There’s uproar in the Western media, about Donald Trump wanting to negotiate with Putin, a peace deal in Ukraine. And Trump called Ukraine’s President Zelenskyy a dictator and blamed him for starting the present war Ukraine.war. And he said that Zelenskyy’s approval rating has fallen to 4%. General agreement that Donald Trump was “rewriting history”.
Well, Trump is well known for lying, and it’s just so easy to scrutinise those statements and smugly assert that they are incorrect, and obviously Donald Trump has no idea of what he’s talking about.
And yet, and yet… all those statements deserve further scrutiny. Because underneath their careless inaccuracy lies the real history of the Ukraine mess.
Historically, Ukraine as a sovereign State goes back only until 1991. In its previous history, it was dominated by a motley succession of European powers, but in the 19th and 20th Century, by Russia. Cruel exploitation by Stalin’s rule in the 1930s was followed in 1941 by a brutal Nazi regime, and after 1944 back under oppressive Soviet control.
It is no surprise that there are long-standing resentments among both Ukrainian dwellers and in the diaspora. There is also a variety of ethnic backgrounds, and a clear difference between the ‘West-leaning” culture of Western Ukraine, and the more pro-Russian culture to the East.
At the end of World War 2, the Allies had the opportunity to include Russia in some co-operative Council of the powers, as was done by the Congress of Vienna in 1815, after the Napoleonic Wars. Instead, the USA, Britain and France chose to set up a co-operative group, North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO), that excluded Russia. American triumphalism gradually encouraged this into a defensive group against Russia, and encouraged former Soviet States to be part of America’s “sphere of influence” and to join NATO.
As Ukraine is the largest Western State on Russia’s border, it is obvious that Russia would not want it to be a NATO state, potentially with U.S military bases aimed at Russia.
Now, to go to the forgotten 8 years Ukrainian war
In 2014, an American-sponsored coup overthrew the democratically elected President Viktor Yanukovych. He was subsequently followed by oligarch Petro Poroshenko, who removed Russian as an official language, causing opposition in the Eastern provinces. The result was fierce repression against the Russian-speaking regions (Odessa, Dnepropetrovsk, Kharkov, Lugansk and Donetsk). The rebels of Donetsk and Lugansk held referendums, seeking not to separate from Ukraine, but to have a status of autonomy, guaranteeing them the use of the Russian language as an official language .
2014-15 Minsk Agreements. Leaders of France, Germany, Russia and Ukraine gathered in Minsk, and supported the agreements between Russia, Ukraine, the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) and the leaders of separatist-held regions Donetsk and Luhansk. This formally gave Donetsk and Luhansk autonomous status within Ukraine.
2015 – 2022: The agreements were never implemented. The Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko launched a massive “anti-terrorist operation” against the Donbass, and the fighting continued. This war was not popular, reservists failed to turn up.
“In October/November 2017, 70% of conscripts did not show up for the “Fall 2017” recall campaign. This is not counting suicides and desertions (often over to the autonomists), which reached up to 30 percent of the workforce in the ATO area”.Young Ukrainians refused to go and fight in the Donbass and preferred emigration, which also explains, at least partially, the demographic deficit of the country.”
The Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) estimates the total number of war-related casualties in Ukraine from 14 April 2014 to 31 December 2021 to be 51,000–54,000.
This entire 8 years of war is rarely mentioned by the Western media. There’s no recognition of the impact of imposing the Ukrainian language on Russian-speakers. No consideration of some loyalties to Russia and her role in WW2. No consideration of the influence of Ukrainian Nazi collaborators, and the role of the minority neo-Nazis. There was one exceptional coverage by The Guardian in 2014 – It’s not Russia that’s pushed Ukraine to the brink of war.
2019: Volodymr Zelenskyy was elected with a huge majority, on his pledge to uphold the Minsk agreements, and bring peace to Ukraine. But soon after coming to power, Zelenskyy reneged on that pledge. He later made it clear that he intentionally chose to sabotage Minsk, give his country more time to prepare for war. A large-scale militarisation of Ukraine began. The build-up of the Ukrainian army was accompanied by the development of militias, notoriously the Azov brigade, with links to the Nazi past and the philosophy of past far-right leader Stepan Bandera.
2022: February 24. Russia launched its Special Military Operation into Ukraine, claiming that it was a limited operation, not a war. Russia argued that this was lawful under Article 51 of the UN Charter, that it may use force against Ukraine in order to defend the Donetsk and Luhansk Peoples Republics. Anyway it soon turned into a full-scale war against Ukraine, which certainly was not legal, and Ukraine got the enthusiastic backing of the USA and NATO, though no foreign troops.
