Rebel commander says separatists control 80 pct of Debaltseve in east Ukraine

“Ten unarmed Berkut policemen were shot dead on Feb. 18th”

On Feb. 18th, after neo Nazi Right Sector called for an offensive, the demonstrations were no longer peaceful and authorities had every right to use necessary force to restore order. Even according to Wiki, a biased pro-Western source in my view, the “protesters,” (1) broke through police barricades; (2) threw paving stones, grenades, and other explosives at police: (3) burned tires; (4), set fire to the Party of Regions Building; and (5) occupied and set fire to the Trades Union Building. I can assure you that, in the city in which I live, Washington, D.C., such conduct would be met with force. In April 1968, when riots erupted after the King assassination, more than 13,000 federal troops moved in to halt the unrest, in which twelve died and more than 1,000 were injured; more than 6,000 arrests were made.

“A few thousand “protesters” - or “rioters” do not have the right to oust by force a government legitimately elected”

The 2004 Amendments to the Ukrainian constitution were ruled unconstitutional by the Ukrainian Constitutional Court, not by Yanukovych. The adoption of the original Amendments, which dealt merely with the President’s right to appoint and dismiss ministers, were criticized at the time by Western bodies including the Council of Europe, the European Parliament and the Venice Commission. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_of_Ukraine

You provide no citation for jailing of political opponents, and don’t describe any concrete actions of protesters “being detained, kidnapped, beaten or killed.”
Rioting protesters would justifiably be detained for violation of the civil law. Any protesters “beaten or killed” on the Maidan would have happened mainly in the context of violent mob actions, such as occurred on Feb. 18th.

In any case, under Poroschenko, among many civil liberties violations, we find the “lustration” law banning from public office for five to ten years persons who were simply civil servants under the previous government or Communist party members. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lustration_in_Ukraine
This is estimated to affect a million people and has been condemned by the EU. http://rt.com/news/214275-ukraine-europe-lustration-law/ Ukraine has also banned 14 Russian cable channels. http://www.themoscowtimes.com/news/article/ukraine-bans-14-russian-tv-channels-for-war-propaganda/505424.html
Now Ukraine is jailing its own journalists for opposing the war. http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2015/02/10/free-ruslan-kotsaba/

Yankuovych’s ouster was clearly unconstitutional as even Wiki admits. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viktor_Yanukovych
When the people of Donetsk and Lugansk rose up against this illegal action ousting the President they voted for in overwhelming numbers, they were much more entitled to revolt than the Maidan protesters since they rebelled against an unconstitutional change of government and did not seek to remove a lawful government. The coup government, unlike Yanukovych, did not respond with a few thousand riot police, but with tens of thousands of soldiers and neo-Nazi paramilitaries, who proceeded to start a war that has killed thousands, maimed tens of thousands, and destroyed billions in property.

I don’t where you get your two million protester figure from, but even assuming it is correct, that is less than 45 million. Again, however, your argument proves too much, because the people of the Donbass, by overwhelming numbers have voted and fought for their independence, and thus have a much better justification for their actions than the Maidan protesters.

“This was a blatant “coup” ultimately fostered by the US/EU”

“This is documented by the famous Nuland-Pyatt conversation in which parties speculate on how the coup can be “midwifed” and who should be placed at the head of government - weeks before the actual overthrow at a time when a lawful government was in power.”

Ihere is no reference in the transcript to the Yanukovych offer, which clearly shows the US plotting to install a new government on Jan. 28th, weeks before the coup. Previous to this, Nuland publicly admitted in December 2013 that the US had spent $5 billion propagandizing Ukraine and interfering in its internal affairs since the early 1990s. http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article37599.htm
Further, in November 2013, delegate Oleg Tsarov presented detailed information to the Rada about US information warfare to undermine the existing government.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5gbVOr6n8Ww

As you are no doubt aware, the US has a long history of overthrowing governments it doesn’t like, including democratic ones, such as Iran (1953), Guatemala (1954), Brazil (1964), and Chile (1973).

