Ukrainian Government Acknowledges that Some of Its Leaders Are Nazis

a reply to: DJW001

You mean when the head of state defected to Russia, forcing the government to reform? Agreed. Russia broke the agreement when they started bribing Yanukovych.

How was Yanukovich bribed then? Can you back this up?

Defected to Russia, forcing the government to reform? Lol, nice way of twisting things around.

I am pretty sure he had to flee.

a reply to: YouPeople

Well Russia gave Ukraine $15 billion in 2013. Then Yanukovych completely changed his tune regarding the EU deal. I wonder whatever happened to that $15 billion. Especially considering Yanukovych fled to Russia with billions of dollars that belonged to the Ukrainian people.

You have to admit that's a bit more direct cause and effect than the US spending $5 billion in aid over 20+ years to get Ukraine to join the West. Especially when you consider that Ukraine voluntarily applied to NATO in 2008 and was denied.

a reply to: Xcalibur254

Well Russia gave Ukraine $15 billion in 2013. Then Yanukovych completely changed his tune regarding the EU deal. I wonder whatever happened to that $15 billion. Especially considering Yanukovych fled to Russia with billions of dollars that belonged to the Ukrainian people.

So much utter BS in this post. Russia didn't "give" 15 billion to Ukraine.

Yes, Yanukovich changed his tune, because Russia offered a better deal. Russia offered this deal when Ukraine was about to break the treaty between them by signing the Association Agreement with the EU.

He fled to Russia with billions belonging to the Ukranian people?

Are you making stuff up now? Can you back up these claims.

What billions might that be?

I hope you are not suggesting that the promised 15 billion from Russia belongs to the Ukranians, after signing the EU deal?

You have to admit that's a bit more direct cause and effect than the US spending $5 billion in aid over 20+ years to get Ukraine to join the West.

I don't have to "admit" to things I never mentioned or contested.

a reply to: DJW001

Criticising Israel is antisemitism ... are you candidate for the Nobel Price of whining ?

Separating anti-Semitism from anti-Zionism

originally posted by: theultimatebelgianjoke
a reply to: DJW001

Criticising Israel is antisemitism ... are you candidate for the Nobel Price of whining ?

Separating anti-Semitism from anti-Zionism

No, arbitrarily trying to turn a thread about fascism into a thread about Israel is. Like you are trying to do now. I get it: you don't like Israel but are okay with Russia.

Mod note #2

Let's keep away from getting personal, alright?

Stick to the topic.

Do not reply to this post

originally posted by: DJW001

No, arbitrarily trying to turn a thread about fascism into a thread about Israel is. Like you are trying to do now. I get it: you don't like Israel but are okay with Russia.

Please don't jump to conclusion about what other posters may think, or don't try to summarize other posters thought for your own profit. It's not my fault if you must consider things from a 'Good VS Evil' perspective, things are more subtle than that imo.

a reply to: DJW001

No, arbitrarily trying to turn a thread about fascism into a thread about Israel is.

No it is not. You didn't quite refute his valid claim there. Seems that criticising Isreal = Anitsemitism, according to you.

The title of this thread has been proven to be a lie. Even the article linked to in the OP does not make the claim Why this sudden rush to derail the thread? Are you trying to cover something up?

a reply to: YouPeople

Then why did Ukraine receive $15 billion from Russia and reduced gas prices in December 2013 shortly after Yanukovych turned down the agreement he had been fighting for years to get passed?

And yes Yanukovych did steal from the Ukrainian people. Ukraine's chief prosecutor says he and his cronies may have stolen upwards of $100 billion. Interpol even had a red note out on him for embezzlement.

And if you're not going to mention the $5 billion then what is your evidence for a West backed coup?

a reply to: Xcalibur254

Then why did Ukraine receive $15 billion from Russia and reduced gas prices in December 2013 shortly after Yanukovych turned down the agreement he had been fighting for years to get passed?

Ehm, because that was part of the better deal I was talking about? Duh? And again, money was not just "given", and also there never was a construction in which an amount of 15b would be transferred in one go.

-Reuters- Russia threw Ukraine an economic lifeline on Tuesday, agreeing to buy $15 billion of Ukrainian debt and to reduce the price its cash-strapped neighbor pays for vital Russian gas supplies by about one-third. The deal, reached at talks in Moscow between the Russian and Ukrainian leaders, is intended to help Ukraine stave off economic crisis though Moscow will hope it keeps Kiev in its political and economic orbit. The agreement could also fuel protests in Kiev against Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovich, who faces accusations of "selling" Ukraine to the highest bidder after spurning a trade deal with the European Union and turning to Moscow for help.

www.newsweek.com...

And yes Yanukovych did steal from the Ukrainian people. Ukraine's chief prosecutor says he and his cronies may have stolen upwards of $100 billion. Interpol even had a red note out on him for embezzlement.

This may vey well be true, or not, however it is not relevant to this 15 billion deal.

Not saying he is clean at all, but the fact remains that a legitimate president was ousted by a coup.


The rest of your post will be answered too.

Why am I not surprised that someone who thinks $5 billion in "civil society" aid over 20 years constitutes "financing a coup" also thinks that $15 billion in a couple of weeks is nothing untoward??

a reply to: Aloysius the Gaul

Why am I not surprised that someone who thinks $5 billion in "civil society" aid over 20 years constitutes "financing a coup"

Never said such a thing. I even said a few posts ago that I never said such a thing. Yet somehow it got concluded in your drivel.

also thinks that $15 billion in a couple of weeks is nothing untoward??