The Political Situation in Ukraine: The Zelenskyy regime has banned opposition parties, cracked down on the use of the Russian language, restricted media and freedoms of expression and peaceful assembly, violating international law. Zelenskyy signed a law that threatens to effectively shut down the Ukrainian Orthodox Church (UOC) – the largest faith-based organization in the country. He signed a law that restricted import of books from Russia. Monuments to Russian cultural history were destroyed.
So – to go back to Donald Trump’s inaccurate claims and “rewriting history”. How far off the mark was Trump? In fact, Zelenskyy was elected democratically, but has now turned Ukraine into a dictatorship. Zelenskyy did not start the war, but he provoked it, by overturning his election policy to implement the Minsk agreements. Zelenskyy’s approval rating is still above 50%, but has slipped over the past year.
It is Western dogma that you can’t approve of anything that Donald Trump does. And for anyone to even mention the 8 years’ war in Ukraine is to invite being branded as an idiotic puppet of Russian propaganda and disinformation.
The “progressive” West notices with disapproval, that Donald Trump’s aim is to get American business’s control of Ukraine’s mineral resources, in exchange for Russia getting territorial concessions. Well, what else would you expect from Trump – whose whole schtick is to get American (and his own) control of business, preferably everywhere? It still might be a better deal for Ukrainians than obliteration. Way back, the West, and Zelenskyy could have honoured the Minsk agreement, and given the Donbass provinces self-government within the state of Ukraine and avoided the whole war.
Also by Neil Wauchope: Conveniently forgotten and ignored: the 8 years war in Ukraine up to 2022
Dear reader, we need your support
Independent sites such as The AIMN provide a platform for public interest journalists. From its humble beginning in January 2013, The AIMN has grown into one of the most trusted and popular independent media organisations.
One of the reasons we have succeeded has been due to the support we receive from our readers through their financial contributions.
With increasing costs to maintain The AIMN, we need this continued support.
Your donation – large or small – to help with the running costs of this site will be greatly appreciated.
You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969
Thank you Noel Wauchope for the true background to this tragic conflict
Few remember the role of Victoria Nuland in thenMaidan protests and her part in the regime change. Among all the western commentators there is a wilful forgetfulness about this period and the unnecessary deaths of thousands over the years prior to Putins invasian. Moreover Ukraine’s legacy of Nazi sympathisers is never mentioned. Had the Minsk agreements been honoured and if the west had refrained from using this conflict for its own advantage this conflict would have been long over.
1/.“As Ukraine is the largest Western State on Russia’s border, it is obvious that Russia would not want it to be a NATO state”
May I suggest you do a little more research. Putin has completely changed his position on Ukraine’s joining NATO.
Putin has previously made the following statement –
“I am absolutely convinced that Ukraine will not shy away from the processes of expanding interaction with NATO and the Western allies as a whole. Ukraine has its own relations with NATO; there is the Ukraine-NATO Council. At the end of the day the decision is to be taken by NATO and Ukraine. It is a matter for those two partners.”
Only more recently has Putin objected to Ukraine joining NATO.
You can find the statement I’ve quoted on the official site of the Russian President
2/. “In 2014, an American-sponsored coup overthrew the democratically elected President Viktor Yanukovych”
I’ve pointed out before that to gain office, Yanukovych committed to seeking membership of the EU.
Once elected he reneged and sought to join the Russian trade zone.
There were mass public protests against his decision. The public protests were the biggest in contemporary Europe. Ukrainians didn’t wish to return to being a Russian colony.
Yanukovych lost control of the apparatus of government when the police and military declined to comply with his directions to shoot civilians.
Ultimately Yanukovych was removed from office by a vote of the Ukraine Rada. It was 328 to zero.
Even the Regional Party of Yanukovych voted against him.
That isn’t to say the USA was a disinterested bystander, but calling this a “coup” ignores the facts.
3/. With regard to the Minsk Agreement(s), there were requirements on both sides.
There are numerous clauses of the Minsk Agreement the Russian backed separatists did not comply with . Among them they were required to-
° Decommission their heavy artillery. They didn’t
°Disband all illegal militias. They didn’t
° Return border control to Ukraine. They didn’t
° Allow humanitarian aid to the region. They didn’t.
4/. It is also important to recall that all regions of Ukraine voted solidly for independence from the Soviet Union. Even Crimea.
5/. With regard to the status of the Ukrainian nation, we should note that Russia guaranteed Ukrainian sovereignty, in accordance with existing borders by signing the Budapest Memorandum.
