "just concerned" about vaccines. When they clearly aren't. Some people don't realise how obvious their agendas are.
12 -
@Pussyhands - I was called a Putin apologist and a supporter of the invasion because I said I was trying to understand why Putin decided to invade Ukraine.
Yes, and you got banned from the "Russia" thread because of it. Is it too difficult for you to understand why?... or are the moderators as well as every poster on here wrong, and you're right?
There's really nothing to understand. Whatever Putin's reasons for his invasion (I've outlined my thoughts earlier in the thread) they are simply not justified. End of. He's delusional. The West were not threatening him in any way, and his assertion that he feels Russia is being threatened is nothing but pure fantasy in an addled, paranoid and dangerous mind.
@Cheerful S, in his above posts, states it is wrong for Ukraine to be militarily armed by Nato. Yet he makes no mention - and just seems to accept it as matter of fact - that Russia can have some of the most powerful weapons on earth and 6,000 nuclear warheads. Now in my mind, and I would say most people on this forum, that would imply he's either a Russian sympathiser, apologist, plain stupid or a deliberate troll.
apologist
noun
a person who offers an argument in defence of something controversial.
You come across as a reasonably intelligent guy. Why do you feel you have to understand Putin's reasoning, whilst hundreds of innocent women and children are being killed each day on his orders. Cant you just accept that he's evil?
Putin wants you to come over to the Dark Side. Don't do it
LukePussy.Otherwise carry on digging your own grave to bury your credibility in.
Post edited by goldenmick on2 -
Most of the powerful states have had nuclear weapons for decades including Russia. What point you making exactly here? What does that make me a Putin puppet did not bring it up?
Russia never declared war against the West. The West has decided to join this quarrel between people who have shared history.
Why are we messing about in a country that is of such importance to a country like Russia.
What if Mexico and Canada joined a Russian alliance. What kind of response would you expect from Washington. Would they just look on or send in the army to prevent it?
We nearly had WW3 over Soviet missiles in Cuba in the 60s and Cuba 800 miles from Washington. Here is Ukraine right next door to Russia attempting to join a hostile alliance that has primary aim of destroying Russia. That you dont get why Nato membership would be problematic shows how deaf and dumb people are nowadays.
6 -
It's not us you you need to persuade. But the Ukrainians that Putin raining fire and death on them is a good thing for them.
If it's such a good thing why is it censored in Russia.
1 -
You haven't a clue why I was banned from that thread? So how can you act like you do?
Nah I'm of average intelligence.
As for why I like to understand why? Why wouldn't I? Do you not like to understand reasons for things happening? When that German wings plane crashed into mountains, did you not want to find out why he did it?
Did you not want to understand why Joe o reilly killed his wife? Wanting to understand the reasons doesn't mean you support the actions.
7 -
So you don’t want to watch the video or read the link to a just a 7 page discussion on events? I’ve put up links to the information to allow you to refute them with rational points and facts.
You have just insulted me, accused me of being like anti Vaxxers (I’m not and you can see the that on covid threads, I’ve nothing to hide) and having an agenda without any evidence. Is that how you engage people? By insulting them if they don’t share their view of the world and events exactly how you do?
5 -
It's a simple request, describe the conspiracy in your own words. Who is behind it? what is the plan? and so on.
I don't see any insults in my reply to you?
1 -
@Cheerful S - Here is Ukraine right next door to Russia attempting to join a hostile alliance that has primary aim of destroying Russia.
@Pussyhands - I'm of average intelligence...
Did you not want to understand why Joe o reilly killed his wife?
**makes mental note to self**... Remember not to inadvertently visit the Conspiracy Theories forum again as it has more nuts and fruit loops than a family box of breakfast cereal.
12 -
America promotes democracy, Putin objects to any political threats to his dictatorship. Is any of that a surprise to anyone.
0 -
Advertisement
-
-
No it was not.
The major issue is that Ukraine has always been caught between half of its leadership looking west and the other half east, it goes back all the way to the Cossacks, through the Russian Civil War, WW2 and beyond independence. Look at any election map pre-Maidan and you'll see that people on the east side of the Dnieper tend to vote for the pro-Russian candidate and vice versa. The most dangerous part being that it was always split near enough 50/50 to mean that even if it's democratic, you're going against the choice of a huge part of the country.
The flashpoint comes in 2013 when the the western part of the country wanted to apply for EU trade deal, however even the 'eastern' president and his parliament were onboard. Once it started to look like a reality though, the Russians panicked and pressured the country and president to not sign any agreement. This leads to the Maidan protests, which were again 50/50 supported by the general populace. The protests lead to violent repression and violent protest which ends in the exile of the president, the eastern idea that it was all a western backed coup and the Russian invasions.
