Replies

In the General/Chat forum, on a thread titled Nato demand for 3.5pc defence spending blows hole in Starmer’s review, Petrosius wrote:

Trump says the State Department helped overthrow the Ukraine in 2014. I believe Trump, not you.
Petrosius wrote: Trump is not our Dear Leader with whom we must always agree. He has made some ill-informed statements about Ukraine.
ransomnote: I didn't say Trump is our 'Dear Leader' with whom we have to agree. I'm I believe him, not you, because his credibility far, far exceeds yours. It's Trump's reputation which exceeds that of anonymous pro Ukrainian posters on FR.
There are other good sources who confirm the State Department and CIA helped overthrow the Ukraine. There's a recorded phone call in which Victoria Nuland and another CIA asset discuss whom they want to install in the Ukrainian government.
Petrosius wrote: But even if it were true, it has been made moot by the two subsequent elections.
ransomnote: The CIA/State Department invested a lot in their overthrow of the Ukraine, as they always do when they 'acquire' a nation's sovereignty. They did not give up when Yanukovych left office. Ukrainian citizens don't have the power to throw out corrupt officials, so Yanukovych was 'fired' by the CIA/State Department. The CIA/STAT DEPT continued to control and select their leaders through election theft, just as the CIA/Dems do in the United States. Zelensky is controlled by NATO/CIA.
Petrosius wrote: What may or may not have happened in 2014 is no justification for Russia's invasion eight years later. The truth is that Putin is upset that his own interference in Ukrainian with Yanukovych was thwarted. It is the hight of hypocrisy for Putin to complain about Yanukovych's removal when one of his stated war aims is to replace the elected Ukrainian government with a pro-Russian one acceptable to Moscow.
ransomnote wrote: Putin watched NATO/Deep STate put into action their plan to install their puppet in Russia. He knew when they overthrew the Ukraine in 2014 the DeepState/Globalist/NATO had plans to 'acquire' Russia and its nukes.
He watched while they built an army and dug fortifications for 8 years for the purpose of starting a war and driving him from office. They wanted to make a long bloody war so that Russian citizens would tire of it and remove him. That's why Zelensky keeps the war going long after he could conceivably continue to staff his war (he's out of men and ammunition). There are portions of the front lines which are unmanned; this is being encountered on an increasing basis.
Putin knows NATO/Deep State will never stop attacking Russia because they plan to rule the world, and he'd prefer a peaceful partner with whom Russia can trade.

Putin watched NATO/Deep STate put into action their plan to install their puppet in Russia.

And how was that supposed to happen? All you are offering is paranoid speculation.

He watched while they built an army and dug fortifications for 8 years for the purpose of starting a war and driving him from office.

Did you miss the part where Russia invaded and occupied that land. Ukraine was not intending to attack Russia; only to recover its own land and protect itself from Russian attacks. There were no NATO troops in Ukraine to back them up. Do you really think that Ukraine would have been able to attack Russia on its own?

They wanted to make a long bloody war so that Russian citizens would tire of it and remove him. That's why Zelensky keeps the war going long after he could conceivably continue to staff his war (he's out of men and ammunition).

If that were true then the Russians should be able to just march to Kyiv unopposed. Russian apologists have been predicting a Ukrainian collapse for over three years. It has yet to happen. Zelensky is continuing to fight because the Russians are continuing to attack. Is that really that hard to understand?