In return Ukraine relinquished their nuclear weapons.
Ukraine was disarmed then invaded.
Let’s not fool ourselves by blaming Ukraine for the war.
Later, I might post some further information, to balance this article.
But don’t ignore these facts I have posted
Need to learn how to find, test and present sources for credibility.
Case in point, the imagery of Roger Waters, according to Tampere University’s Russian disinfo research unit Vatnik Soup
‘Former Pink Floyd Lyricist Polly Samson tweeted that Waters is “antisemitic” to his “rotten core”, also calling him Putin apologist and misogynist. David Gilmour, Roger’s former band mate and Samson’s husband, fully agreed with this assessment…..
‘Waters has also denied Bashar al-Assad’s involvement in the chemical attacks around Syria. He’s called the Syrian humanitarian aid NGO, White Helmets, who save civilians from disaster areas a “fake organisation” that produces propaganda for “jihadists and terrorists”.
https://vatniksoup.com/en/soups/189/
The comment by AC is a litany of deliberate misinformation.
Deliberate, because this has all been refuted before, yet he repeats it without shame.
You will note that AC in his usual manner provides no dates or references to his claims. This is important, because circumstances change over time. The provision of dates provides context.
To have any credibility at all on this AC should provide a link for Putin’s statement about Ukraine joining NATO. It’s not good enough to quote “the official site of the Russian president”. AC knows that the average reader will not go to that trouble. It’s a ploy to keep people in the dark.
The 328 to zero vote was not constitutional, as AC already knows.
Those seeking autonomy were not Russian backed as AC already knows. And why would they disarm while still being under attack from their own government?
The Budapest Memorandum was first breached by the US, UK, and Ukraine. When Russia intervened the Memo no longer existed, Ukraine had walked away from it as AC already knows.
The regions of Ukraine voted for independence from Russia prior to the coup and the emergence of ultra-nationalists into positions of power in Ukrainian affairs. As AC already knows.
AC said “Let’s not fool ourselves by blaming Ukraine for the war” yet he knows that a plan to provoke Russian intervention existed for at least 3 years prior, and was verified by a video that I have linked to at least twice previously.
This irrational behaviour by AC must have a reason.
Given the events of the last few days it’s not hard to work out.
Steve Davis do you ever stop gaslighting people who disagree with your opinions and repetitive Kremlin talking points?
Shooting messengers to avoid and deflect from inconvenient facts, alliances etc. a la RW MSM…
Like the article, why do you ignore the distasteful RWNJs and tankies, who run protection for corrupt power represented by Putin, Trump etc. while precluding agency for sovereign states, Ukraine, their citizens, Europe etc.?
Gee, it would be nice if Andrew Smith one day posted a comment that actually had substance to it.
He and AC must have gone to the same debating seminar —
“Don’t provide context.”
“give ’em nothing they can use”
“brush up on a lot of critical labels you can pin on your opponents, like gaslighting etc”
“Be as vague as you can without appearing stupid”
Readers will note that Andrew chose to not contest any of my points. Made accusations without evidence.
And for those who might think Andrew has a point with my reference to AC being irrational, his repetition of refuted points is not rational, nor was his repeated references to little green men at A Dramatic Development In The Ukraine Situation.
Consider AC’s account of the protests that led to the coup, then consider this.
An established and public verdict on the false-flag operation commonly called ‘Euromaidan’ was rendered by a Kyiv court (Sviatoshyn District Court) on 18 Oct 2023, following an extensive investigation. The verdict acknowledged that non-government and non-law-enforcement activists firing from the Hotel Ukraina were responsible for the deliberate and targeted killings of both protesters and police, and had also shot at a BBC News crew with the apparent intent of killing them. This verdict is based in part on the testimony of eyewitnesses. Today you would never find acknowledgement of that verdict unless you knew how to keyword-search for specific terms, because virtually no news media reported it. Meanwhile, public social-media archives such as Wikipedia go on blithely spreading the disinformation that it was a spontaneous grass-roots rebellion
From canadiandimension.com 20 Feb 2024– A nearly one-million-word verdict from Ukraine’s Maidan massacre trial has recently confirmed that many Maidan activists were shot not by members of Ukraine’s Berkut special police force or other law enforcement personnel but by snipers in the far-right-controlled Hotel Ukraina and other Maidan-controlled locations a decade ago today. The verdict, handed down on October 18, 2023, states specifically that this hotel was controlled by Maidan activists and that an armed, far-right-linked Maidan group was in the hotel and fired from it. It also confirms that there was no Russian involvement in the massacre and that no massacre orders were issued by then President Viktor Yanukovych or his ministers. The verdict concludes that the Euromaidan was at the time of this massacre not a peaceful protest but a “rebellion” that involved the killing of Berkut and other police personnel.
