What's Really Happening in the Ukraine

[laughing dog]

The reality is that we don't know what is happening behind the scenes in the Ukraine. All the speculation about machinations and intent on the part of the US, the EU, Russia and any other perceived outside influence is speculation. The situation is very complex, and the presented speculative scenarios are more representative of the biases and lack of information on the part of the presenters than they are of the reality in that region.

Of course it's speculation. No one here are mind-readers........

There are lots of speculative theories that explain the behavior of all parties. Why focus on the doomsday one or the ones based on ridiculous Russian or US propaganda?

.. But I haven't heard them

Because you focus on the most outre doomsday scenario.

 

[boneyard bill]

The reality is that we don't know what is happening behind the scenes in the Ukraine. All the speculation about machinations and intent on the part of the US, the EU, Russia and any other perceived outside influence is speculation. The situation is very complex, and the presented speculative scenarios are more representative of the biases and lack of information on the part of the presenters than they are of the reality in that region.

Of course it's speculation. No one here are mind-readers........

There are lots of speculative theories that explain the behavior of all parties. Why focus on the doomsday one or the ones based on ridiculous Russian or US propaganda?

.. But I haven't heard them

Because you focus on the most outre doomsday scenario.

What is "doomsday" about my scenario. It assumes that all parties are acting rationally and therefore don't want a nuclear war, but it also assumes that both parties recognize the risk of nuclear war and are weighing those risks. They're playing with fire, but they're using safety matches.

If you really think that others have come up with reasonable explanations for the behaviors in Ukraine, why don't you present them?

 

[boneyard bill]

The reality is that we don't know what is happening behind the scenes in the Ukraine. All the speculation about machinations and intent on the part of the US, the EU, Russia and any other perceived outside influence is speculation. The situation is very complex, and the presented speculative scenarios are more representative of the biases and lack of information on the part of the presenters than they are of the reality in that region.

Of course it's speculation. No one here are mind-readers........

There are lots of speculative theories that explain the behavior of all parties. Why focus on the doomsday one or the ones based on ridiculous Russian or US propaganda?

.. But I haven't heard them

Because you focus on the most outre doomsday scenario.

What is "doomsday" about my scenario. It assumes that all parties are acting rationally and therefore don't want a nuclear war, but it also assumes that both parties recognize the risk of nuclear war and are weighing those risks. They're playing with fire, but they're using safety matches.

If you really think that others have come up with reasonable explanations for the behaviors in Ukraine, why don't you present them?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

The reality is that we don't know what is happening behind the scenes in the Ukraine. All the speculation about machinations and intent on the part of the US, the EU, Russia and any other perceived outside influence is speculation. The situation is very complex, and the presented speculative scenarios are more representative of the biases and lack of information on the part of the presenters than they are of the reality in that region.

We know quite a bit of what is going on. We know that the USA is supporting a bunch of Neo Nazis who took power in a violent coup, and ousted a democratically elected government. We also know that these fascists are killing Ukrainians who don't recognize that that have any legitimacy.

Why is America supporting some Neo Nazis who are murdering their fellow Ukrainians?

Ukraine, democratically elected??

- - - Updated - - -

Of course it's speculation. No one here are mind-readers. So the question arises, 'Why do these western Ukraine troops massacre unarmed protestors instead of simply taking over these government buildings and arresting the protestors or simply chasing them out? And this is especially true since a massacre would run the risk of provoking a Russian intervention?

The obvious response to that would seem to be that they are trying to provoke a Russian intervention. But why would they be doing that? They couldn't possibly hope to win against Russian forces.

Which suggests the original is wrong--either there was no massacre or they weren't unarmed protestors or they weren't killed by the Ukrainians.

 

[barbos]

Loren, by the same logic Holocaust did not happen or jews are to be blamed for that.

 

[laughing dog]

The reality is that we don't know what is happening behind the scenes in the Ukraine. All the speculation about machinations and intent on the part of the US, the EU, Russia and any other perceived outside influence is speculation. The situation is very complex, and the presented speculative scenarios are more representative of the biases and lack of information on the part of the presenters than they are of the reality in that region.

Of course it's speculation. No one here are mind-readers........

There are lots of speculative theories that explain the behavior of all parties. Why focus on the doomsday one or the ones based on ridiculous Russian or US propaganda?

.. But I haven't heard them

Because you focus on the most outre doomsday scenario.

What is "doomsday" about my scenario. It assumes that all parties are acting rationally and therefore don't want a nuclear war, but it also assumes that both parties recognize the risk of nuclear war and are weighing those risks. They're playing with fire, but they're using safety matches.

