Sure, sure. I just don't care to see another civil war -- which is what we will get and it may very well serve US interests. Not so much the Ukrainian people. I have already stated my opinion of Vladimir. I am only speaking of this particular situation. It is clear that we facilitated the overthrow of a democratically elected government ("midwife this thing" to use Victoria Nuland's happy phrase).
The Future of Ukraine
- Thread starter sailordeac
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
Sure, sure. I just don't care to see another civil war -- which is what we will get and it may very well serve US interests. Not so much the Ukrainian people. I have already stated my opinion of Vladimir. I am only speaking of this particular situation. It is clear that we facilitated the overthrow of a democratically elected government ("midwife this thing" to use Victoria Nuland's happy phrase).
vadimivich
Well-known member
I hate agreeing with Lectro even the tiniest bit - but yes, there are some very nasty people with deep connections to Svoboda who are part of the new Ukrainian government.
European right wing nationalism doesn't have to make sense these days, and anti-semetism and fascism aren't the same thing - you can be anti-semetic and left wing (see groups in France) and you can be ultra right wing and Jewish (see many parties in central and eastern europe). The confusion of fascism and anti-semetism as being the same thing just because Hitler and his crew were both is flat out wrong.
European right wing nationalism doesn't have to make sense these days, and anti-semetism and fascism aren't the same thing - you can be anti-semetic and left wing (see groups in France) and you can be ultra right wing and Jewish (see many parties in central and eastern europe). The confusion of fascism and anti-semetism as being the same thing just because Hitler and his crew were both is flat out wrong.
Agree. In the Ukraine you have a variety of fascists on both sides of this dispute.
We just happen to be in bed with the Nazi party - which I would think could prove somewhat troublesome for the average OGB'er.
Just hazarding a guess...
vadimivich
Well-known member
Svoboda are far right nationalist populists. They aren't a true "neo-Nazi" party in the traditional sense like Greece's Golden Dawn is, as they don't have a platform that includes scientific racism.
Not saying that Svoboda doesn't have some vile people in it, they very much do. But in the complex swirl of far right parties in Europe, they really aren't "Nazi".
Yes, we can split hairs over degree of virulence... lets just say that Svoboda is "Stridently Anti-Semitic but has yet to industrialize their hatred". No doubt they feel that Jews are sub-human and the world would be better off without them.
Western Media in lock step. After you watch it for many years -- and applying Noam Chomsky's methods for reviewing tactics - you see the same drumming up of half truths and bald faced lies. Not really much different than the litany of falsehoods which preceded the last Iraqi invasion.
As the Ukraine crisis continues to deepen, the mainstream U.S. news media is sinking to new lows of propaganda and incompetence. Somehow, a violent neo-Nazi-spearheaded putsch overthrowing a democratically elected president was refashioned into a "legitimate" regime, then the "interim" government and now simply "Ukraine."
The Washington Post's screaming headline on Sunday is "Ukraine decries Russian 'invasion,'" treating the coup regime in Kiev as if it speaks for the entire country when it clearly speaks for only a subset of the population, mostly from western Ukraine. The regime's "legitimacy" comes not from a democratic election but from a coup that was quickly embraced by the U.S. government and the European Union.
Objective U.S. journalists would insist on a truthful narrative that conveys these nuances to the American people, not simply behave as clumsy propagandists determined to glue "white hats" on the side favored by the State Department and "black hats" on everyone that the U.S. government disdains. But virtually the entire mainstream press corps has opted for the propaganda role, much as it has in the past. Think Iraq 2002-03.
You also might remember the mainstream media's rush to judgment over the Sarin attack in Syria on Aug. 21, 2013. The State Department rashly blamed the incident on the Syrian government despite serious doubts inside the U.S. intelligence community.
To conceal those dissents, the State Department and the White House issued a four-page "Government Assessment," rather than a National Intelligence Estimate from the 16 U.S. intelligence agencies. That would have had to include footnotes revealing disagreements over the evidence among the analysts.