There has been, however, a blackout of the verdict’s confirmation of the Maidan snipers in the Ukrainian media and, with a few notable exceptions, the Western mainstream media. Moreover, in an op-ed piece in The Bulwark, an online neoconservative magazine, author Cathy Young misrepresented the verdict, falsely claiming that it had found the Berkut police responsible for the deaths of 40 of the 48 protesters killed. Young also denied and openly whitewashed the existence of Maidan snipers and the far-right’s involvement in the Maidan massacre, labelling it a “conspiracy theory” despite clear and overwhelming evidence to the contrary in the verdict, the trial, and the investigation, as well as in academic studies of the event. Such deliberate omission and misrepresentation has been perpetrated in spite of the fact that the verdict’s Ukrainian text, as well as automatic English translation of the relevant excerpts, are publicly available, and in spite viral tweets describing and quoting from it.
https://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/114304164
AC stated that “Yanukovych lost control of the apparatus of government when the police and military declined to comply with his directions to shoot civilians”, yet the verdict stated that no massacre orders were issued by then President Viktor Yanukovych or his ministers.
AC is a fabricator.
Why are you so aggressive in shooting messengers and disrupt others’ narratives by micro focus ignoring all else; neither makes your Putin-MAGA infused opinions correct, nor the article.
The points you make are wilfully misleading, as you seem to have been misled; what and how you present is not credible (year 10?).
Using the Socratic method on credibility, there is a lack of Ethos or authority and Logos or expertise, but dollops of Pathos or negative opinions and pathos a la Fox News editorial; equates with throwing Ukraine and Europe under a bus…
What is it, and the article’s author too, that you are proposing or what do you want for the future vs banging on about your misconceptions of history and more recent events?
Suggests everyone should be ‘quiet Australians’, take empathy bypasses and follow orders, that mirror Trump, Putin, faux anti-imperialist ‘tankies’ of the left (&/or right?), Musk, Orbán, Koch & Tanton Networks et al, MAGA and RW white Christian nationalists’ ‘collective narcissism’ to support <1%?
The latter suggests what you and the author are reflecting ie. the latters’ intolerance, but deflecting to blame Ukraine victims of an invasion and Russians too, due to Putin’s regime, to deal with your own 20thC cognitive dissonance and (collective) narcissism?
Andrew Smith says “The points you make are wilfully misleading,…” yet he gives no evidence for that.
Where did he learn to discuss like this?
Did the seminar I jokingly referred to earlier also include in its advice “deflect, accuse and ramble until your opponent walks away” ?
I would not wish to confuse AC, or his buddy, about Putin and NATO, but history does record that Vlad, in his early days leading Russia, actually applying to NATO for membership.
It was denied and thats probably because NATO woold then have to have another reason to carry on.
I also watched Jeffery Sachs addressing an audience in Europe very recently revealing his personal involvement in the USA`s regime change operation in Ukraine in 2014. This is not AI but an US senior official telling Europe what happened, and how they should now react.
Its sitting there on U-tube.
More background context by Oliver Stone:
https://watchdocumentaries.com/ukraine-on-fire/
There’s a saying: ‘All wars are banker’s wars’. Currently there’s said to be 40k odd Israeli Zionists plus the ‘Clubs of Blackrock, Vanguard et al’ on a RE shopping spree in Ukraine. Disaster capitalism at its finest?
Zionism in Ukraine, has much really changed since the 1880s?
https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/zionism-in-ukraine/
Then there’s the Balfour Declaration and decades of UN befuddlement. Helpful?
More and more people see what’s happening and the globalists don’t like that.
Andrew Smith regularly gives a plug to Vatnik Soup as being an impeccable authority on the situation in Ukraine. And he does so again here.
Vatnik Soup however, is a purveyor of propaganda.
Here is the V. Soup account of the protests, with no mention of the court verdict, and no mention of far-right snipers.
https://bsky.app/profile/vatniksoup.bsky.social/post/3l7sxxkqamc2i
Feb 18-20, 2014, was the most violent period of the Maidan protests. In just span of few days, almost 100 people were killed as thousands of protesters attempted to storm the Parliament, only to be met with bullets from Berkut snipers.