Besides the fact that "doomsday" scenario does not require irrationality, your scenario does not assume rationality on the part of all parties because it assumes the US is attempting to start a war with Russia when the evidence is clear that it is not.

If you really think that others have come up with reasonable explanations for the behaviors in Ukraine, why don't you present them?

A number of people have (including myself).

 

[laughing dog]

The reality is that we don't know what is happening behind the scenes in the Ukraine. All the speculation about machinations and intent on the part of the US, the EU, Russia and any other perceived outside influence is speculation. The situation is very complex, and the presented speculative scenarios are more representative of the biases and lack of information on the part of the presenters than they are of the reality in that region.

We know quite a bit of what is going on. We know that the USA is supporting a bunch of Neo Nazis who took power in a violent coup, and ousted a democratically elected government. We also know that these fascists are killing Ukrainians who don't recognize that that have any legitimacy.

There is a distinct difference between what the rest of the world knows, and what you believe you know. The new gov't is not "Neo-Nazi".

Why is America supporting some Neo Nazis who are murdering their fellow Ukrainians?

Prove that the US is currently supporting Neo-Nazis who are murdering their fellow Ukranians.

 

[boneyard bill]

The reality is that we don't know what is happening behind the scenes in the Ukraine. All the speculation about machinations and intent on the part of the US, the EU, Russia and any other perceived outside influence is speculation. The situation is very complex, and the presented speculative scenarios are more representative of the biases and lack of information on the part of the presenters than they are of the reality in that region.

We know quite a bit of what is going on. We know that the USA is supporting a bunch of Neo Nazis who took power in a violent coup, and ousted a democratically elected government. We also know that these fascists are killing Ukrainians who don't recognize that that have any legitimacy.

Why is America supporting some Neo Nazis who are murdering their fellow Ukrainians?

Ukraine, democratically elected??

- - - Updated - - -

Of course it's speculation. No one here are mind-readers. So the question arises, 'Why do these western Ukraine troops massacre unarmed protestors instead of simply taking over these government buildings and arresting the protestors or simply chasing them out? And this is especially true since a massacre would run the risk of provoking a Russian intervention?

The obvious response to that would seem to be that they are trying to provoke a Russian intervention. But why would they be doing that? They couldn't possibly hope to win against Russian forces.

Which suggests the original is wrong--either there was no massacre or they weren't unarmed protestors or they weren't killed by the Ukrainians.

Well yes, you always have the option of deny the facts. The facts are that the Yanukovich government was democratically elected and those elections were subject to international monitoring and supervision. His party had a majority in the parliament, and he was voted out of office by a rump parliament that lacked a quorum as both he and many of his allies fled for the lives due to armed insurgents who had taken over the government buildings. Many of the insurgents were members of the professed neo-Nazi party called Svoboda. Others were associated with the ultra-nationalist Ukrainian Right Sector.

Those are the facts although they are woefully downplayed by the US media if they bother to mention them at all. The State Department labeled these thugs "democracy movement" and that seems to be enough for our incompetent and sychophantic media.

Likewise the unarmed protestors who burned in Odessa were not the subjects of some kind of unfortunate accident. They were prevented from leaving the burning building by armed men firing guns at them. These things are verified by various videos on YouTube as well as by foreign media accounts.

Those are the facts that need to be explained, and that is why I posted the scenario that I did. Surely you're not going to fall for the puerile media's "good guy - bad guy" account of some mythical Russian Imperial aggression which we as the good guys have to counter?

What needs to be explained here is not Russian militarism but rather the lack of it.

 

[boneyard bill]

The reality is that we don't know what is happening behind the scenes in the Ukraine. All the speculation about machinations and intent on the part of the US, the EU, Russia and any other perceived outside influence is speculation. The situation is very complex, and the presented speculative scenarios are more representative of the biases and lack of information on the part of the presenters than they are of the reality in that region.

Of course it's speculation. No one here are mind-readers........

There are lots of speculative theories that explain the behavior of all parties. Why focus on the doomsday one or the ones based on ridiculous Russian or US propaganda?

.. But I haven't heard them

Because you focus on the most outre doomsday scenario.

What is "doomsday" about my scenario. It assumes that all parties are acting rationally and therefore don't want a nuclear war, but it also assumes that both parties recognize the risk of nuclear war and are weighing those risks. They're playing with fire, but they're using safety matches.