When the "Government Assessment" was posted online at the White House Web site on Aug. 30, it contained not a single piece of evidence that could be independently checked. That same day, Secretary of State John Kerry gave a nearly hysterical speech that sounded like a declaration of war. He insisted that the U.S. government had conclusive proof of the Syrian government's guilt but he just couldn't reveal any.
The U.S. press corps showed virtually no skepticism about the U.S. government's case. Only a few Web sites, including Consortiumnews.com, noted the lack of verifiable proof and the absence of U.S. intelligence officials during the presentations, including none sitting behind Kerry when he made the rounds of congressional hearings.
The evidence regarding the Syrian government guilt apparently was so flimsy that no U.S. intelligence official wanted to play the role of CIA Director George Tenet who popped up behind Secretary of State Colin Powell during his deceptive speech on Feb. 5, 2003, asserting a definitive case that Iraq was hiding weapons of mass destruction.
But the dog-not-barking in the missing intelligence officials on Syria was ignored by the big media. Instead, the New York Times, the Washington Post and other major news outlets reprised their Iraq War roles.
The Vector Analysis
In September, the Times even fronted a story -- by C.J. Chivers and Rick Gladstone -- asserting that it had established Syrian government guilt for the Sarin attack, much as a 2002 Times story reported that Iraq's purchase of aluminum tubes was proof of a secret nuclear program. That Times story became the basis for President George W. Bush and his top aides scaring the American people with warnings about "mushroom clouds."
As the Ukraine crisis continues to deepen, the mainstream U.S. news media is sinking to new lows of propaganda and incompetence. Somehow, a violent neo-Nazi-spearheaded putsch overthrowing a democratically elected president was refashioned into a "legitimate" regime, then the "interim" government and now simply "Ukraine."
The Washington Post's screaming headline on Sunday is "Ukraine decries Russian 'invasion,'" treating the coup regime in Kiev as if it speaks for the entire country when it clearly speaks for only a subset of the population, mostly from western Ukraine. The regime's "legitimacy" comes not from a democratic election but from a coup that was quickly embraced by the U.S. government and the European Union.
Objective U.S. journalists would insist on a truthful narrative that conveys these nuances to the American people, not simply behave as clumsy propagandists determined to glue "white hats" on the side favored by the State Department and "black hats" on everyone that the U.S. government disdains. But virtually the entire mainstream press corps has opted for the propaganda role, much as it has in the past. Think Iraq 2002-03.
You also might remember the mainstream media's rush to judgment over the Sarin attack in Syria on Aug. 21, 2013. The State Department rashly blamed the incident on the Syrian government despite serious doubts inside the U.S. intelligence community.
To conceal those dissents, the State Department and the White House issued a four-page "Government Assessment," rather than a National Intelligence Estimate from the 16 U.S. intelligence agencies. That would have had to include footnotes revealing disagreements over the evidence among the analysts.
When the "Government Assessment" was posted online at the White House Web site on Aug. 30, it contained not a single piece of evidence that could be independently checked. That same day, Secretary of State John Kerry gave a nearly hysterical speech that sounded like a declaration of war. He insisted that the U.S. government had conclusive proof of the Syrian government's guilt but he just couldn't reveal any.
The U.S. press corps showed virtually no skepticism about the U.S. government's case. Only a few Web sites, including Consortiumnews.com, noted the lack of verifiable proof and the absence of U.S. intelligence officials during the presentations, including none sitting behind Kerry when he made the rounds of congressional hearings.
The evidence regarding the Syrian government guilt apparently was so flimsy that no U.S. intelligence official wanted to play the role of CIA Director George Tenet who popped up behind Secretary of State Colin Powell during his deceptive speech on Feb. 5, 2003, asserting a definitive case that Iraq was hiding weapons of mass destruction.
But the dog-not-barking in the missing intelligence officials on Syria was ignored by the big media. Instead, the New York Times, the Washington Post and other major news outlets reprised their Iraq War roles.
