Alright, in the interests of educating I would point out that the US financed and fomented a coup in Ukraine in 2014 to install a pro-US government, which then lead to the Constitution of Ukraine being rewritten so that NATO membership was back on the board.
That's a pretty big fucking change. Imagine Mexico or Canada suddenly having a pro-Chinese government installed and the CCCP forming a military alliance with them. You think the US might see that as a threat? Oh but this is different because the US can be trusted not to interfere abroad lol..
Meanwhile, the people in Crimea and the Donbass region being heavily Russian did not want any part of that CIA-backed Western interventionism that we've used to destroy vast parts of the world. Crimeans then voted to be annexed to Russia while Donetsk and Luhansk tried to break away as independent of Ukraine. The people in these regions DO NOT want to be a US puppet and that shouldn't be hard for us to understand considering our track record. Not that Russia's track record is much better, but at least they associate themselves with Russia. Better the devil you know as they say.
So then the US-backed government in Kiev who has been at war with their own citizens in Donbass and killing them for 8 years decided to cut off the water to Crimea and run their reservoirs dry, leading up to the invasion last year.
Remember this next time you hear our fucking talking heads on CNN & FOX News parrot the same "totally unprovoked invasion" talking point.
Which countries in the world do not recognize the current government of Ukraine and all preceding governments since 2014 as the legitimate governments of Ukraine?
Which countries recognize the independence of Luhansk and Donetsk?
If both answers are "Russia, Syria and North Korea", then I'd re-evaluate my views if I were you. The unprecedented international isolation of Russia and the total lack of support for its narratives speaks for itself.[1][2] Even Taliban voted against Russia, and I don't think anyone could argue that they have much sympathy towards "CIA-backed Western interventionism".
> Which countries recognize the independence of Luhansk and Donetsk?
Which countries recognize Kosovo, and now tell me how that's different? Hint: because we said so. And that's it.
Also, I love how you claimed nothing has changed in the last 20 years and then didn't refute a single thing I said showing how wrong you are, because you can't. We were behind a coup on their border and we pretend to be surprised that the Russkis didn't like it? lol k
There is nothing to refute. Kosovo is recognized by 101 UN members (out of 193). The narrative you described is a fiction that nobody in the world shares, not even Belarus is fully behind it (doesn't recognize LNR and DNR).
Well no, it's a fact that we were behind the coup. The question is why wouldn't you think it's obvious that Russia would have a problem with that?
It's also a fact that Kiev cutoff the water supply to Crimea. The question is, why wouldn't you think it's obvious that Russia would have a problem with that?
So knowing this, how can you say the response from Russia was "totally unprovoked" when we did everything we could to provoke it?
Also, the only difference between Kosovo being recognized by more countries is because the US wants it that way, and we get our way in the UN with most countries. But Kosovo doesn't deserve independence any more than the people of the Donbas, do they?
> Well no, it's a fact that we were behind the coup.
There was no coup and no-one recognizes it as such.
> It's also a fact that Kiev cutoff the water supply to Crimea. The question is, why wouldn't you think it's obvious that Russia would have a problem with that?
Don't invade other countries and you won't have to deal with such issues.
> the only difference between Kosovo being recognized by more countries is because the US wants it that way
The US is not all-powerful and has a long history of initiatives that have failed to gain traction despite best efforts to build support. But never before has Russia been in such international isolation. No-one besides Syria and North Korea find their narrative convincing.
Why no-one supports Russia, not even countries that are usually sympathetic?
> Don't invade other countries and you won't have to deal with such issues.
Crimeans voted to be annexed to Russia. Are we not supporting their right to self-determination? Let me guess, this is different?
Also, when you talk about not invading other countries do you not realize the irony of that when we have invaded more countries in the last 50 years than the rest of the world combined?
I am not "we the US". I was born in the USSR and I live in Eastern Europe.
> ..and on and on.