Besides the fact that "doomsday" scenario does not require irrationality, your scenario does not assume rationality on the part of all parties because it assumes the US is attempting to start a war with Russia when the evidence is clear that it is not.

If you really think that others have come up with reasonable explanations for the behaviors in Ukraine, why don't you present them?

A number of people have (including myself).

Where have you offered anything, provided a link, to any where, or offered any evidence to support any claims that you have made? All I've ever seen you do on virtually all of your posts is try to knock down other people's arguments with nit-picking and irrelevant points.

 

[boneyard bill]

The reality is that we don't know what is happening behind the scenes in the Ukraine. All the speculation about machinations and intent on the part of the US, the EU, Russia and any other perceived outside influence is speculation. The situation is very complex, and the presented speculative scenarios are more representative of the biases and lack of information on the part of the presenters than they are of the reality in that region.

We know quite a bit of what is going on. We know that the USA is supporting a bunch of Neo Nazis who took power in a violent coup, and ousted a democratically elected government. We also know that these fascists are killing Ukrainians who don't recognize that that have any legitimacy.

There is a distinct difference between what the rest of the world knows, and what you believe you know. The new gov't is not "Neo-Nazi".

Why is America supporting some Neo Nazis who are murdering their fellow Ukrainians?

Prove that the US is currently supporting Neo-Nazis who are murdering their fellow Ukranians.

Do a search on the Svoboda Party or the Ukrainian "Social National" party, their former name. They currently hold four positions in the Yastsenyuk government including the Ministry of Defense. Their hero is Stepan Bandera who led Ukrainian troops fighting under Hitler during WW II. They proudly carried flags of Bandera during the protests in the Maidan. Although they've tried to tone down their neo-Nazi positions in recent times it pervades their origins which they do not deny.

 

[laughing dog]

The reality is that we don't know what is happening behind the scenes in the Ukraine. All the speculation about machinations and intent on the part of the US, the EU, Russia and any other perceived outside influence is speculation. The situation is very complex, and the presented speculative scenarios are more representative of the biases and lack of information on the part of the presenters than they are of the reality in that region.

Of course it's speculation. No one here are mind-readers........

There are lots of speculative theories that explain the behavior of all parties. Why focus on the doomsday one or the ones based on ridiculous Russian or US propaganda?

.. But I haven't heard them

Because you focus on the most outre doomsday scenario.

What is "doomsday" about my scenario. It assumes that all parties are acting rationally and therefore don't want a nuclear war, but it also assumes that both parties recognize the risk of nuclear war and are weighing those risks. They're playing with fire, but they're using safety matches.

Besides the fact that "doomsday" scenario does not require irrationality, your scenario does not assume rationality on the part of all parties because it assumes the US is attempting to start a war with Russia when the evidence is clear that it is not.

If you really think that others have come up with reasonable explanations for the behaviors in Ukraine, why don't you present them?

A number of people have (including myself).

Where have you offered anything, provided a link, to any where, or offered any evidence to support any claims that you have made? All I've ever seen you do on virtually all of your posts is try to knock down other people's arguments with nit-picking and irrelevant points.

That reflects more on your reading comprehension and reasoning abilities than my posts. The fact is you don't like the Obama administration and appear to believe that Obama intends to start conflicts despite the obvious facts that he has taken action in Iraq and Afghanistan to reduce conflict. There is no overt evidence that the Obama administration intends to provoke a war over the Ukraine nor does the current evidence suggest that war is even imminent. Yet you continue to post these speculative scenarios as if they are likely.

- - - Updated - - -

The reality is that we don't know what is happening behind the scenes in the Ukraine. All the speculation about machinations and intent on the part of the US, the EU, Russia and any other perceived outside influence is speculation. The situation is very complex, and the presented speculative scenarios are more representative of the biases and lack of information on the part of the presenters than they are of the reality in that region.

We know quite a bit of what is going on. We know that the USA is supporting a bunch of Neo Nazis who took power in a violent coup, and ousted a democratically elected government. We also know that these fascists are killing Ukrainians who don't recognize that that have any legitimacy.

There is a distinct difference between what the rest of the world knows, and what you believe you know. The new gov't is not "Neo-Nazi".

Why is America supporting some Neo Nazis who are murdering their fellow Ukrainians?

Prove that the US is currently supporting Neo-Nazis who are murdering their fellow Ukranians.

Do a search on the Svoboda Party or the Ukrainian "Social National" party, their former name. They currently hold four positions in the Yastsenyuk government including the Ministry of Defense. Their hero is Stepan Bandera who led Ukrainian troops fighting under Hitler during WW II. They proudly carried flags of Bandera during the protests in the Maidan. Although they've tried to tone down their neo-Nazi positions in recent times it pervades their origins which they do not deny.

