• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Crimea parliament declares independence from Ukraine ahead of referendum

Moot said:
I provided a link to a hacked phone conversation of a US diplomat chosing which leader the US wanted for leader of Ukraine and now he is.
Click to expand...

What you have is a US diplomat talking to another about the two players and which one they preferred, and which one they thought would come out on top. Apparently, in bizarro world, it's better for diplomats to be wrong- I guess that makes them look innocent. If you're right? You're evil. If you're wrong? You're dumb. Very convenient.

Supporting the opposition by proxy is typical of US invasions. It worked quite well with Pinochet.
Click to expand...

lol, so that's a no. Difficult to admit, we see.

Whats intersting about Nuland's hacked phone call is the that US hasn't denied a single word she said and much of it has already come to pass.
Click to expand...

Would you believe it if they did? So what does it matter?

She gave her opinion on which of two would be better, and she was right. SHOCKER.
 
Moot said:
The US wanted Yats to be leader of Ukraine....and look...now he is.
Click to expand...

The participants in the telephone conversation thought he was the best man for the job and he might well be. We'll see.
 
Moot said:
I don't think I hate the US anymore than you do.

I provided a link to a hacked phone conversation of a US diplomat chosing which leader the US wanted for leader of Ukraine and now he is. But I guess if you don't want to see it then of course it must not exist.


Supporting the opposition by proxy is typical of US invasions. It worked quite well with Pinochet.

Thats debatable.

Take it easy, pal..its just a forum.



Yeah, that was a pretty stupid false equilvent that you posted there. lol Whats intersting about Nuland's hacked phone call is the that US hasn't denied a single word she said and much of it has already come to pass. Yats is now officially a US puppet.
Click to expand...

Then if you don't hate the US, why are you so quick to assume hypercritical conspiracy theories that have no basis in fact other than people believe it's possible since the US is awful and does these type things everywhere (which they do not)? You give way to much credit to the US if you think we actually could have coordinated this event. The only time this type event has even come close to occurring with the help of the US it involved an armed insurrection which this was not. Pinochet is a non-sequitur.

Your linked phone call shows nothing more than a typical discussion between two diplomats. Nothing more. I would suggest doing some research on International Affairs. IR is accomplished by every country with the sole goal of what is in the best interest of that country. Have anything else?

Of course the US isn't going to deny the conversation. Nor should they. And it's not a ridiculous comparison between what you say and what happened with Putin saying he hoped Obama was elected; that is unless what you say happened is ridiculous, which it is (which means they both are). That's why I stated it. To demonstrate the illogical and unrealistic jump from the phone call to saying there is proof the US put them in power.

Do you feel that any country has the right to invade another country and impose their chosen and hand picked person over that government? You accuse the US of doing that with no proof yet support Russia doing that very thing while denying it happened against empirical evidence that they did?

Why? If not out of hatred for the US?
 
OldWorldOrder said:
What you have is a US diplomat talking to another about the two players and which one they preferred, and which one they thought would come out on top. Apparently, in bizarro world, it's better for diplomats to be wrong- I guess that makes them look innocent. If you're right? You're evil. If you're wrong? You're dumb. Very convenient.
lol, so that's a no. Difficult to admit, we see.
Would you believe it if they did? So what does it matter?
She gave her opinion on which of two would be better, and she was right. SHOCKER.
Click to expand...

That these two people in the conversation were actually able to overthrow the Ukrainian government must rank as the greatest diplomatic coup of the ages. I'm certainly impressed.
 
Grant said:
The participants in the telephone conversation thought he was the best man for the job and he might well be. We'll see.
Click to expand...

From what I've read about Yats, he is very qualified and a moderate. I totally agree with the US picking Yats over Olag and the other guy, the boxer. But it's still US interference anyway you slice and dice it.
 
Grant said:
That these two people in the conversation were actually able to overthrow the Ukrainian government must rank as the greatest diplomatic coup of the ages. I'm certainly impressed.
Click to expand...