“One of the leaders of the Ukrainian Ministry of Internal Affairs (MVD), the First Deputy Chairman of the Main Investigative Directorate of the Police, Vitaliy Sakal, made a sensational announcement.”

Would you please tell me how a story in January 2014 could possibly concern an investigation of events that did not occur until February 2014?

“It is inconceivable that reporters for both the pro-Russian RT and anti-Russian Telegraph, who attended the same news conference”

“This testimony can only be regarded as trustworthy if it is what we lawyers call “an admission against interest.”

I repeat that it is “inconceivable,” that both reporters made the exact same quotation mistake; readers of this thread - if there are any left - can judge for themselves.

“You provide not one whit of evidence that Ruban is not a general, although he is everywhere identified as such by pro-Western sources”

The man is being held out as a general even on Ukrainian TV. He is a prominent public figure in Ukraine who is esteemed enough to be charged with effecting prisoner exchanges on behalf of the Ukrainian government. Don’t you think such a public figure would have long since been called out by others for fraudulently representing his credentials? Even if he is not a general, he is a public figure who has acted as an agent of the Ukrainian government, which is sufficient to lend credibility to his words.

“Also google “Odessa Massacre.”

No, I’d say “neo-Nazis burn 42 people to death” covers it (of course holocaust is their specialty). In the spirit of your reply, however, I’d say, “Maidan demonstrators attacked police and got the worst of it,” or “Ukraine attacked Donbass and got the worst of it.”

In April 1968, when riots erupted after the King assassination, more than 13,000 federal troops moved in

Apples and oranges. There's a big difference between US riots accompanied by looting, and what happened on Maidan. Former, is a blind and misguided expression of rage, whereas Maidan was a goal-driven act of civil disobedience. It began with peaceful demonstrations but was forced to evolve to Molotovs and tire burning after beatings inside and outside of Maidan, dictatorial laws of January 2014, and Berkut advances into Maidan with BTRs and lethal weaponry on February 18-20.

Looting, drunkenness and other forms of lawlessness on and around Maidan were virtually non-existent.

This can't be said about Donetsk-Luhansk when Strelkov and Company moved in. Link

“A few thousand “protesters” - or “rioters” do not have the right to oust by force a government legitimately elected”

Hundreds of thousands of protesters, supported by half of the country absolutely have a right to oust a legitimately elected president if that president gone rogue. There are a number of historical precedents of democratically elected leaders going rogue, most prominent (and cliched) being Hitler.

The 2004 Amendments to the Ukrainian constitution were ruled unconstitutional by the Ukrainian Constitutional Court, not by Yanukovych.

Should have quoted the rest of the Wiki entry, which said that the reversal of constitution in 2010 was mired in controversy, especially the part about the 4 judges who resigned, or forced to resign. Yanukovich tempered in the work of the Constitutional Court. He was not the first one to do it, but we're not discussing others here.

The adoption of the original Amendments, which dealt merely with the President’s right to appoint and dismiss ministers, were criticized at the time by Western bodies including the Council of Europe, the European Parliament and the Venice Commission.

Yuschenko, as president at the time, was pushing to repeal the 2004 amendment. Yanukovich, as Prime Minister in 2006, sought to uphold it. He did so until he became himself a president and in 2010 when he "saw the error of his ways" bullied the Constitutional Court to repeal the 2004 amendment and gave himself more power.

Found a good summary of 2010 repeal of amendment here

You provide no citation for jailing of political opponents

My apologies, I had the assumption anyone well versed in Ukrainian events would get that it's a reference to Yulia Tymoshenko. Also there was Yuri Lutsenko.

and don’t describe any concrete actions of protesters “being detained, kidnapped, beaten or killed.”

Tetiana Chornovol,
Bulatov
Ihor Lutsenko and Yuriy Verbytsky
Vyacheslav Veremiy

Rioting protesters would justifiably be detained for violation of the civil law. Any protesters “beaten or killed” on the Maidan would have happened mainly in the context of violent mob actions, such as occurred on Feb. 18th.

All the people I listed above were taken outside of Maidan.