The Vector Analysis
In September, the Times even fronted a story -- by C.J. Chivers and Rick Gladstone -- asserting that it had established Syrian government guilt for the Sarin attack, much as a 2002 Times story reported that Iraq's purchase of aluminum tubes was proof of a secret nuclear program. That Times story became the basis for President George W. Bush and his top aides scaring the American people with warnings about "mushroom clouds."
Continuing -
The Chivers-Gladstone story cited the azimuths (or the reverse flight paths) of two Sarin-laden rockets intersecting at a Syrian military base northwest of Damascus, the "slam-dunk" proof of Syrian guilt, making those of us who raised questions about lack of evidence look stupid.
But both Times stories -- the one in 2002 and the one in 2013 -- collapsed under scrutiny. The Iraqi aluminum tubes, it turned out, were unfit for nuclear centrifuges (and the U.S. invasion force later determined that Iraq had no active nuclear program), and the intersecting azimuths proved false because only one of the two rockets contained Sarin and its maximum range was around 2.5 kilometers, according to scientific analyses, not the necessary 9.5 kilometers for the two azimuths to cross.
So, in December 2013, three months after the Times ran its front-page "vector analysis," Chivers got the assignment to write a grudging retraction, though the admission of his error was mumbled in the 18th paragraph of a story stuck deep inside the newspaper. [See Consortiumnews.com's "NYT Backs Off Its Syria-Sarin Analysis."]
Because the retraction was "buried," however, much of Official Washington still thinks the earlier story, supposedly proving the Syrian government's guilt, is operational. That's why you see politicians, like Sen. John McCain, accusing President Barack Obama of cowardice for failing to bomb Syria after it crossed his "red line" against using chemical weapons.
You've had a similar rush to judgment in connection with the violence that broke out in Kiev last month. The U.S. government and news media blamed lethal sniper fire on the government of President Viktor Yanukovych and -- after he was driven from office by a neo-Nazi-led putsch on Feb. 22 -- the U.S. media made much of how the new rump regime in Kiev had accused Yanukovych of mass murder.
However, according to an intercepted phone conversation between Estonia's Foreign Minister Urmas Paet and European Union foreign affairs chief Catherine Ashton, Paet reported on a conversation that he had with a doctor in Kiev who said the sniper fire that killed protesters was the same that killed police officers.
As reported by the UK Guardian...
"During the conversation, Paet quoted a woman named Olga -- who the Russian media identified her as Olga Bogomolets, a doctor -- blaming snipers from the opposition shooting the protesters.
"Paet said, 'What was quite disturbing, this same Olga told that, well, all the evidence shows that people who were killed by snipers from both sides, among policemen and people from the streets, that they were the same snipers killing people from both sides.
"'So she also showed me some photos, she said that as medical doctor, she can say it is the same handwriting, the same type of bullets, and it's really disturbing that now the new coalition, that they don't want to investigate what exactly happened. ... So there is a stronger and stronger understanding that behind snipers it was not Yanukovych, it was somebody from the new coalition.'
The Chivers-Gladstone story cited the azimuths (or the reverse flight paths) of two Sarin-laden rockets intersecting at a Syrian military base northwest of Damascus, the "slam-dunk" proof of Syrian guilt, making those of us who raised questions about lack of evidence look stupid.
But both Times stories -- the one in 2002 and the one in 2013 -- collapsed under scrutiny. The Iraqi aluminum tubes, it turned out, were unfit for nuclear centrifuges (and the U.S. invasion force later determined that Iraq had no active nuclear program), and the intersecting azimuths proved false because only one of the two rockets contained Sarin and its maximum range was around 2.5 kilometers, according to scientific analyses, not the necessary 9.5 kilometers for the two azimuths to cross.
So, in December 2013, three months after the Times ran its front-page "vector analysis," Chivers got the assignment to write a grudging retraction, though the admission of his error was mumbled in the 18th paragraph of a story stuck deep inside the newspaper. [See Consortiumnews.com's "NYT Backs Off Its Syria-Sarin Analysis."]