Was it all America's fault? No the Russians blocked the EU trade agreement which lead to the protests. Were the protests America's fault? Again no, it was the attempt to aggressively and then violently repress the protests which ultimately lead to their success. Is it America's fault for supplying the Ukraine with weapons since then? Obviously no, they needed every one of those weapons to protect themselves.
3 -
So you weren’t accusing me of “having an agenda” or being “an anti vaxxer” type? I know you didn’t quote mr directly but you made a general sweeping post about what you call “types” of posters.
Heres a self reflection challenge for you. Imagine I’m an average person (yes an actual person) , that doesn’t have an agenda and is simply asking a question and looking for different opinions and preferably factual (not subjective insults) information. How do you think your hostile posts come across even to the casual observer?
Here’s another one. Do you think if a person doesn’t share your entire narrative on this topic they have to have an agenda? That they have to be a Putin apologist?
You are asking me to describe the conspiracy, I’ve done that and said I find it hard to sift through the propaganda. You just aren’t arsed trying to understand anybody who doesn’t share your views, you just want to spoil discussion and shout down people for some reason.
9 -
Bit of a weird comment to make considering the amount of people who watch series and are interested in finding out why things happen.
Joe O'Reilly documentary on RTE was watched by loads.
Madeline McCann netflix series had big viewing numbers
I wonder if all the parents/siblings/children of people who committed suicide without reason are weirdos too because they'd like to know why they did it?
2 -
Carry on twisting things to your own agenda, child.
Black is black and white is white, but you want to question it instead of just accepting it.
Questioning the reasoning behind atrocities does nothing to bring innocent lost lives back.
People like you are a waste of space and take a perverse pleasure in continually stirring the pot. You need to be given a permanent ban not just thread bans.
0 -
Thanks for discussing the topic not attacking the poster.
Would you mind commenting on following:
The US agenda was made plain in September 2013, when Carl Gershman, head of the CIA-tied National Endowment for Democracy, declared that"Ukraine is the biggest prize." If Ukraine could be pulled into the US-led order, Gershman explained, "Putin may find himself on the losing end not just in the near abroad but within Russia itself." In short, in Washington's eyes, regime change in Kiev could redound to Moscow as well.
An opportunity to claim the prize arrived two months later with the outbreak of Ukraine's Maidan protests. The Maidan is commonly described in the US as a "democratic revolution." That is a fair term for its initial weeks, when tens of thousands of Ukrainians gathered in Kiev's Maidan square to protest rampant government corruption and to support European integration. But these protests were soon co-opted by Ukraine's far-right forces, who turned a people's movement into a violent campaign for regime change. Maidan culminated in what George Friedman, head of the US intelligence-tied firm Stratfor, reportedly described as "the most blatant coup in history."
The spark for the Maidan protests was a decision by President Viktor Yanukovych to back out of a trade deal offered by the European Union. The conventional narrative is that Yanukovych was bullied by his chief patron in Moscow. In reality, Yanukovych was hoping to develop ties to Europe, and "cajoled and bullied anyone who pushed for Ukraine to have closer ties to Russia," Reuters reported at the time. But the Ukrainian president got cold feet once he read the EU deal's fine print. Ukraine would not only have to curb its deep cultural and economic ties to Russia, but accept harsh austerity measures such as "increasing the retirement age and freezing pensions and wages." Far from improving the lives of average Ukrainians, these demands only would have ensured deprivation and Yanukovych's political demise.
Russia capitalized on Yanukovych's jitters by offering a more generous package of $15 billion and threatening to withhold payments if the EU's terms were accepted. Contrary to subsequent Western narratives, Russia did not demand "a commitment to join the [Russian-led] customs union or any other evident quid pro quo," according to the New York Times.
Unlike its Western counterparts, Russia also did not demand that Ukraine abandon its European ambitions. Yanukovich, the Times reported in December 2013, "has insisted that Ukraine would ultimately move toward Europe and even consider signing the accords at a later date." But there was one obstacle: "a senior European Union official has said those discussions have been cut off."
By that point, rather than help broker a compromise, the US had swung its weight behind far-right opposition figures who had taken command of the Maidan.
As far-right groups occupied government buildings across Ukraine, Washington's bipartisan Cold Warriors swept in to claim the prize. Senators John McCain and Chris Murphy visited the central protest encampment in Kiev and stood beside Oleh Tyahnybok, leader of the far-right Svoboda party. Tyahnybok had once urged his supporters to fight the "Muscovite-Jewish mafia running Ukraine."
"Ukraine will make Europe better and Europe will make Ukraine better," McCain promised the crowd. Giving away the game, Murphy told CNNthat the Senators' mission was to "bring about a peaceful transition here."