You won't hear sympathy for the commies coming from me. As for the rest, fire them all and re-admit them on case by case basis. State apparatus is too large. With Poroshenko & Co efforts they're are already running a smaller government, one of the few things they done well, it's commendable.

Ukraine has also banned 14 Russian cable channels.

War time measure - those channels were spreading ethnic hatred and war-time propaganda. Western democracies during WW2 also put a lid on spread of Nazi propaganda in their countries, freedom of speech and all.

Ukrainian Russian-language channels which dominated the TV dial in Ukraine haven't been affected.

Yanukovych’s ouster was clearly unconstitutional as even Wiki admits.

Yanukovich fled the country on his own free will and the country needed a president. Rules of impeachment haven't been applied because he wasn't impeached but relieved - he was unable to fulfill his duties as president.

When the people of Donetsk and Lugansk rose up against this illegal action ousting the President

You consider Strelkov and Borodai, military and political HEADS of the Russian militant organization as "the people of Donetsk" ? They're both Russian citizens for god's sake. So are Motorola, Kozitsyn, Babai and truckloads of Chechen mercenaries

The coup government, unlike Yanukovych, did not respond with a few thousand riot police, but with tens of thousands of soldiers and neo-Nazi paramilitaries, who proceeded to start a war that has killed thousands, maimed tens of thousands, and destroyed billions in property

Ukraine is defending against Russian aggression. They're supposed to just surrender to Russia? Ah-ha, wrong people

I don’t where you get your two million protester figure from

Based on this poll, 5% of the country's population travelled to Kyiv Maidan during November-February 2014. Another 6% protested in their cities. The numbers absolutely make sense. When protests were still peaceful in December, some weekends pulled hundreds of thousands of protesters in Kyiv.

There is no reference in the transcript to the Yanukovych offer, which clearly shows the US plotting to install a new government on Jan. 28th, weeks before the coup.

Yanukovych made an offer on January 25th. The offer doesn't have to be referenced, it's already a public record. Nuland-Pyatt tape leaked on February 6th, almost 2 weeks after Yanukovych offer was public.

Previous to this, Nuland publicly admitted in December 2013 that the US had spent $5 billion propagandizing Ukraine and interfering in its internal affairs since the early 1990s.

What was US propagandazing? (I'm not arguing here, just developing the idea )

Would you please tell me how a story in January 2014 could possibly concern an investigation of events that did not occur until February 2014?

My apologies, I assumed you would know that Nigoyan and Zhysnevsky, the two victims discussed in Sakal report, were killed on January 22 2014. The report white-washing the police came out end of January 2014. Russian agitprop reprinted this report in January 2015 as something new.

Justice minister lied about having Master's

People have been asking about Ruban credentials, but as long as he's saving Ukrainian soldiers, they haven't been as rigorous about it.

“In April 1968, when riots erupted after the King assassination, more than 13,000 federal troops moved in”

Are you seriously suggesting that if thousands of demonstrators in Washington stormed the White House and the government buildings around Lafayette Square with an object of overthrowing the government, they would be dealt with less severely than rioters no closer than ten blocks from the WH? Here’s a more recent example. In 2013, a mentally disturbed young woman with a toddler in her car ran a police barricade near the US Capitol and was immediately shot to death by five police bullets. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Capitol_shooting_incident_(2013)

You have inverted your facts concerning the Maidan as even recorded by Wiki, a CIA-edited source. The violence began when the Right Sector neo-Nazis started their “offensive” on Feb. 18th. “Around 09:45 in the morning the marching column of demonstrators broke through the police barricade of several personnel-transport trucks near the building of Central Officer’s Club of Ukraine (intersection of Hrushevskoho and Kriposny).[85] The demonstrators broke through the barricade and pushed the cordon of police aside.[86] The clashes started after some two dozen demonstrators moved a police vehicle blocking their path to parliament.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Ukrainian_revolution

No “looting,” “drunkenness, or “other forms of lawlessness?”
What do you call storming, sacking, and burning the opposition party headquarters building and the Trades Union building, not to mention the other forms of violence already detailed even in Wiki? If the mob was sober at the time, that is an aggravating, not a mitigating factor.

