Ukrainian Government Acknowledges that Some of Its Leaders Are Nazis

The US was clearly trying to install known nazi party members in the new government, with Nuland's efforts.

a reply to: YouPeople

If you really want me to explain my "point" to you as though you were a toddler, I'd be happy to.

Here it is, champ.

"Sometimes, bad people find a way to hold important roles in society."

"But, those bad people can be voted out if you live in a Country that lets you vote for people"

"That way, even if a bad person comes to have power, they can still removed through democracy."

There ya go slugger, my "point" nicely laid out for you.

a reply to: ScientificRailgun

The problem is that it is not relevant at all. Not in relation to the comment you replied to, or anything else I said.

So again, what is your point, sis?

a reply to: ScientificRailgun

"Sometimes, bad people find a way to hold important roles in society."

Especially when they are being put forward by US ambassadors. It has nothing to do with democracy.

a reply to: YouPeople

You still don't get it?

Is English your second language? I'm genuinely asking as anyone with a concrete grasp of English would have gotten my point.

Oh wait, I get it now. You're baiting me.

How fun.

Nah they're not really Nazi's that's just the official 'cover story' they use.

This is who they really are...

a reply to: ScientificRailgun

I am baiting you? Did I enter a thread you were active in and start replying to your comments with irrelevant and random drivel?

I think not.

Yes, English is not my native language, but I understand what you are saying just fine. I do not understand how it is relevant though.

a reply to: YouPeople

Ah, so we're swapping drivel then. Just as the whole "Nuland and The U.S. pushed Nazis into power in Ukraine" narrative is unsubstantiated drivel as well.

Were some Nazi sympathizers part of the interim government in Kiev? Probably. Eastern Europe is awash with Nazi sympathizers. MY point is that they have been voted out through the democratic process.

YOUR point seems to be that there was some vast conspiracy to get nazis into power in Ukraine. Which of these two claims is factually true?

a reply to: ScientificRailgun

YOUR point seems to be that there was some vast conspiracy to get nazis into power in Ukraine.

My point is that US government will put forward any character that might be of use to them, without any morality.

Unsubstantiated you say? These talks are documented.

Why are they interfering and creating governments in the first place?

a reply to: YouPeople

The talks are documented?

The talks where they discuss putting Nazis in government? Did they say "Man, we should totally put nazis in charge of Ukraine!"

But boy did they get egg on their face with the Ukrainians voted them out! Those silly americans, putting nazis into a democratic government, didn't they know they'd get voted out? Worst supervillains ever.

Did they also twirl their mustaches while they were planning this?

a reply to: ScientificRailgun

Tahnyenhuk was not put forward by Nuland?

The US was not directly involved with creating the new government, putting forward the members that got in?

Why is the US interfering with the creation of Ukraine's government.

Again, this is documented.

Your attempts at being sarcastic don't change this fact.

Historically, choosing between the brutal Hitler and the brutal Stalin must have been very difficult. However, by WW2 we need to recognise that Stalin and the Soviets has already engineered a famine in Ukraine that killed between 2.5 and 7 million Ukrainians in 1932-33.

Many Ukrainians were just prepared to fight with anyone who was against Stalin!

This continuous accusation from Russia that the Ukrainians are Nazis avoids the fact that Stalin and was probably worse to Ukrainians than was Hitler. Both regimes were vile and as bad as each other.

originally posted by: YouPeople
a reply to: ScientificRailgun

Tahnyenhuk was not put forward by Nuland?

The US was not directly involved with creating the new government, putting forward the members that got in?

Why is the US interfering with the creation of Ukraine's government.

Again, this is documented.

Your attempts at being sarcastic don't change this fact.

I'm being sarcastic because it literally means nothing. One: There's is ZERO concrete evidence that the US interfered with the creation of Ukraine's government.

Two: Even if there WAS, the recent elections changed most seats.

Three: You attempting to make the flimsy connection between the U.S., Ukraine, and Nazis while frantically waving your arms about screaming "See?! There's a connection! The U.S. Are NAZIS!" is what's ridiculous about this thread.

a reply to: ScientificRailgun

One: There's is ZERO concrete evidence that the US interfered with the creation of Ukraine's government.