You can write anything you want on a website. Mafia shot Kennedy. Moon landing was faked. Covid doesn't exist. It doesn't make it true. Nor is salon.com authoritative source for assessing legitimacy of a government. I've set the benchmark to how many UN members endorse the view, and Russia has unprecedented lack of support for their current narrative, be it the illegitimacy of Ukraine's government, independence of LNR and DNR, or the Crimean referendum.
> Crimeans voted to be annexed to Russia. Are we not supporting their right to self-determination? Let me guess, this is different?
Again, virtually no-one recognizes it. The majority of United Nations, 100 countries, voted for a resolution calling this a mock referendum. Only 11 countries opposed: Russia, Syria, North Korea and a few other failed states.
The only argument you could possibly come up with is that for a decade, the US has somehow managed to force the whole world against Russia, from tiny Pacific island nations to India and China (including even Taliban!), but that's an obvious nonsense. No-one wields such power. Could it be that Russia is... just wrong? Violating every norm of international relations to a degree that it has lost all support it ever had among other countries?
If you think that the US controls foreign policy of almost all 193 members of the United Nations, including some if its greatest rivals like China, then this is just another view not supported by reality.
US de facto controls foreign policy through the UN and other international orgs for a majority of countries on earth. China and Russia are the two largest exceptions. We use economic pressure like a bully. This is a fact that nobody would dispute. You can agree with the aims of the US without pretending that we don't force other nations to do our bidding all the time.
Meanwhile, you never addressed the point that the US invades more nations than anybody else. Why are you ignoring that?
> US de facto controls foreign policy through the UN and other international orgs for a majority of countries on earth.
This is demonstrably false. For example, the US was very strongly against the UN resolution that declared Jerusalem's status as Israel's capital null and void, but nevertheless the resolution passed with 128 votes against 9.[1]
I am not interested in introducing another debunked internet copypasta into this conversation. It bears no relevance to the international recognition of LNR and DNR's independence, legitimacy of Ukraine's government and the Crimean referendum.
It seems like you have nothing to respond to the fact that these events have no international recognition whatsoever, nor can you explain it within the framework of your beliefs without resorting to easily debunkable conspiratorial thinking. That's an indication that your beliefs may be wrong.
> It bears no relevance to the international recognition of LNR and DNR's independence, legitimacy of Ukraine's government and the Crimean referendum.
Sure it does, it speaks to our hypocrisy and why our position on these matters is irrelevant. We recognize Kosovo and twist others arms to do so, and then not respect Crimeans desire to be annexed to Russia or LNR & DNR independence for no other reason than it doesn't fit our foreign policy objectives. It has nothing to do with the desires of the actual people that live there.
But you're right, it's a waste of time to discuss. You're such an apologist for our foreign policy fuckups that you can't even acknowledge the trainwrecks we've caused along the way.
I already showed how the assumption that the US can "twist others' arms" is not gounded in reality. The UN has a long and rich history of adopting resolutions that criticise US policy on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, yet here no-one sides with Russia.
It's quite surprising that even Belarus, which is internationally isolated, heavily depends on Russia, is deeply infiltrated by Russian intelligence services, and hosts a large contingent of Russian armed forces on its territory (to the extent that some don't even consider it independent anymore), refuses to fully endorse Russian narrative. Are they too under American influence?
Takes a strange kind of provincialism to attribute everything that's going on in the world to the US.
You are the only troll here. Instead of engaging in a conversation, you just throw talking points at me, and when I debunk them, you desperately try to move to new talking points. Not once have you said anything that would leave an impression of you as of a human; it feels like I am responding to someone reading off a script. Throughout the conversation, I've known three steps ahead what you'd write, because it's the same old tired script without any freedom to deviate into topics like the foreign policy of Belarus regarding Ukraine, LNR and DNR. I've seen zero original thought. Even utterly brainwashed Russians have some original reasoning to glue official talking points together to cope with the situation and justify it. You offer nothing.
Even modern chatbots aren't this stiff and stuck to the script.