Yet the court verdict stated Maidan activists were not shot by members of Ukraine’s Berkut special police force or other law enforcement personnel but by snipers in the far-right-controlled Hotel Ukraina and other Maidan-controlled locations.
Vatnik Soup was forced to admit that violent far-right groups were present at the protests — “So, were there far-right groups at Euromaidan? Yes. Svoboda, Right Sector, Misanthropic Division, Congress of Ukrainian Nationalists and UNA-UNSO are all such groups, and they were also involved in the violent acts during the protests.”
But then not only failed to mention the killings by the far-right, but tried to engender sympathy for them.
“If there’s an uprising where a nation tries to separate itself from a dictator and from external influence, or where people fight a perceived threat, why wouldn’t the nationalist be there? But in the grand scheme of things, nationalists were just a small fraction (not more than 15% at different stages of the Revolution) of the protesting population. Often these type of extreme groups are active in violent protesting, as they have hard time getting recognition in politics and feel disenfranchised…”
So suddenly they became merely “nationalists”, not far-right thugs? Are we to feel sympathy for violent protesters who feel disenfranchised because they have a hard time getting recognition?
And from that we see that Vatnik Soup has a warped understanding of democracy. Fringe groups have the same voting rights as everyone else. In a democracy minority groups do not have the right to impose their wishes on the majority. By violence or any other means. But as Vatnik Soup knows, as Andrew Smith knows, in Ukraine anything goes.
In May 2019, on the Ukrainian media Obozrevatel, Dmytro Yarosh, former head of the Right Sector mentioned above, openly threatened Zelensky with death, if he came to an agreement with Russia.
Yarosh — “Zelensky in his inaugural speech said that he was ready to lose ratings, popularity, position. No, he’ll lose his life. It will hang on some tree on Khreshchatyk – if it betrays Ukraine and those people who died on the Revolution and the War. It is very important that he understands this.”
Yarosh is still active in Ukraine politics. Instead of being jailed for treason. In Ukraine, anything goes.
https://incident.obozrevatel.com/crime/dmitrij-yarosh-esli-zelenskij-predast-ukrainu-poteryaet-ne-dolzhnost-a-zhizn.htm#goog_rewarded
Is Vatnik Soup a supporter of terrorism? It has certainly excused thuggery. And apparently, in Ukraine, violent actions by minorities pay off big-time.
From the BBC 28 April 2014 — “The nationalist Svoboda party – also a significant player in the Maidan protests – now has three powerful posts in the interim government: acting chief prosecutor, deputy prime minister and chairman of the National Security Council.”
Not bad for a “disenfranchised” minority.
Vatnik Soup is an example of the worst type of online journalism.
1/. “… history does record that Vlad, in his early days leading Russia, actually applying to NATO for membership.”
I’m always perplexed that people seem to think they can post false information on a public site and think it will be accepted.
The fact is that Putin never applied for membership of NATO. He once asked when Russia would be invited to join NATO. The response was that countries aren’t invited to join, they apply and their application is considered.
Putin didn’t proceed to apply.
2/. “The 328 to zero vote was not constitutional”
The vote was a few short of the number required for impeachment, but no one claims Yanukovych was impeached.
The office of President was declared vacant because Yanukovych had abandoned it.
As I said, he lost control of the apparatus of government when the police and military declined to comply with his (illegal) directions to shoot civilians.
3/. ” The Budapest Memorandum was first breached by the US, UK, and Ukraine”
This is typical”look over there nonsense.
° The Budapest Memorandum was breached in numerous ways by the Russian backed separatists, and I’ve listed a few examples.
The application of economic sanctions by western signatories is a long way short of the compete breaching of the agreement via a military invasion.
4/. But as I’ve noted, Steve’s credibility is greatly enhanced now that Trump is using the same talking points
What we tend to forget is that Trump is an old man, seventy-nine in June. Like most ageing humans, his faculties are slowing as was evidenced in his forgetting that Russia actually invaded Ukraine.
He has allowed others to convince him that tariffs are a road to national prosperity and only now is realizing that it is US consumers who pay for the billions collected in tariffs [as Tony Abbott would say, it’s just another new tax).
Fortunately, so far Trump has only put a ten percent tax on Chinese imports. Most consumer goods imported by Walmart and other major retailers come from China and any further impositions would hit the US consumer hard.
Trump failed to understand that the fact that Ukraine had not held elections was due to necessary parliamentary impositions during time of war – when it is almost physically impossible to organise elections that will be free and fair and accessible by voters.
It is generally recognised that Trump’s dictates are usually the result of ideas planted in his brain by the last person he spoke to ; let’s hope that person isn’t J D Vance !