The Senators were joined in Kiev by senior State Department official Victoria Nuland, who now occupies a similar position under Biden. On February 4th, an intercepted phone call, presumably recorded and released by Russian or Ukrainian intelligence, exposed Nuland's plan for bringing the "transition" about. Speaking to Geoffrey Pyatt, the US Ambassador to Ukraine, Nuland laid out how the US would back a new Ukrainian government, fronted by Maidan leaders and handpicked by Washington. The State Department responded to the leak by dismissing it as "Russian tradecraft."
Although Nuland had cavorted, along with McCain and Murphy, with Tyahnybok in Maidan square, the fascist leader was deemed unsuitable for office. The anti-Semitic Russophobe, Nuland worried, would be a "problem", and better "on the outside."
Also discussed was former boxer and opposition figure Vitaly Klitschko, but he was quickly ruled out. "I don’t think Klitsch should go into government," Nuland said. "I don’t think it’s necessary. I don’t think it’s a good idea." One reason was Klitschko's proximity to the European Union. Despite McCain's warm words for the EU before the Maidan crowd, the Europeans had annoyed Washington by supporting a compromise proposal that would leave Yanukovych in power. As Nuland put it to Pyatt: "**** the EU."
The two US officials settled on technocrat Arseniy Yatsenyuk. "Yats is the guy," Nuland decreed. The only outstanding matter was securing the blessing of the then-Vice President, Joe Biden and his then-senior advisor, Jake Sullivan, "for an atta-boy and to get the deets [details] to stick."
The deets were realized days later. On February 20th, snipers fatally shot dozens of protesters in Maidan square. The massacre was blamed on Yanukovych's forces, setting off a new round of violence and threats on Yanukovych's life. In another intercepted phone call that emerged weeks later, Estonian foreign minister Urmas Paet told EU foreign secretary Catherine Ashton that he suspected pro-Maidan forces of culpability. In Kiev, Paet reported, "there is now stronger and stronger understanding that behind the snipers, it was not Yanukovych, but it was somebody from the new [opposition] coalition."
The University of Ottawa's Ivan Katchanovski, who has conducted exhaustive research on the massacre, concurs with Paet's initial suspicion. The attack, he concludes, was "perpetrated principally by members of the Maidan opposition, specifically its far-right elements."
On February 21st, a European-brokered comprise agreement between Yanukovich and the opposition called for the formation of a new coalition government and early elections. Yanukovich's security forces immediately withdrew from the Maidan area. But the encampment's far-right base had no interest in compromise. "We don’t want to see Yanukovych in power," Maidan squadron leader Vladimir Parasyuk declared. "… And unless this morning you come up with a statement demanding that he steps down, then we will take arms and go, I swear." Yanukovich, no longer protected by his armed forces and under heavy threat, got the message and fled to Russia.
A new government was quickly formed, despite lacking the sufficient parliamentary majority. This violation of Ukrainian law was of little consequence: with the Nuland-anointed Yatsenyuk named Ukraine's new Prime Minister, the United States got their "guy."
The centrality of fascist elements to the Maidan coup was recently trumpeted by one of its key figures. At a public event in Kiev last month, Yevhen Karas of the neo-Nazi C14 gang proclaimed that "Maidan was a victory for nationalist forces." Dismissing what he called the "LGBT and foreign embassies" who "say ‘there were not many Nazis at Maidan,'" Karas offered a correction: "If not for those eight percent [of neo-Nazis] the effectiveness [of the Maidan coup] would have dropped by 90 percent."
Without his far-right allies, Karas added, "that whole thing would have turned into a gay parade." He did not mention the critical backing of Washington bureaucrats, who deserve equal credit for avoiding the parade and ensuring a coup instead.
Theres more information on that link BTW
2 -
You know you're right when all someone does is come back with insults. ☺️
2 -
Russia had cooperative agreements with NATO until 2014, they were suspended upon the annexation of Crimea. The hostility came from Russia by interfering in Ukraine's right to self determination. Anything from EU membership to NATO membership was treated as a big no by Russia. Basically you think Russia have the right to limit any international memberships due to Putin's extreme paranoia?
Also let's not forget that Russia has spent plenty of time attempting to interfere in western politics. Funding questionable organisations to create friction, using troll farms to push conspiracy theories and attempting to interfere with elections.
It's pretty clear that the offensive has been coming from Russia. And there's every reason to believe that Putin literally viewed this as empire building. He wasn't prepared for the level of revolt against his invasion and now he's attempting to hold the world hostage with threats of nuclear action.
4 -
The smirk of delusion. That figures.
0 -
Advertisement
-
You can summarize all of that as the Ukrainians wanting to move closer to EU politically and economically, and the West facilitating that, and Putin seeing that as threat not to Russia militarily, but his Dictatorship, and he responds in the only way he knows how with force. He can hardly sell the Russian system as some sort of utopia.
None of this exists in a vaccum of other events. Its Putin actions elsewhere that pushed Ukraine further away.
4
![[Deleted User]](/applications/dashboard/design/images/defaulticon.png)