Because the retraction was "buried," however, much of Official Washington still thinks the earlier story, supposedly proving the Syrian government's guilt, is operational. That's why you see politicians, like Sen. John McCain, accusing President Barack Obama of cowardice for failing to bomb Syria after it crossed his "red line" against using chemical weapons.
You've had a similar rush to judgment in connection with the violence that broke out in Kiev last month. The U.S. government and news media blamed lethal sniper fire on the government of President Viktor Yanukovych and -- after he was driven from office by a neo-Nazi-led putsch on Feb. 22 -- the U.S. media made much of how the new rump regime in Kiev had accused Yanukovych of mass murder.
However, according to an intercepted phone conversation between Estonia's Foreign Minister Urmas Paet and European Union foreign affairs chief Catherine Ashton, Paet reported on a conversation that he had with a doctor in Kiev who said the sniper fire that killed protesters was the same that killed police officers.
As reported by the UK Guardian...
"During the conversation, Paet quoted a woman named Olga -- who the Russian media identified her as Olga Bogomolets, a doctor -- blaming snipers from the opposition shooting the protesters.
"Paet said, 'What was quite disturbing, this same Olga told that, well, all the evidence shows that people who were killed by snipers from both sides, among policemen and people from the streets, that they were the same snipers killing people from both sides.
"'So she also showed me some photos, she said that as medical doctor, she can say it is the same handwriting, the same type of bullets, and it's really disturbing that now the new coalition, that they don't want to investigate what exactly happened. ... So there is a stronger and stronger understanding that behind snipers it was not Yanukovych, it was somebody from the new coalition.'
And so it goes... right on schedule
Forbes, Washington Post all agree that this situation is going to require us to build new Nuclear missiles.
GD, our country must truly be out of real money. They are determined to create and move product and, of course, "Fuck the EU"
Good shit: http://www.forbes.com/sites/lorenth...ale-for-new-nuclear-weapons/?partner=yahootix
Forbes, Washington Post all agree that this situation is going to require us to build new Nuclear missiles.
GD, our country must truly be out of real money. They are determined to create and move product and, of course, "Fuck the EU"
Good shit: http://www.forbes.com/sites/lorenth...ale-for-new-nuclear-weapons/?partner=yahootix
The United States of America and its brand of State sponsored terrorism.
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=fWkfpGCAAuw
What happened in the Ukraine and the WAR that is coming.
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=fWkfpGCAAuw
What happened in the Ukraine and the WAR that is coming.
WFFaithful
Well-known member
More sanctions on Russia? Cruz, Paul say not so fast. Loosen the rules on tax exempt political organizations first. OBAMA'S SO WEAK!!!!!
Drones in Syria? GOP says not so fast. OBAMA'S SO WEAK!!!!!
Drones in Syria? GOP says not so fast. OBAMA'S SO WEAK!!!!!
sailordeac
Well-known member
Is Putin looking to move on Moldavia next?
If only there were a way to travel to the future and find out what Ukraine will be like and come back and fix the future problems now.
WFFaithful
Well-known member
#Romney2016
Deacon923
Scooter Banks
The less Americans know about where Ukraine is located, the more they want the US to go to war to defend it.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/monkey-cage/wp/2014/04/07/the-less-americans-know-about-ukraines-location-the-more-they-want-u-s-to-intervene/?hpid=z1
'Murica.
Several survey respondents believe that Alaska is Ukraine, or that Ukraine is actually inside the continental United States.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/monkey-cage/wp/2014/04/07/the-less-americans-know-about-ukraines-location-the-more-they-want-u-s-to-intervene/?hpid=z1
'Murica.
Several survey respondents believe that Alaska is Ukraine, or that Ukraine is actually inside the continental United States.
bym051d
I AM VERY IMPORTANT
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2011
- Messages
- 39,355
- Reaction score
- 5,127
Don't those dipshits know the difference in Ukraine and Georgia?
WFFaithful
Well-known member
Woot!
Newenglanddeac
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 1, 2011
- Messages
- 13,135
- Reaction score
- 390