“A few thousand “protesters” - or “rioters” do not have the right to oust by force a government legitimately elected”

“I don’t where you get your two million protester figure from”

Throwing out a legitimate government by mob action is not justified. Even if your Ukrainian poll was accurate, it showed only that 47% to 46.1%, a statistically insignificant difference, supported the protests, not the violent overthrow of the government. The article clearly states: “most respondents (63.3%) believe that in order to achieve a positive outcome of protests it’s necessary to sit at the negotiating table, and the process should be made public,” quoting the press release. The article further states, “Some 11.1% of respondents believe that force should be used to resolve the conflict.”
Yanukovych did exactly what the people wanted; on Feb. 21, he reached agreement with the Maidan leaders, supported by France, Germany, Russia, and Poland, to pare back his powers and have an early election not later than December 2014. Thttp://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/feb/21/agreement-on-the-settlement-of-crisis-in-ukraine-full-tex That agreement was immediately abrogated by the Maidan mob the next day by violence. An orderly election with a proper campaign and full legitimacy could have been held in less than a year.

Whatever his shortcomings, Yanukovych was no Hitler; he did nothing his pro-Western predecessor had not done and far less than Poroschenko. I’m amazed you would dare bring Hitler’s name up, since the Kiev regime is infested with neo-Nazis. Neo-Nazi paramilitaries and supporters hold torchlight parades all over Ukraine as if it were Nuremberg 1934! Kiev’s Ambassador to Germany recently acknowledged how important the neo-Nazis are to the war effort.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QcR9jl4AM3A&feature=youtu.be
The Russophobic Daily Telegraph has also has reported on the neo-Nazi paramilitaries. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/ukraine/11025137/Ukraine-crisis-the-neo-Nazi-brigade-fighting-pro-Russian-separatists.html Yuschenko, Yanukovych’s pro-Western predecessor, named mass murdering Nazi collaborator Stepan Bandera a “Hero of Ukraine,” and he is idolized far and wide in the country.

“The 2004 Amendments to the Ukrainian constitution were ruled unconstitutional by the Ukrainian Constitutional Court, not by Yanukovych”

“The adoption of the original Amendments, which dealt merely with the President’s right to appoint and dismiss ministers, were criticized at the time by Western bodies including the Council of Europe, the European Parliament and the Venice Commission.”

You are certainly right here. According to Wiki, Yuschenko,
“in May 2007, illegally dismissed three members of Ukraine’s Constitutional Court, thus preventing the court from ruling on the constitutionality of his decree dismissing Ukraine’s parliament.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viktor_Yushchenko Yanukobych, then, at worst, did nothing his predecessor had not done and there is nothing to choose between them on this score.

“You provide no citation for jailing of political opponents”

“Rioting protesters would justifiably be detained for violation of the civil law. Any protesters “beaten or killed” on the Maidan would have happened mainly in the context of violent mob actions, such as occurred on Feb. 18th”

Tymoshenko was a political opponent of Yanukovych but even you would probably be willing to acknowledge she is one of the biggest corrupt oligarchs in the country. Lutsenko, also an opponent, was pardoned after being convicted in a criminal court. Whether there was perfect due process in either case, they were not arbitrarily jailed and their cases went before public courts. In the other cases, there has been absolutely no proved responsibility of the Yanukovych government and in Chornovol’s, two suspects reported to have been arrested by the government. https://www.kyivpost.com/content/ukraine/journalist-and-protest-activist-chornovol-beaten-near-kyiv-334224.html

“In any case, under Poroschenko, among many civil liberties violations, we find the “lustration” law banning from public office for five to ten years persons who were simply civil servants under the previous government or Communist party members.”