The more you think about it the more ridiculous it becomes: a diplomat took a picture with a recognized important factional leader in a country; there's an uprising, that diplomat says that leader is probably going to take over, and that's okay/preferable; the leader ends up taking power. That's evidence of a coup created by the CIA? How obscenely ignorant of both foreign affairs/State Department operations and intelligence operations do you have to be to make that assumption? Christ: there's so many things I'm ignorant of, but I try not to post conspiracy theories about them. I'm not a high school football coach or storm window sales executive, so I don't post crazy theories about those industries.
 
OldWorldOrder said:
The more you think about it the more ridiculous it becomes: a diplomat took a picture with a recognized important factional leader in a country; there's an uprising, that diplomat says that leader is probably going to take over, and that's okay/preferable; the leader ends up taking power. That's evidence of a coup created by the CIA? How obscenely ignorant of both foreign affairs/State Department operations and intelligence operations do you have to be to make that assumption? Christ: there's so many things I'm ignorant of, but I try not to post conspiracy theories about them. I'm not a high school football coach or storm window sales executive, so I don't post crazy theories about those industries.
Click to expand...

You overlooked the cookie angle. Any word yet on what kind they were? It might be a factor.
 
OldWorldOrder said:
What you have is a US diplomat talking to another about the two players and which one they preferred, and which one they thought would come out on top. Apparently, in bizarro world, it's better for diplomats to be wrong- I guess that makes them look innocent. If you're right? You're evil. If you're wrong? You're dumb. Very convenient.
Click to expand...

Phone calls were made by Nuland directly to Yats to tell him the US wanted him to be president and not the boxer or the right wing extremist. Next thing we know, Yats is the unelected president of Ukraine. So what really have here is a very high level US State Department diplomat with the authority and creditionals to represent US foreign policy and negotiate directly to and with representives and leaders of another country in order to influence a favorable outcome for US interests. Don't act so shocked, countries have been using that kind of representative diplomacy for centuries.


lol, so that's a no. Difficult to admit, we see.

Would you believe it if they did? So what does it matter?

She gave her opinion on which of two would be better, and she was right. SHOCKER.
Click to expand...
Nuland speaks for and represents US foreign policy and she didn't make the decision to pick Yats on her own....no no no....she was advised by Freedom House...a neocon think tank funded by the US government. I must say, it's impressive how little you know on the subject, owo. lol
 
Moot said:
Phone calls were made by Nuland directly to Yats to tell him the US wanted him to be president and not the boxer or the right wing extremist. Next thing we know, Yats is the unelected president of Ukraine. So what really have here is a very high level US State Department diplomat with the authority and creditionals to represent US foreign policy and negotiate directly to and with representives and leaders of another country in order to influence a favorable outcome for US interests. Don't act so shocked, countries have been using that kind of representative diplomacy for centuries.


Nuland speaks for and represents US foreign policy and she didn't make the decision to pick Yats on her own....no no no....she was advised by Freedom House...a neocon think tank funded by the US government. I must say, it's impressive how little you know on the subject, owo. lol
Click to expand...

But what about the cookies?
 
Beaudreaux said:
Then if you don't hate the US, why are you so quick to assume hypercritical conspiracy theories that have no basis in fact other than people believe it's possible since the US is awful and does these type things everywhere (which they do not)?
Click to expand...
Gee, I dunno, why do you hate the US so much that you have to lie and misrepresent my arguement?

You give way to much credit to the US if you think we actually could have coordinated this event. The only time this type event has even come close to occurring with the help of the US it involved an armed insurrection which this was not.
Click to expand...
Thats an extemely naive arguement you have to think the US isn't involved. Are you sure you don't want to rethink it?

Pinochet is a non-sequitur.
Click to expand...
Don't be so dismissive. Pinochet was an excellent example of US involvement in a coup that toppled a democratically elected government.