You need to explain how that is relevant to what is in boldface.

 

[Deadend]

Has it been mentioned yet that the fascist parties did not even receive 2% of the votes in the recent elections. Half the votes the Jewish candidate got.

Russian state television reported the fascists got 37%, surely they will also be rewarded a medal for their 'objective coverage'.

 

[boneyard bill]

laughing dog writes:

The reality is that we don't know what is happening behind the scenes in the Ukraine. All the speculation about machinations and intent on the part of the US, the EU, Russia and any other perceived outside influence is speculation. The situation is very complex, and the presented speculative scenarios are more representative of the biases and lack of information on the part of the presenters than they are of the reality in that region.

Of course it's speculation. No one here are mind-readers........

There are lots of speculative theories that explain the behavior of all parties. Why focus on the doomsday one or the ones based on ridiculous Russian or US propaganda?

.. But I haven't heard them

Because you focus on the most outre doomsday scenario.

What is "doomsday" about my scenario. It assumes that all parties are acting rationally and therefore don't want a nuclear war, but it also assumes that both parties recognize the risk of nuclear war and are weighing those risks. They're playing with fire, but they're using safety matches.

Besides the fact that "doomsday" scenario does not require irrationality, your scenario does not assume rationality on the part of all parties because it assumes the US is attempting to start a war with Russia when the evidence is clear that it is not.

If you really think that others have come up with reasonable explanations for the behaviors in Ukraine, why don't you present them?

A number of people have (including myself).

Where have you offered anything, provided a link, to any where, or offered any evidence to support any claims that you have made? All I've ever seen you do on virtually all of your posts is try to knock down other people's arguments with nit-picking and irrelevant points.

That reflects more on your reading comprehension and reasoning abilities than my posts. The fact is you don't like the Obama administration and appear to believe that Obama intends to start conflicts despite the obvious facts that he has taken action in Iraq and Afghanistan to reduce conflict. There is no overt evidence that the Obama administration intends to provoke a war over the Ukraine nor does the current evidence suggest that war is even imminent. Yet you continue to post these speculative scenarios as if they are likely

.

You are the one who could use a course in reading comprehension since no where in my posts do I make the claims that you say I did. Where did I say that Obama wanted to start a war? No where. Sharpen up your reading skills and then get back to me.

- - - Updated - - -

The reality is that we don't know what is happening behind the scenes in the Ukraine. All the speculation about machinations and intent on the part of the US, the EU, Russia and any other perceived outside influence is speculation. The situation is very complex, and the presented speculative scenarios are more representative of the biases and lack of information on the part of the presenters than they are of the reality in that region.

We know quite a bit of what is going on. We know that the USA is supporting a bunch of Neo Nazis who took power in a violent coup, and ousted a democratically elected government. We also know that these fascists are killing Ukrainians who don't recognize that that have any legitimacy.

There is a distinct difference between what the rest of the world knows, and what you believe you know. The new gov't is not "Neo-Nazi".

Why is America supporting some Neo Nazis who are murdering their fellow Ukrainians?

Prove that the US is currently supporting Neo-Nazis who are murdering their fellow Ukranians.

Do a search on the Svoboda Party or the Ukrainian "Social National" party, their former name. They currently hold four positions in the Yastsenyuk government including the Ministry of Defense. Their hero is Stepan Bandera who led Ukrainian troops fighting under Hitler during WW II. They proudly carried flags of Bandera during the protests in the Maidan. Although they've tried to tone down their neo-Nazi positions in recent times it pervades their origins which they do not deny.

You need to explain how that is relevant to what is in boldface.

No I don't. If you did the search I recommended the relevance should be obvious, If you can't figure out how it is relevant then, again, you need to sharpen up your reading skills. Then maybe we discuss this issue rationally.

 

[boneyard bill]

Has it been mentioned yet that the fascist parties did not even receive 2% of the votes in the recent elections. Half the votes the Jewish candidate got.

Russian state television reported the fascists got 37%, surely they will also be rewarded a medal for their 'objective coverage'.

Are you claiming that Svoboda got only 2% in the latest election? What elections are you actually referring to? And how do you reach this 2% figure. Svoboda got considerably more than that in the previous election and in the that election Eastern Ukraine voted, but in this election they did not. So I would have to rate your claim very suspect unless you have some actual voting results to support it.