It is what it is. It was the deal that Russia offered and Ukraine agreed to it.

Russia threw Ukraine an economic lifeline on Tuesday, agreeing to buy $15 billion of Ukrainian debt and to reduce the price its cash-strapped neighbor pays for vital Russian gas supplies by about one-third. The deal, reached at talks in Moscow between the Russian and Ukrainian leaders, is intended to help Ukraine stave off economic crisis though Moscow will hope it keeps Kiev in its political and economic orbit.

What is the point of your drivel?

originally posted by: YouPeople
a reply to: Xcalibur254

Well Russia gave Ukraine $15 billion in 2013. Then Yanukovych completely changed his tune regarding the EU deal. I wonder whatever happened to that $15 billion. Especially considering Yanukovych fled to Russia with billions of dollars that belonged to the Ukrainian people.

So much utter BS in this post. Russia didn't "give" 15 billion to Ukraine.

Yes, Yanukovich changed his tune, because Russia offered a better deal. Russia offered this deal when Ukraine was about to break the treaty between them by signing the Association Agreement with the EU.

He fled to Russia with billions belonging to the Ukranian people?

Are you making stuff up now? Can you back up these claims.

What billions might that be?

I hope you are not suggesting that the promised 15 billion from Russia belongs to the Ukranians, after signing the EU deal?

You have to admit that's a bit more direct cause and effect than the US spending $5 billion in aid over 20+ years to get Ukraine to join the West.

I don't have to "admit" to things I never mentioned or contested.

You don't have to be "pro Russia" to understand they offered a deal that didn't involve austerity. It also involved lower gas prices. Between the two exploiters, Russia and the west, Ukraine would have been materially better off with Russia.

This doesn't mean I think Ukraine should have to rely on any sort of loans with strings attached. I think Russia and the IMF should get bent. It's like mafia fighting over territory and thus profits. Both sides are corrupt.

originally posted by: JeanPaul

originally posted by: YouPeople
a reply to: Xcalibur254

Well Russia gave Ukraine $15 billion in 2013. Then Yanukovych completely changed his tune regarding the EU deal. I wonder whatever happened to that $15 billion. Especially considering Yanukovych fled to Russia with billions of dollars that belonged to the Ukrainian people.

So much utter BS in this post. Russia didn't "give" 15 billion to Ukraine.

Yes, Yanukovich changed his tune, because Russia offered a better deal. Russia offered this deal when Ukraine was about to break the treaty between them by signing the Association Agreement with the EU.

He fled to Russia with billions belonging to the Ukranian people?

Are you making stuff up now? Can you back up these claims.

What billions might that be?

I hope you are not suggesting that the promised 15 billion from Russia belongs to the Ukranians, after signing the EU deal?

You have to admit that's a bit more direct cause and effect than the US spending $5 billion in aid over 20+ years to get Ukraine to join the West.

I don't have to "admit" to things I never mentioned or contested.

You don't have to be "pro Russia" to understand they offered a deal that didn't involve austerity. It also involved lower gas prices. Between the two exploiters, Russia and the west, Ukraine would have been materially better off with Russia.

This doesn't mean I think Ukraine should have to rely on any sort of loans with strings attached. I think Russia and the IMF should get bent. It's like mafia fighting over territory and thus profits. Both sides are corrupt.

There is no austerity measures on Ukraine your being delusional. Now to the reason Ukraine refused is the way Russia set it up. This wasn't a loan it was an agreement to buy Ukraines debt. This means Ukraine didn't get to spend the money they already did. what Putin did is simple he said you owe Russia we will push out those payment dates and we will buy up additional debt in bonds, Meaning it out Ukraine further in debt to Russia this was by design. With Russia holding Ukraine a debt they figured that gives them a level of control. This offer was quickly deemed ones Eleanor since they were trying to lessen Mod cows influence on Ukraine nor increase it.

This made loans from the EU much more attractive in that they were true loans where Ukraine borrows the money with a payment schedule. It also allowed them to invest the money where they could get positive returns unable to do that with Russian offer.

Russia could have set up low interest loans to Ukraine as well problem is Russia wanted to make money off the deal and control the Ukrainian govt. The Ukrainians just weren't stupid enough to fall into the Russian trap even their prices on gas they promised were subject to price increases.

a reply to: dragonridr

Now to the reason Ukraine refused is the way Russia set it up.

But they didn't refuse, Ukraine signed the deal.

Rewriting history are we?

Russia threw Ukraine an economic lifeline on Tuesday, agreeing to buy $15 billion of Ukrainian debt and to reduce the price its cash-strapped neighbor pays for vital Russian gas supplies by about one-third. The deal, reached at talks in Moscow between the Russian and Ukrainian leaders, is intended to help Ukraine stave off economic crisis though Moscow will hope it keeps Kiev in its political and economic orbit.

a reply to: YouPeople

But they didn't refuse, Ukraine signed the deal.

The Ukrainian people understood the Russian deal was a swindle and voted it down. It was Yanukovych who agreed to the deal and who consequently defected to Russia openly.