Your linked phone call shows nothing more than a typical discussion between two diplomats. Nothing more. I would suggest doing some research on International Affairs. IR is accomplished by every country with the sole goal of what is in the best interest of that country. Have anything else?
Click to expand...
Merkel didn't think so.


Of course the US isn't going to deny the conversation. Nor should they. And it's not a ridiculous comparison between what you say and what happened with Putin saying he hoped Obama was elected; that is unless what you say happened is ridiculous, which it is (which means they both are). That's why I stated it. To demonstrate the illogical and unrealistic jump from the phone call to saying there is proof the US put them in power.
Click to expand...
Do you ever actually read what you write or what other people write? Or is all just logical fallacies one right after another with you?

Do you feel that any country has the right to invade another country and impose their chosen and hand picked person over that government? You accuse the US of doing that with no proof yet support Russia doing that very thing while denying it happened against empirical evidence that they did?

Why? If not out of hatred for the US?
Click to expand...
Why? Why do you keep defending far right nazi nationalist if not for your deep hatred for the US? See, I can play that game, too.
 
Moot said:
Good question, what about those cookies?
Click to expand...

LOL. I'm too damn tired to read any more conspiracy theory BS.

Good night Moot. Have a good evening. Seriously. Until I got this headache (unrelated to you) it was fun going back and forth. Maybe tomorrow.
 
Beaudreaux said:
What? Nazi's? Reductio ad Hitlerum. Some of the protestors were priests as well. Does that make them all priests. Some were woman, are they all women?

That riot you mentioned has nothing to so with this.

At this point, I'm extracting myself from the attempts of others to cloud the true issue, which is... At what point in your mind, does any of this give Russia the right to invade another sovereign nation and take control with their military that they have a signed treaty with that country that precludes such military aggression?
Click to expand...

Not everybody views Russia's response to a US backed overthrow of an elected government in the same terms.
 
Moot said:
Phone calls were made by Nuland directly to Yats to tell him the US wanted him to be president and not the boxer or the right wing extremist. Next thing we know, Yats is the unelected president of Ukraine. So what really have here is a very high level US State Department diplomat with the authority and creditionals to represent US foreign policy and negotiate directly to and with representives and leaders of another country in order to influence a favorable outcome for US interests. Don't act so shocked, countries have been using that kind of representative diplomacy for centuries.
Click to expand...

Ummm...yeah. That's not a CIA created coup or uprising, though. That's normal foreign affairs.

Nuland speaks for and represents US foreign policy and she didn't make the decision to pick Yats on her own....no no no....she was advised by Freedom House...a neocon think tank funded by the US government. I must say, it's impressive how little you know on the subject, owo. lol
Click to expand...

lol what? hahahahahah
 
Moot said:
Phone calls were made by Nuland directly to Yats to tell him the US wanted him to be president and not the boxer or the right wing extremist. Next thing we know, Yats is the unelected president of Ukraine. So what really have here is a very high level US State Department diplomat with the authority and creditionals to represent US foreign policy and negotiate directly to and with representives and leaders of another country in order to influence a favorable outcome for US interests. Don't act so shocked, countries have been using that kind of representative diplomacy for centuries.


Nuland speaks for and represents US foreign policy and she didn't make the decision to pick Yats on her own....no no no....she was advised by Freedom House...a neocon think tank funded by the US government. I must say, it's impressive how little you know on the subject, owo. lol
Click to expand...

Freedom House, NED, USAID are all CIA front groups. History proves it.
 
Beaudreaux said:
I tried to tell that earlier. They just can't get past their tin foil hat rage against the US, the CIA, the NSA and maybe even Disneyland.
Click to expand...

Actually, the answer as to why this all happened is quite nuanced. No, the new Ukraine government is not a US puppet.

1) Viktor Yanukovych attempted to bring Ukraine under Russian influence. The people in Western Ukraine naturally revolted, as they want to be part of the Western alliance.