 

[laughing dog]

No I don't. If you did the search I recommended the relevance should be obvious, If you can't figure out how it is relevant then, again, you need to sharpen up your reading skills. Then maybe we discuss this issue rationally.

It is up to you to present your evidence to support your claims. You have not produced one iota of evidence that proves that the US is currently supporting Neo-Nazis who are murdering their fellow Ukranians. You showed that there are some Neo-Nazis in the Ukrainian gov't. You did not show the US is currently supporting them or that they are murdering their fellow Ukrainians. In rational discourse - something you claim you wish to engage in -that means you did not come close to providing proof of that claim. Which is why I asked that question. Instead of logically dealing with the claim, your response was literally content-free.

 

[barbos]

It is up to you to present your evidence to support your claims. You have not produced one iota of evidence that proves that the US is currently supporting Neo-Nazis who are murdering their fellow Ukranians. You showed that there are some Neo-Nazis in the Ukrainian gov't.

So what was CIA director doing in Ukraine just before military operation started?
And what was Right Sector representatives discussing with Nuland in Washington?

 

[boneyard bill]

No I don't. If you did the search I recommended the relevance should be obvious, If you can't figure out how it is relevant then, again, you need to sharpen up your reading skills. Then maybe we discuss this issue rationally.

It is up to you to present your evidence to support your claims. You have not produced one iota of evidence that proves that the US is currently supporting Neo-Nazis who are murdering their fellow Ukranians. You showed that there are some Neo-Nazis in the Ukrainian gov't. You did not show the US is currently supporting them or that they are murdering their fellow Ukrainians. In rational discourse - something you claim you wish to engage in -that means you did not come close to providing proof of that claim. Which is why I asked that question. Instead of logically dealing with the claim, your response was literally content-free.

You're shifting the debate. You said I claimed that Obama was trying to start a war. I said no such thing. Show me where I did.

 

[laughing dog]

No I don't. If you did the search I recommended the relevance should be obvious, If you can't figure out how it is relevant then, again, you need to sharpen up your reading skills. Then maybe we discuss this issue rationally.

It is up to you to present your evidence to support your claims. You have not produced one iota of evidence that proves that the US is currently supporting Neo-Nazis who are murdering their fellow Ukranians. You showed that there are some Neo-Nazis in the Ukrainian gov't. You did not show the US is currently supporting them or that they are murdering their fellow Ukrainians. In rational discourse - something you claim you wish to engage in -that means you did not come close to providing proof of that claim. Which is why I asked that question. Instead of logically dealing with the claim, your response was literally content-free.

You're shifting the debate. You said I claimed that Obama was trying to start a war. I said no such thing. Show me where I did.

I did not shift the debate. You responded to my challenge to another poster in post #30. There was nothing about Obama trying to start a war.

As to you claiming Obama was trying to start a war, I suggest you read your own OP in your thread entitled Are US policy makers actually TRYING to start WW III?

 

[tupac chopra]

As to you claiming Obama was trying to start a war, I suggest you read your own OP in your thread entitled Are US policy makers actually TRYING to start WW III?

I think that it's not so much Obama that wants a war. The neo cons want a war, and Obama is too weak to stand up to them. Very few Americans can stand up to them and even less those in public office, lest they be accused of being unpatriotic.

 

[tupac chopra]

No I don't. If you did the search I recommended the relevance should be obvious, If you can't figure out how it is relevant then, again, you need to sharpen up your reading skills. Then maybe we discuss this issue rationally.

It is up to you to present your evidence to support your claims. You have not produced one iota of evidence that proves that the US is currently supporting Neo-Nazis who are murdering their fellow Ukranians. .

US to violate own laws by financially aiding Ukraine’s coup-installed govt – Moscow

Added in edit:
Videos and Photos of the Odessan Massacre, and Why It Was Done

For the first time in history, an organized massacre of civilians has been filmed by many people from many different angles and perspectives while it was happening, and is documented in extraordinary detail in “real time,” the perpetrators having no fear of any negative consequences from their endeavor, and even cheering and celebrating the tortures and deaths as they were being imposed upon the helpless victims. The perpetrators were unconcerned, because what they were doing was what the government (which the U.S. had imposed upon their country and which U.S. taxpayers had spent more than 5 billion dollars to bring about there) had wanted them to do, and had helped to organize them to carry out. These people were just having fun, like a party to them, nothing really serious at all. Sort of like Stanley Kubrick’s movie A Clockwork Orange, more than, say Auschwitz (such a bore!). But, if so, a hundredfold more. And none of these people (tragically including the victims) were actors!