Trump’s capacity to carry out his role as POTUS will, I believe, become progressively more erratic and it is to be hoped that the Congress will rein him in before he does something really stupid.
Correction of my comment –
“The Budapest Memorandum was breached in numerous ways by the Russian backed separatists…”
Of course I meant the Minsk Agreement.
Never let it be said that I don’t willingly own up to my errors!
But just for clarification, it is disingenuous in the extreme to excuse Russia’s brutal invasion of Ukraine, and their specific breaching of their guarantee of Ukrainian sovereignty, when relatively minor sanctions were applied by other signatories.
AC has a problem.
He’s having trouble distinguishing between fact and fiction. Or is he?
Readers will note that AC refuses to provide links to his assertions.
The last thing he wants is someone checking his “facts”.
If he has evidence that the Donbass militias breached the Minsk agreements he should provide a link. May be his evidence is to be found at Vatnik Soup.
The coup was indeed unconstitutional. The 1996 and the 2004 constitutions are uniform when it comes to the reasons for removing a president, with Article 111 stating the parliament has the right to initiate a procedure of impeachment. He was not impeached.
Constitutional guidelines call for a review of the case by Ukraine’s Constitutional Court and a three-fourths majority vote by the Verkhovna Rada — i.e., 338 lawmakers. The vote was 328. And that’s after Yanukovych and supporters fled the violence. The coup was unconstitutional.
Everything AC presents as fact has to be checked thoroughly.
To Terry Mills. Thanks for bringing this discussion up to date and down to earth. I pretty much believe your assessment of Donald Trump. Except that you are too kind. I don’t think that Trump’s failings are the result of his age. He has always been awful, lacking any compassion for those he has harmed, and being a persistent liar. Trump’s idea of government is that its only role is to promote American business. So, I agree that his presidency will end badly, unless it is somehow reined in, and probably even then. I just think that this negotiated end of the war is going to much better for Ukraine that the continued slaughter, and pretense that Ukraine can win.
Well Steve, I’ve provided a range of details to support my argument, and there are a couple of things I enjoy about your comments –
° I like to allow you to dig holes for yourself. You’re currently doing that with your position on the Minsk Agreement(s)
As they are freely available via a Google search, you can read it and demonstrate I’m wrong.
You won’t.
° I really think it’s hilarious that you and Trump use the same talking points
° I find your semantics hilarious! They’re not separatists, they’re seeking autonomy
The writer conveniently overlooks the fact that Zelenski had 70,000 Nato trained Ukrainian troops on the border of the Donbas ethnic russian oblasts ready to invade the Donbas with orders from Zelenski to kill all ethnic russians and push on through to recapture Crimea.These facts make Russia’s actions legal under international law. They are also the facts relied upon to prove Ukraine actually did start the war.
THIS FROM A FRM NATO OFFICER WHO.WAS ON THE SPOT WHEN ALL THE RELEVANT FACTS OCCURRED
UKRAINE IS BIDEN’S WAR. HE PLANNED IT WHEN VICE PRESIDENT TO OBAMA.
‘The rebels ( in the Donbas) were armed thanks to the defection of Russian-speaking Ukrainian units that went over to the rebel side. As Ukrainian failures continued, tank, artillery and anti-aircraft battalions swelled the ranks of the autonomists. This is what pushed the Ukrainians to commit to the Minsk Agreements.’
https://labourheartlands.com/jacques-baud-the-military-situation-in-the-ukraine-update/?fbclid=IwY2xjawIjGLxleHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHRNCVPkI1BOWodV3cRkeGNHiNRJDYshe6L4lUYJrhMfT8rMzC8j–Vc9iw_aem_j64Ig-u5ThZkRo5YL_1Ltw
“Well Steve, I’ve provided a range of details to support my argument…”
Now there’s a fabrication straight off.
As readers can see, my guess about AC not wanting to provide links to his allegations was correct.
I requested a link, not a difficult request to comply with, and instead got nonsense about conversations taking place in his head.
The value of links is that they provide context.
AC does not do context.
Context interferes with his fiction.
When challenged to provide evidence for wild assertions, AC’s response is “I don’t have to do that. You prove me wrong!”
It really is schoolyard stuff that downgrades the value of this site and is a sign of disrespect to readers.
My suspicion that he gets this nonsense from Vatnik Soup is getting stronger all the time.
Hilarious Steve
I don’t see discussion with you are one that deserves compliance with your demands.
My enjoyment is watching you dig holes for yourself.