I would say the leaked phonecalls in w(h)ich Victoria Nuland is literally discussing who gets to be in the government is about as concrete as it gets.

You want something concrete like a videotaped confession involving all players?

Two: Even if there WAS, the recent elections changed most seats.

Again, this doesn't change the fact that it did happen.

Three: You attempting to make the flimsy connection between the U.S., Ukraine, and Nazis while frantically waving your arms about screaming "See?! There's a connection! The U.S. Are NAZIS!" is what's ridiculous about this thread.

Quite the opposite of acting like there is nothing wrong here, huh......

originally posted by: YouPeople
I would say the leaked phonecalls in whuich Victoria Nuland is literally discussing who gets to be in the government is about as concrete as gets.

To be fair, a discussion between a diplomat and Nuland hypothesising about who should be in the reformed Ukrainian government does not represent US policy, especially as Nuland's ire is directed towards the EU(!) and not the exactitudes of Ukrainian politics.

However, apart from that taped and informal conversation, is there any real evidence that the US is interfering in Ukrainian politics? Any evidence that the EU is interfering for that matter? We already have evidence of Russian interference, but let's be hushed about that because it's inconvenient.

a reply to: YouPeople

One: That "infamous" phone call with Nuland was a) taken out of context and b) not at all proof that the U.S. Chose who went into the new Ukrainian government. If you look at the text of the entire conversation, Nuland was providing an opinion, not appointing a dictator. If that's all you need as your "proof" of some conspiracy, I have a bridge in Nebraska to sell you.

Two: Why would the U.S. take such careful measures to make sure exactly who they wanted was in place in the Ukrainian government if new elections would be held ANYWAY when things stabilized a bit?

Three: I never said there was nothing wrong in Ukraine. They have a whole of crap to deal with, but arguing over who was in power when those players are no longer in power is a useless exercise by itself. Instead of trying to point fingers and assign blame for what's happening, why not give some concrete steps for Ukraine to move forward on it's own? Oh wait, that wouldn't push the anti-west agenda you have. My bad.

originally posted by: YouPeople
a reply to: ScientificRailgun

YOUR point seems to be that there was some vast conspiracy to get nazis into power in Ukraine.

My point is that US government will put forward any character that might be of use to them, without any morality.

Unsubstantiated you say? These talks are documented.

Why are they interfering and creating governments in the first place?

By who Russian media?

originally posted by: YouPeople
a reply to: ScientificRailgun

Tahnyenhuk was not put forward by Nuland?

The US was not directly involved with creating the new government, putting forward the members that got in?

Why is the US interfering with the creation of Ukraine's government.

Again, this is documented.

Your attempts at being sarcastic don't change this fact.

No but your attempting to change the facts..
Tell you what go back and listen to the nuland conversation. And then let's see what actually happened. Even the person she thought should be put in charge wasnt. In fact nothing she said in the video happened. That's very odd if the US was in control of ukraine. How could they possibly be in charge but nothing they thought would happen did??

a reply to: paraphi

To be fair, a discussion between a diplomat and Nuland hypothesising about who should be in the reformed Ukrainian government does not represent US policy, especially as Nuland's ire is directed towards the EU(!) and not the exactitudes of Ukrainian politics.

Sure.

This is not about the EU remark. They are clearly talking about what decisions they are going to influence, they are discussing their strategy, quite obviously.

Why would they plan a strategy when they are not planning to interfere?

However, apart from that taped and informal conversation, is there any real evidence that the US is interfering in Ukrainian politics? Any evidence that the EU is interfering for that matter?

I don't think it would be made evident.

But please, how childishly naive are you people. US and EU have been trying to get Ukraine in the EU for years. Off course they are interfering.

I mean how can Russia not do something. I don't blame Russia for looking out for its best interests when they are in jeopardy. I think that sofar they handled it well and probably with a lot more restraint than some people had hoped for.

We already have evidence of Russian interference, but let's be hushed about that because it's inconvenient.

What are you whining about? I am not talking about the Russians now. What do you want me to say? Off course Russia is involved. You'd have to be a retard to not understand that.

The same goes for America's and the EU's involvement.

a reply to: dragonridr

Even the person she thought should be put in charge wasnt

Really?