No sympathy for the commies? This is like Obama coming into office and banning from office every single Republican registered federal employee down to the janitor. Would that be ok with you? No wonder even the EU had to condemn it. Would it have been “tyranny” if Yanukovych had done it? No, there is no provision I am aware of for reapplication. Yes, they are running a smaller government, since an aide to Poroschenko admitted last month that, in 2014, $450 million, or between a fifth and fourth of the entire defense budget was stolen and that the defense department was “total corruption.” http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2015/01/ukraine-says-450-million-stolen-military-2014.html

“Ukraine has also banned 14 Russian cable channels”

Why not let the people of Ukraine decide what is propaganda and what isn’t? Protection of civil liberties in wartime is more important than ever. Jailing journalists for “treason” for opposing the war is “tyranny.” That did not happen in the US during Vietnam nor to my knowledge in any Western country. A journalist who resists the draft can be prosecuted for that like anyone else, but not for treason. Now, as you see, Ukraine is going even further and pulling the credentials of all Russian media in Ukraine. The population is being zombified by Ukrainian government propaganda starting at the top. Not only has Poroschenko publicly denied there was ever any cauldron in Debaltsevo, as the whole world knew, he has now crossed the line into total lunacy by alleging that Surkov, a senior, pro-Western adviser to Putin, personally directed the sniping on the Maidan. http://news.yahoo.com/poroshenko-says-evidence-shows-kremlin-aide-surkov-directed-140817740.html

“Yanukovych’s ouster was clearly unconstitutional as even Wiki admits.”

Yanukovych did not flee the country out of his own “free will” - he fled in fear for his life. He had just made an agreement with the Maiden leaders and the West to remain in office until an early election. When the Maidan mob repudiated the agreement, and turned to violence, he was forced to flee under threat of his life. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-02-28/ukraine-minister-accuses-russia-of-armed-invasion/5291986 And, yes, Yanukovych was illegally impeached. “Even the mob-dominated vote by the Rada to impeach Yanukovych fell short of the required 3/4ths supermajority. They needed 338 votes in the 450-seat parliament and only got 328. Oops, ten votes shy. Not a big deal.” http://nationalinterest.org/commentary/the-democratic-values-stake-ukraine-10069 (also giving more reasons why it was illegal)

“When the people of Donetsk and Lugansk rose up against this illegal action ousting the President”

“The coup government, unlike Yanukovych, did not respond with a few thousand riot police, but with tens of thousands of soldiers and neo-Nazi paramilitaries, who proceeded to start a war that has killed thousands, maimed tens of thousands, and destroyed billions in property”

This is a war for independence, or a civil war, not a war of aggression by Russia, which has repeatedly tried to persuade Poroschenko simply to negotiate a federal solution to the problem. It is in no way distinguishable from the American War for Independence. You may recall in that war that we had a military alliance with the French, who not only helped arm, equip, and finance the revolution, but sent an entire French army and navy to provide the decisive blow. Rochambeau commanded more men Washington did. Countless foreign volunteers served in our revolution, quite a few as generals, including several from France and Poland, and at least one from Germany. US volunteers served in foreign armies in the Spanish Civil War and in both World Wars before US entry.

The Russian invasion line is a red herring. The land belongs to the people who live on it, not to Kiev. On a 75% turnout, Donetsk voted for independence by 89% and Lugansk by 96% on May 11, 2014. “An opinion poll that was taken on the day of the referendum and the day before by a correspondent of the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, the Washington Post, and five other media outlets found that of those people who intended to vote, 94.8% would vote for independence.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donbass_status_referendums,_2014#Result

All the NAF fighters are volunteers (no conscription unlike Ukraine) and at least 80% are local Donbass people, who have maintained the war in spite of immense suffering. There are certainly no regular Russian units in Donbass as even the Ukrainian military chief of staff has admitted, contradicting another Poroschenko lie. http://sputniknews.com/europe/20150129/1017514425.html

“There is no reference in the transcript to the Yanukovych offer, which clearly shows the US plotting to install a new government on Jan. 28th, weeks before the coup.”

Yatsenyuk had already rejected the offer to become PM on Jan. 26, two days before the call was made, so the conversation was not in reference to that.