Such as-
° Semantics – eg. they’re not separatists they’re seeking autonomy
° Absolute nonsense – eg. economic facts, statistics and data are meaningless in a discussion about economics
° False equivalence – eg. misrepresentation about Merkel’s comments, while excusing/contextualising Putin
°Yearning for cognitive reinforcement, and the approval of others – eg. said I was wrong, and his proof was that a couple of others had agreed with your comments
And now…you can’t demonstrate that any of the comments I have made about the separatists breaching the Minsk Agreements were incorrect, even though you’re somehow debating this!
I mentioned earlier that AC was repeating allegations that had been refuted before.
Here’s one such occasion. The comments are worth a read for the extra details that did not emerge here.
https://theaimn.com/who-are-the-narcissists/
And for those who might be interested in the link to the Arestovich interview in which he revealed the Ukraine/NATO plan to provoke a Russian invasion 3 years before it happened, it’s here. That video is crucial to a realistic view of facts on the ground in Ukraine.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1xNHmHpERH8&t=449s
Hilarious Steve!
I’d invite anyone to review that thread, they’d observe you posting almost half the comments and about two thirds of the volume.
It’s a case study in an obsessive compulsion to get the last word (and in a very wordy manner)
Dear oh dear. Here I am trying to spread awareness and knowledge, and all AC can spread is bile.
The reason for AC’s thrashing about whenever Ukraine pops up? And the reason for his Trump obsession? The game’s almost over.
https://www.axios.com/2025/02/21/zelensky-trump-five-moves-ukraine-russia
Realpolitik. We haven’t seen much of that term since the rise of the global hegemon, but with the fall of the hegemon my feeling is that we are about to see it a lot more often.
“It’s a sht sandwich,” a Trump administration official acknowledged.
But Ukraine is going to have to eat it because Trump has made clear this is no longer our problem.”*
That’s realpolitik right there.
Ukraine should learn the new game on the double, or it’s all over.
But there’s a difference with the realpolitik of the 21st century. It has the added feature of Trumpian erratics.
Now let’s see what AC’s Trump obsession can do with that. 🙂
Bile? Where?
Steve, really I was only pointing out the fact that on that thread (along with most you participate in) your comments amounted to almost half.
And a far greater proportion of the volume of words.
That’s because (when you are challenged), you try verbosity in the extreme, you seek to changing the subject. You try to bury the failings of your position in repetition and unabashed obfuscation.
You make a series of comments in quick succession .
You make a provocative comment, then modify and qualify it under pressure.
You demonstrated all those tactics on that single thread, it is a valuable reminder of your blogging tactics.
Thank you.
And keep digging!
C’mon now AC, give us some more of that Trump obsession!
Y’know we’re just dying to hear it.
Will this help?
Things go from bad to worse for Kiev.
Not only is Ukraine locked out of peace talks, where the old saying “If you aren’t sitting at the table, you’re on the menu” takes effect, now the White House has added a new point of contention to its relations with Ukraine:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2025/02/22/ukraine-war-un-resolution-trump/
“US Pressures Kiev to Replace UN Resolution Condemning Russia.”
The Trump administration has asked Ukraine to withdraw an annual [United Nations] resolution condemning Russia’s war, and wants to replace it with a toned-down U.S. statement that was perceived as being close to pro-Russian in Kyiv, according to an official and three European diplomats familiar with the plan, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss a sensitive political situation between nations that have typically acted as partners.
The suggestion stunned Kyiv, which refused to withdraw its resolution,…
As a blogger put it, “At this speed Zelenski can count the days he has left in office on the fingers of one, or with luck, two of his hands.”
I dunno. Let’s see. Trumpus Erraticus never sleeps.
C’mon now, let fly.
Yes Steve, it definitely enhances your credibility now that Trump uses the same talking points.
You’re known by the company you keep.
Remember when you said you would stop replying to me if I didn’t retract? You said that several times. I haven’t retracted.
Big bold (over)statements and claims (that you don’t justify or maintain) are your specialty
I knew it!
I knew that if I plonked an orange soft plastic Trump lure in front of AC that like a half-starved barramundi he would not be able to resist.
But I confess, I was hoping he would hit it hard and go full jilted lover.
Instead, I got a whimper.
Why this sudden coyness?
For days it’s been Trump Trump Trump, (here, and nine at A Dramatic Development in the Ukraine Situation) but now with an opportunity to go the whole hog, the full jilted lover, he’s given us nothing. It’s his little green men saga all over again. (He can come clean on that one any time he likes.)
