A coup supported by the west in 2014, a color (orange) revolution before that. In both cases there was overt support for the anti-government protests and vetting and planning for the US favored successor (“Fuck the EU”).
A former Georgian prime minister (same that got Georgia into an armed conflict with Russia and who came into power in Georgia by a flower revolution) became head of Odessian Oblast with US support some time after 2014.
Various paramilitary groups were funded / backed by Russia / US / other people. Among them obviously the “peoples republics”.
Years of investment in “pro”-democracy NGOs many of which are known to be affiliated with the State Department and intelligence fronts, to the point that many maidan protesters / organizers were essentially paid to be there.
The Crimean referendum happened under Russian influence obviously.
The whole Nordstream 1/2 project came into existence because Ukraine was annoying to deal with and some German politicians were more than a bit too friendly and open to Russian suggestions.
In turn there was a lot of planning by the US happening to slow down Nordstream 2.
There are a lot more examples like that. Ukraine is an excellent case study how large blocks / nations follow through on their foreign policy goals over decades.
> A coup supported by the west in 2014, a color (orange) revolution before that. In both cases there was overt support for the anti-government protests and vetting and planning for the US favored successor (“Fuck the EU”).
And what were the events that led up this revolution? Walk me through the details.
> In turn there was a lot of planning by the US happening to slow down Nordstream 2.
And now Nordstream 2 is cancelled. Are you saying Putin is working with western oil and gas companies? Had Russia not invaded Ukraine last month, Nordstream 2 wouldn’t have been cancelled and gas would continue to flow into Europe.
The 2014 one was basically an association agreement with EU fell through, in part because they / the IMF were unwilling to extend a line of credit without massive cuts to government subsidized gas / energy and Russia threatened to cancel the Tarif agreements between Ukraine / Russia (as they otherwise would have given unrestricted access to EU goods to Russia. Russia instead gave a ~15 billion credit. Various NGOs then followed a typical playbook, occupy a central square, agent provocateurs showed up and created violent incidents, the Kiev mayor ordered a violent removal of protestors in order to install christmas decorations. Some protestor was shot, turned into a martyr, the investigation who was responsible has been inconclusive afaik. Various neo nazi groups (right sector) started arming themselves and attacking security forces, trying to storm government buildings. In total I think roughly ~120 protestors and ~20-40 security forces were killed. Janukovitch narrowly escaped the storming of his residence. Orange Revolution I don’t really remember any details.
I answered above in relationship to foreign interference and how sophisticated it can be. Ukraine has been of interest since the end of WWII to American intelligence, with many former Ukrainian Nazi Collaborators and Resistance fighters being approached by British and US intelligence.
Nordstream is in many ways just s bargaining chip, strong German and Russian interest in it, US obviously opposed. Instigating as much instability in Ukraine and making sure that German, Russian cooperation becomes untenable, was surely part of the US plan. Germany will now import US / US client states LNG and build corresponding terminals. US imposed various sanctions and the pipeline was held up for various reasons even before the war started. Obviously that doesn’t justify Russian aggression. This is just to say that the whole Gas thing is an excellent example of foreign interference in a country both in Germany (Russia & US) and in Ukraine (Eu & Russia & US). Note how it also played a role in the maidan revolution.
All of this to say, if Russia hadn’t invaded, Germany and Europe would be moving right along with buying Russian gas.
The problem with this theory is this idea that somehow an EU-aligned Ukraine represents a threat to Russia or Russian energy. It doesn’t. All the foreign interference in the world is irrelevant.
The truth of the matter is that Putin thought that gas supplies to Europe were a sufficient bargaining chip to prevent the EU and an in-fighting United States (thanks China/Russia/Iran, appreciate the taste of our own medicine) from acting while he took over a resource rich and to Putin, historically important Ukraine. Putin tells you this. He wrote about it and has talked about it endlessly. There is no mystery here. No grand “foreign interference” conspiracy. The US has no reason to care if Russia supplies energy to Europe except to the extent that Russia then goes on to cause chaos and trouble elsewhere. This is evident by the actions of the US which have been appeasement after appeasement.