“Previous to this, Nuland publicly admitted in December 2013 that the US had spent $5 billion propagandizing Ukraine and interfering in its internal affairs since the early 1990s.

The US now uses sophisticated “color revolutions” to overthrow governments, using USG funded NGOs to fund opposition parties, media, etc. This short documentary is a good introduction to the concept. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uV3ElZS9paY

“Would you please tell me how a story in January 2014 could possibly concern an investigation of events that did not occur until February 2014?”

I will drop this point since I do not read Russian and cannot verify the original source.

“The man is being held out as a general even on Ukrainian TV. He is a prominent public figure in Ukraine who is esteemed enough to be charged with effecting prisoner exchanges on behalf of the Ukrainian government. Don’t you think such a public figure would have long since been called out by others for fraudulently representing his credentials?”

I don’t think there is any thing further to be said on this point. I will add that, as a top level Ukrainian “insider,” his words are scarcely less credible no matter what his credentials may be.

Are you seriously suggesting that if thousands of demonstrators in Washington stormed the White House and the government buildings

No, that would be a superficial comparison, it doesn't account for Ukrainian circumstances. If you want something more valid, imagine

- Obama jails a popular political opponent on trump up charges. Sarah Palin, is not the ideal Tymoshenko analog, but as a strong female figure, she will do here.

- Obama's daughters become multimillionaires in a matter of years while the rest of the country faces economic hardships

- Obama repeals 22nd amendment, claiming presidential term limit is unconstitutional, bullies Supreme Court to agree with him.

- He then passes Obamacare (decision as unpopular as pivoting Ukraine away from Europe towards Russia)

- few thousand peacefully protest but Obama gets annoyed that they're not leaving and sends the SWAT team to break it up (Nov 30 2013 in Ukraine)

- the SWAT team overdoes it and videos of police beating students who are on the ground in fetal position, make the round of news

- Million Man March takes place a day later and very weekend for more than one month. Few protesters hit back because the initial beating by SWAT went unpunished, but vengeance needs to be had. Still, for another month, the protests are overwhelmingly peaceful.

- Obama doesn't want to appear weak in front of his buddies and pushes anti-protest laws through Congress. Anyone labeled "an extremist" can get a 3 year prison term. Freedom of the press is now dead - there's 1 year sentence for "defamation".

This is where Ukraine was in mid January 2014. Any and all methods of fighting a tyrant are justified - molotovs, tires, and at the very last moment, when Berkut opened fire, to fire back. I suspect that in US, this wouldn't have been tolerated and somebody would've grabbed the gun at point 3 or 4 above.

What do you call storming, sacking, and burning the opposition party headquarters building and the Trades Union building

Justifiable methods of fighting a tyrant after other forms of protests have been exhausted. One episode of vandalism in 1773 New England city comes to mind as an example of property destruction that has a political goal in mind.

Also, why is Trades Union building in here? Maidan protesters didn't set fire to it, it was their base. They lost people there and accused Berkut of setting fire to it with protesters inside. (Unless you mean one in Odesa?)

The article clearly states: “most respondents (63.3%) believe that in order to achieve a positive outcome of protests it’s necessary to sit at the negotiating table, and the process should be made public,”

Peaceful resolution was the goal from the beginning, but Yanukovich refused to cooperate. After the initial police beat down on Nov 30 until mid January, Maidan demanded the offending Berkut be punished and maybe Minister of Internal Affairs Zakharchenko replaced - that didn't happen and Berkut got amnesty (I'm not counting the 3 sacrificial lambs that Yanukovich offered, they were nobody). After "dictatorial laws" of January 16 and first 4 protester deaths, Maidan demanded that Yanukovich had to go. He refused, offering (a condescending, second rate) PM seat to Yatseniuk. There was a wide-held belief that if Maidan was to disband, mass arrests were to sure to follow. Even in the end, after a 100 dead, he agreed to leave after another 10 months on the post.

on Feb. 21, he reached agreement with the Maidan leaders ... That agreement was immediately abrogated by the Maidan mob the next day by violence.