Whatever happened to AC’s self-proclaimed sign of intelligence? — to read widely and distill this into an opinion that you’re capable of expressing in your own words.
He clearly has an opinion on Trump.
But suddenly there is no words.
What conclusion can we draw from that?
Just in case you didn’t notice Steve, you’re the one using Trump’s talking points on this issue.
That is entirely enough to eliminate the credibility of both you and Trump.
But do you remember saying you would stop replying to me unless I retracted?
Can you identify when I retracted? No
“do you remember saying you would stop replying to me unless I retracted?”
I do remember that. It was when I first realised that AC is a serial fabricator. And no, he did not retract.
But AC has brought this up twice now.
Is this a thinly disguised plea for me to stop replying? A plaintive cry for help? Has AC inadvertently revealed the working of his subconscious mind?
I don’t want to go there.
But there’s no point in going over what is there for all to see. Let’s look at what is being said now.
AC has alleged that I’m “using Trump’s talking points on this issue”.
AC is too coy to state what they are, so I’m at rather a disadvantage here.
And there’s no way that I’ll venture a guess at what AC might be implying. No way I’ll be peeking into the dark recesses of that mind.
But I will say this. If Trump was to hold a press conference to declare to the world that the Earth is round, I would have no choice but to agree with him.
That might be it!
Could that be what’s behind all this sudden coyness from AC about Trump?
Has Trump made a statement about Ukraine that’s on a credibility level with “the Earth is round”?
I like where this is going.
It seems to me in this vast complexity, that AC and his mate are attempting to hold a ‘political line’ ignoring event timelines, and without proper citations to afford the reader the opportunity to investigate their narratives. It’s tiresome.
And when someone (mostly SD) offers a correction, they resort to diversions, mostly in the form of irrelevant personal attacks, confabulations, guesses and aspersions as to SD’s political alignment and cause celebre. Even more tiresome.
Trawling through it is nauseating, but trawl I must, just in case I learn something new.
S.DAVIS 317,A COMMENTATOR, 11.Regardless of the outcome of this match, one thing is certain..the world is going to shit.Double fast, now that the oligarchy has their criminally insane puppet in place.
As Satchmo once sang..”what a wonderful world”
Hey Clakka — my purpose here is very simple and straightforward.
I’m here to entertain leefe ! 🙂
“Is this a thinly disguised plea for me to stop replying?”
Not at all, I’m entirely happy for you you to continue to make big, unqualified statements that you then back away from and qualify or modify.
That’s your most entertaining trait
I’m just reminding you of the range of changing positions you adopt when challenged
By the way Clakka, I’m not of the view that I’m likely to change anyone’s opinion with my comments.
I’m only providing an informed and brief balance to some of the self important, verbose nonsense posted here by one or two that share Trump’s position on Ukraine.
I share the information that I have read, and not interested in spending even more time finding the links to material I’ve read previously.
But please let me know if you believe anything I’ve said is incorrect
To Harry Lime. Yes, you are right. But it IS a wonderful world, because there are thousands of people, maybe millions, who see through the oligarchy and their insane puppets, and to try to be reasonable and put things right. They don’t just give up. “If you don’t fight, you lose”.
AC, a predictable response from you.
I’m not interested in your conflations, which constitute the majority of your verbiage. As for your unsupported and alleged ‘facts’, I’ve already made my comment.
As for being your teacher, you’d leave me no option but to give you an ‘F’, so I’m not interested.
US and Russian fossil fuel and mining oligarchs, following geopolitical eugenics of the ‘realism school’, avert their gaze from Putin’s invasion of Ukraine, in their demands for ‘peace’ including the Atlas Koch anti-Ukraine Heritage (partnered with Tone’s workplace whose lead is Quadrant’s Euro correspondent), Viktor Orban and now Trump-Putin pact vs Ukraine and the EU.
Conversely, Anglo media claim huge result in German elections for far right, Putin supporting AfD and attracting lots of young males. However, this is ignorant or masks other dynamics: 80% didn’t support the AfD, concentrated in the east of former DDR voters who are more male, middle aged and older, subjected to both Putin and Musk agitprop.
What’s missed? It’s how many of the German centre through left, including many (former) pacifists, now support raising taxes and funds for arming Germany, Europe and Ukraine to stop Putin (& Trump); not trusting Trump & USA hence, splitting off.
This has been a sea change (coming), meanwhile the Anglosphere meekly follows far right fossil fueled geopolitical eugenics of attacking the EU, sovereign nations and progress, to then blame the centre and victims via empathy and humanity bypasses?