The US propped up pro-western governments in Ukraine and sentiment as a wedge issue in particular between Germany and Russia, but also France Russia. They invested upwards of 5 billion to do so. Relationships between Russia - France - Germany were good in the early 2000s they began to deteriorate from 2004 (Orange revolution) onwards. It has been a long standing strategic goal of both the British empire and now the American Empire to keep these three countries non-aligned. Both project power by controlling sea trade routes, an economically integrated Russia would eventually significantly reduce American influence.
The natural resources of the Russian Empire / Soviet Union / Russia together with the industrial base of Germany and France would have been no match at any time of the 20th Century. Both world wars were fought in part about gaining control of the Ukranian (then Russian) resources. The separate peace of Brest-Litovsk split off essentially Ukraine and made it a protectorate of Germany. In many ways the collapse of the Soviet Union and the attempts at integrating former parts of the Russian empire are analogous.
But yeah this doesn’t explain putins actions. I would mostly agree with your analysis of his motivations.
It's not going so well for Ukrainians, and it remains to be seen for the Russians, but recent events have been a triumph huge success for those particular foreigners whose primary goal is selling more weapons manufactured in USA.
It’s going much better than even the most optimistic assessment. I fail to see how selling more American weapons (many of which are being given away?) is more economically advantageous than like, not having a destroyed Ukraine. Maybe you can walk me further through the logic here. Who is making these decisions? Was it Trump when he fought to get Nordstrom’s 2 cancelled? Or is it Biden? Or…?
Even those weapons that are "given away" are first purchased by USA taxpayers. This whole dynamic was observed long ago by Eisenhower. Probably he could have done something to resist it, but puppets like Trump and Biden have very little say in the matter. The most they can do is pick among options when TPTB suffer from a lack of unanimity: see our pathetic withdrawal from Afghanistan. The last guy who really stood up to this, got shot in Dallas.
A stable prospering Ukraine is of no more value to the actual decision makers than a stable prospering DR Congo.
Well then there isn’t much to do nor any reason to care is there?
> see our pathetic withdrawal from Afghanistan
Eh withdrawal was fine. Needed to get out of their ASAP. A little chaotic but the military (woah Biden made the MIC do something they didn’t want to do???!) didn’t think he’d actually order them out since everyone has talked about it for years and they were too far invested to cut their losses.
But sure. The Us wants to sell more weapons. So does Russia. The Russian MIC started the war so Putin would have to buy and upgrade equipment. So there ya have it.
This leads one to suspect trolling. The withdrawal was pathetic because it didn't take place two decades earlier, after ObL left Afghanistan. Also, because it has been followed by the "asset freeze" and associated starve-the-children policy.
Russia isn't led by its MIC; it is led by the dictator that USA installed. Putin, who came to power via USA manipulation, is now opposed by USA manipulation. In this, he takes his place on a long list of world leaders:
Victoriano Huerta,
Raoul Cédras,
Jean-Bertrand Aristide (actually democratically elected, but later removed and reinstalled numerous times in some weird Clintonian game),
Augusto Pinochet,
Suharto,
Rafael Trujillo,
Saddam Hussein,
Mobutu Sese Seko,
Ngo Dinh Diem,
Dương Văn Minh,
Nguyễn Khánh,
Fernando Romeo Lucas García
I'm probably missing a lot here. Especially I think there are many African leaders who could be added to this list. If the fondest dreams of CIA reptiles come true and they somehow manage to replace Putin with some other awful person, we can be sure that eventual opposition to that person's rule will fuel even more sales of armaments.
> The withdrawal was pathetic because it didn't take place two decades earlier, after ObL left Afghanistan. Also, because it has been followed by the "asset freeze" and associated starve-the-children policy.
I don't follow this chain of reasoning. Bin Laden left Afghanistan for Pakistan, the closest realistic staging area was Afghanistan (if you're going to attack this from a "get Bin Laden" angle).
> Russia isn't led by its MIC; it is led by the dictator that USA installed. Putin, who came to power via USA manipulation, is now opposed by USA manipulation. In this, he takes his place on a long list of world leaders:
Speaking of trolling...
If the US is so powerful that it can easily install whoever it wants as a puppet leader in any country, including Russia, then you should go grab a beer and relax and just enjoy your life because there is nothing you can do and nothing for you to be concerned with. The US is all-powerful and all-seeing.
Alternatively, you can not peddle very ridiculous conspiracy theories and not waste my time.