2) Crimea has a majority Russian population. They support Russia, and welcomed the Russian invasion.

3) This is a situation where you had 2 different ethnicities living under one roof, which was an unstable situation that could not last.

4) Viktor Yanukovych and his henchmen were Oligarchs who looted the treasury and turned it into their private piggy bank. The new leadership in Ukraine consists of Oligarchs who are looting the treasury, and turning it into their private piggy banks. Some things just don't change, despite change.

How the hell can people claim that the CIA was behind this? There is absolutely no evidence to support that. The facts point to the obvious reason. Western Ukranians, and Crimean Russians could never stand each other. Something had to give.
 
QUOTE=Moot;1063042011]Phone calls were made by Nuland directly to Yats to tell him the US wanted him to be president and not the boxer or the right wing extremist. Next thing we know, Yats is the unelected president of Ukraine. So what really have here is a very high level US State Department diplomat with the authority and creditionals to represent US foreign policy and negotiate directly to and with representives and leaders of another country in order to influence a favorable outcome for US interests. Don't act so shocked, countries have been using that kind of representative diplomacy for centuries.
Click to expand...
If all it takes is a phone call from a diplomat to unseat the leader of the Ukraine, maybe they should make the same phone call about Putin. Or any of the 'stan countries. No invasion necessary.

Nuland speaks for and represents US foreign policy and she didn't make the decision to pick Yats on her own....no no no....she was advised by Freedom House...a neocon think tank funded by the US government. I must say, it's impressive how little you know on the subject, owo. lol
Click to expand...
So the the real power behind all of this is Freedom House, a 'neocon think tank' buried somewhere under the bowels of Washington DC directing who should be the head of different countries throughout the world.

Do you understand that all those James Bond movies were not documentaries?
 
Grant said:
If all it takes is a phone call from a diplomat to unseat the leader of the Ukraine, maybe they should make the same phone call about Putin. Or any of the 'stan countries. No invasion necessary.

So the the real power behind all of this is Freedom House, a 'neocon think tank' buried somewhere under the bowels of Washington DC directing who should be the head of different countries throughout the world.

Do you understand that all those James Bond movies were not documentaries?
Click to expand...

Do you understand that the NED, USAID, FreedomHouse, etc., are CIA front groups? Many State Dept. representatives are commonly CIA agents. Many Mainstream Media reporters, editors assets are CIA. This is about real life and real crooks.
 
DaveFagan said:
Do you understand that the NED, USAID, FreedomHouse, etc., are CIA front groups? Many State Dept. representatives are commonly CIA agents. Many Mainstream Media reporters, editors assets are CIA. This is about real life and real crooks.
Click to expand...

The CIA exists to collect intelligence, but don't worry about them knocking on your door.
 
Grant said:
The CIA exists to collect intelligence, but don't worry about them knocking on your door.
Click to expand...

So you dispute Dave's claims in that post? The CIA exists for far more than that, and you know that Grant.
 
USAID is not a CIA front group.


:screwy
 
DaveFagan said:
Another missing link.
Click to expand...

False. You must prove your claim. One cannot prove a negative.

Obviously, you cannot prove your claim because it's nutbag CT crap. Thus, case closed.
 
OldWorldOrder said:
No links what? Proving a negative? Oooookay, Dave. lol
Click to expand...

You don't understand Dave's complaint. He hates covert operations. Rather, he favors military invasions.
 
Grant said:
The CIA exists to collect intelligence, but don't worry about them knocking on your door.
Click to expand...

You do know that the CIA has its' own army now and that the DRONES, like the one in Crimea operating out of Ukraine, are under CIA control. Before you would have your drone in Ukraine, you would have boots on the ground in Ukraine to operate and maintain, train, etc. That's known as enlightenment. Free to a good home. The CIA budget is acknowledged as $50 billion, not counting anything that they can develop as self sustaining, self financed like Oliver North, Iran/Contra to Congress, drugs for arms testimony.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom