• kava@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    20 hours ago

    we’ve been pumping money into regime change in Ukraine since the early 90s. NED (National Endowment for Democracy) used to show the dollar figures and specific organizations on their website but deleted that information a while back. You can still find it with Wayback Machine

    Essentially we’ve been funding and supporting organizations in Ukraine under the guise of “pro-Democracy™” “pro-Liberty™” with the goal of supporting any potential chances for regime change. Some of those organizations just happen to be associated with the far-right groups that were part of the initial government that was unconstitutionally appointed In 2014 after Euromaidan- a series of violent protests that forced the pro-Russian president to flee the country.

    tldr: we’ve been destabilizing Ukraine for a long time. the idea was to peel off Ukraine from Russia’s orbit and throw it into the US orbit. And it worked. Which is why Russia invaded in 2014

    Note before I get the inevitable Russian shill comments - I’m not justifying any aggressive invasion by Russia. I’m saying this is a proxy war - a game of tug of war between two larger powers. Neither care in the slightest about what actually happens to the Ukrainians.

    They will not recover from this war for a hundred years. But Lockheed Martin stock will perform nicely

    edit: and remember this comment in 15 years. people will be talking as if what I’m saying is obvious. but right now the propaganda is strong- just like in 2003 with invasion of Iraq

    • barsoap@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      6 hours ago

      Note before I get the inevitable Russian shill comments - I’m not justifying any aggressive invasion by Russia.

      No, you’re just parroting their BS propaganda.

      Some of those organizations just happen to be associated with the far-right groups that were part of the initial government that was unconstitutionally appointed In 2014 after Euromaidan- a series of violent protests that forced the pro-Russian president to flee the country.

      The constitutionality of the confusing as fuck situation is quite irrelevant (the Rada had the power to do what it did, it did have the votes, but procedure was not necessarily followed properly when disposing of the AWOL president) because there were new elections right after, healing any hiccup. Elections which tanked the results of those far-right parties which weren’t exactly impressive in the first place.

      Elections which solved a popular uprising caused by the president to renege on the country’s path to EU accession. That was the sparking point for the protests, which at that point could’ve been solved without an erm special electoral operation, but the Russian puppet ordered Berkut to fire on protestors, which those didn’t appreciate and consequently failed to calm down and disperse.

      After said puppet went AWOL and got disposed and the interim government did nothing much really but organise elections, Poroshenko got elected (yay, another oligarch, as is tradition), trying to solve Russia’s invasion (the green men one) militarily. Zelensky pushed him out of office in the next elections, on a peace ticket, as a Russian native speaker… and then Russia invaded even more. They fucking hit Kiev. The Ukrainian army had re-grouped extensively after the little green men operation, the SBU had identified and neutralised gazillions of Russian operatives, either the FSB didn’t notice or they didn’t want to tell Putin what he didn’t want to hear. The rest is taxi memes.

      If that – those totally irrelevant right sector fucks – is the US’s influence in Ukraine then it truly is pitiful. Compare the influence of glorious Europe: Ukraine actually wants to join up!

    • mightyfoolish@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      14 hours ago

      That’s pretty sad. I don’t understand why we play with so many millions of lives as if it’s all one just big game. Thank you for the through reply.

      • kava@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 hours ago

        agree. the regular people are always the ones that will end up suffering. lockheed martin shareholders got to enjoy a 30% spike in their holdings after feb 2022. hundreds of thousands of ukrainians lost family members, had to flee their homes, lost limbs, many died/will die, etc

        i view geopolitics almost like i do tectonic plates. every once in a while when there are shifts, earthquakes happen. I think the Ukraine war is the small earthquake that always happens right before the big one.

        to make more WW2 analogies

        spanish civil war & italian invasion of ethiopia = ukraine proxy war & israel/gaza/lebanon/iran situation

        rise of fascists across europe = rise of the new pseudo-fascists in US & Europe & really all over the world (look at Argentina, India, etc)

    • Laser@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      20 hours ago

      How was Ukraine “destabilized” compared to other comparable ex-USSR states until 2014?

      And it worked. Which is why Russia invaded in 2014

      If a country being in US orbit is a reason for Russia to attack it, why didn’t they attack Finland? Or the US directly in Alaska? What’s the significance with Ukraine?

      There’s none other that Russia thought it was an easy target, breaking the Budapest Memorandum (and later other agreements). The same memorandum btw granted Ukraine non-military aid from the US and France, so the argument that this was somehow a dirty play makes no sense.

      • kava@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 hours ago

        How was Ukraine “destabilized” compared to other comparable ex-USSR states until 2014?

        see below. Ukraine was in a special position. most similar to Belarus, although much more important. US pumped money in a lot of ex-soviet states, that’s true.

        If a country being in US orbit is a reason for Russia to attack it, why didn’t they attack Finland? Or the US directly in Alaska? What’s the significance with Ukraine?

        Ukraine was under the Russian orbit since the 1700s. It was a fifth of the economic output of the USSR. In the Russian nation-state mythology Kiev is the mother city of all Russians. They share one of the largest borders in the world of mostly plains.

        There’s a lot of reasons. Russia views Ukraine as theirs. Neither Finland or Alaska hold a fraction of the ideological, historic, and strategic importance to the Russians

        The same memorandum btw granted Ukraine non-military aid from the US and France

        go and re-read the 1994 agreement. it does not promise any help at all beyond promising to “seek immediate [UN] Security Council action”.

        i don’t really think it’s relevant to the discussion though. international law (aka treaties) are used as justifications when convenient and ignored when not convenient.

        • Laser@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 hours ago

          Ukraine was under the Russian orbit since the 1700s. It was a fifth of the economic output of the USSR. In the Russian nation-state mythology Kiev is the mother city of all Russians. They share one of the largest borders in the world of mostly plains.

          There’s a lot of reasons. Russia views Ukraine as theirs. Neither Finland or Alaska hold a fraction of the ideological, historic, and strategic importance to the Russians

          Right, what I was getting at was that all the other claims are bullshit, this is a war because winning it would grant Russia strategic advantages, and they thought they’d win the conflict, probably not even expecting a full war; just a three day special operation.

          go and re-read the 1994 agreement. it does not promise any help at all beyond promising to “seek immediate [UN] Security Council action”.

          That’s why I wrote “granted”, I know this is more of a political intentions paper, my point was that nobody can act surprised when a signatory actually follows through later.

          One could ask the question why states are choosing to align with countries other than Russia. The answer is that most of Russia’s allies get screwed. Look at Armenia’s situation with the CSTO.

          • kava@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 hour ago

            Russia is a terrible ally and an even worse overlord I’m not arguing against that. It has a brutal history and a brutal people whose cultural DNA goes all the way back to the Mongol hordes pillaging and raping for tribute

            Right, what I was getting at was that all the other claims are bullshit, this is a war because winning it would grant Russia strategic advantages, and they thought they’d win the conflict, probably not even expecting a full war; just a three day special operation.

            yes, they expected Ukraine to fold. So did US intelligence, at least ostensibly.

            although at this point, anybody paying attention sees the writing on the wall. Russia has been slowly inching forward all year. They will win unless there is some sort of dramatic change in battlefield dynamics

            and US has no intention of allowing Ukraine to win. this is why I see US involvement as cynical. It was never meant to actually help Ukraine. Ukraine has been under Russian orbit for centuries. Throughout the entirety of the Cold War, it was under Russian control.

            It does not meaningfully alter the power balance between US and Russia. US is just taking advantage to extract as much as they can out of this war and then when the juice is squeezed out of the lemon, Ukraine will fall under Russian control.

            So if Ukraine losing was the point the entire time - what “help” was our help? It wasn’t to help the people, prolonging a destructive war only kills more people, destroys more homes, hamstrings economic output for a longer period of time. it will cost over $500B to reconstruct Ukraine (and I guarantee there won’t be any lively debates in congress on approving that aid) and Ukrainian demographics are ruined for a century

            This is sort of my entire point - the US interests in this war don’t line up with the Ukrainian citizen. We want

            a) Russia to bleed as much as possible for every inch

            b) as much public $$$ as possible to be transferred to private hands

            c) battlefield intelligence, both on new technologies and capabilities and on new Russian doctrines (for example drones & EW have been game changers) in preparation for the real war on the horizon

            those goals mean the best way to play it is to hurt Ukraine as much as possible. Keep the war going on as long as possible. But never invest enough for Ukraine to win - that would likewise end the war.

            It’s a very cynical and misanthropic position