You know, you seem very logical, and I'd feel very inclined to hear you speak.It was the Assistant Secretary of State of the United States, Victoria Nuland, former foreign policy advisor to Dick Cheney, the Darth Vadar of the W Bush administration. Cheney, the power behind the throne, with the rhetoric of the "mushroom cloud", led the US on the biggest wild goose chases in modern history, where modern history means since the rise of the origin of modern western intellectual endeavor, Greece. Yep, Victoria Nuland was his foreign policy advisor. Likely not really an advisor in the deep sense of the term, probably more like a sorceror's apprentice. Also of note. She is the wife of prominent neoconservative Robert Kagan. Actually in some ways, depending on how one wishes to view it, they make a very nice couple. I'm serious.
There is a problem though. They are lost in an illusion.
But any rate, that's who she is.
OK. Let's educate ourselves a bit here. We need to get out of the world of CNN and Fox News and try to look at the world in a deeper sense, one that is not so much concerned about rah rah, we are the best. But rather a world that seeks to minimize, though not totally rid itself of such emotional influence, and think about the matter more in terms of pure power concepts. One in which the foreign policy of the real world functions.
I really hate to inform you, but because of it's intrinsic nature, it is a very cold world. Its players do not care even about the collateral damage of innocent human beings when they perceive that their interests are at stake. I further hate to inform you that for the US, democracy is not the primary objective. It is really superficial. It is merely a tool to achieve control. Democracy is promoted because money can exert great, though not absolute, influence on democracies. And it is through that influence that the United States seeks to control Ukraine. Again, not in the absolute sense, but in the sense of achieving what it feels are it's objectives.
Here's something from a person who has advised the US government on foreign policy and is considered an expert on matters of Ukraine. Please note, this was years ago in 2001, long before any of the present events took place.
So back as far as at least 2001, there was this type of thinking in the US foreign policy establishment that Ukraine falling back into the Russian sphere of influence would be a threat to US interests in Europe. As a result of this, the US had worked actively in Ukraine to make sure that does not happen. That 5 billion dollars is one way in which the United States meant to keep that from happening. That is the reality.
Now here is where it gets really interesting because here we can get a view, at least from the perspective of an influential person in the US foreign policy establishment, of what US goals are in a more real sense in terms of actual implementation.
This is very important. These things should be read carefully. So here we can see that the US means to have a Ukraine that has a sustainable pro-Western orientation. Why is this important? Because, although Ukraine is directly on Russia border, the US is pursuing a foreign policy that is in direct conflict with the goals of Russian foreign policy in Ukraine. This indeed is the sore point for the Russians. They feel that although they are a nuclear armed state, the US disregards this, and right on its border vigorously pursues a foreign policy that is directly contrary to their policy.
But when you type with an attitude, such as you just did, I feel no need to hear you out. Check your tone.