What do you mean? there was no violence after Yanukovich made the agreement on Feb 21, he fled during the night of Feb 21-22 and it was over. Perhaps you meant there was a threat of violence by Parasiuk

I’m amazed you would dare bring Hitler’s name up, since the Kiev regime is infested with neo-Nazis.

If "Nazi junta taking over Ukraine" is how Russians try to make sense of the world, it's sad. Nobody's denying that there are fringe groups but to say that fringe groups represent the norm is disingenuous. They were a minority in the protest movement, the new government and didn't make it past the 3% threshold into the Parliament.

There's also an element of pot calling the kettle black, considering that DNR People's Governor Gubarev is a Russian neo-nazi, the Premier Zakharchenko calling Ukraine's leaders "miserable Jews" , and Russian Cossack commanders controlling most of the LNR, Dremov and Kozytsin, are confirmed anti-Semites.

“The 2004 Amendments to the Ukrainian constitution were ruled unconstitutional by the Ukrainian Constitutional Court, not by Yanukovych”

You are certainly right here.

You know, you made both of these statements and now complimenting yourself for being right :)

Yanukobych, then, at worst, did nothing his predecessor had not done and there is nothing to choose between them on this score.

My mom's voice in my head says, and if others jumped from a bridge, will you be jumping as well? Yanukovich exerted more pressure on the Court than his predecessor and succeeded in rewriting the constitution to give himself more power.

Yuschenko was wrong. 2004 amendments allowed the parliament to form the government and was a check on the powers of the president.

Tymoshenko was a political opponent of Yanukovych but even you would probably be willing to acknowledge she is one of the biggest corrupt oligarchs in the country.

Probably, but she wasn't jailed for corruption, her charges were trumped up and everybody plus their mothers called the cases politically motivated. Having many corrupt oligarchs is already bad enough; one who monopolized power and eliminates others, that is a no-no.

Lutsenko, also an opponent ...they were not arbitrarily jailed and their cases went before public courts.

They weren't arbitrarily charged, they were targeted because they were political opponents.

In the other cases, there has been absolutely no proved responsibility of the Yanukovych government

Protesters against Yanukovich get beaten, who else is the the main suspect if not Yanukovich or his men? If he was framed by someone else, then we get into the weird category where we're gonna claim that protesters beat themselves, kill their own, set fire to the buildings they're in (in Kiev and Odesa) etc.

since an aide to Poroschenko admitted last month that, in 2014, $450 million, or between a fifth and fourth of the entire defense budget was stolen and that the defense department was “total corruption.”

1) Biryukov, God bless him for all the good work he does, is not an expert who's figure is to be readily accepted. There is a lot of systemic corruption in the army, police, government and courts that the new Ukrainian government has inherited. The steps they are taking to combat it are real but they're too small. There are calls in Ukraine that at this point, drastic times call for drastic measures and harsh "Singaporean" punishments for corruption are in order, death penalty not excluded.

2) I almost wish that there should be a rule that when Ukrainians are self-critical, Ukraine's enemies may not use these arguments against Ukrainians.

Why not let the people of Ukraine decide what is propaganda and what isn’t?

Is that what the Russians did when they invaded Crimea and Donbas?

It's hard to play fair when your enemy is not playing fair. Russia asks that Russian minorities in other countries get special treatment, while minorities in Russia get nothing of cthe sort. It wants "federalization" for Ukraine while Russia itself is an overly centralized state ruled from Moscow, etc.

Jailing journalists for “treason” for opposing the war is “tyranny.”

In my opinion, they overdid it with the treason charge, should've stuck with resisting draft charge. Now they made Kotsaba, who's not worth anyone's time, a hero, not a good move.

alleging that Surkov, a senior, pro-Western adviser to Putin, personally directed the sniping on the Maidan.

Allegation stems from the visit of an FSB Colonel General Beseda to Ukraine on Feb 20 2014, at the height of killings on Maidan. Another article here

Yanukovich did not flee the country out of his own “free will” - he fled in fear for his life.

That was his choice to make. He could've stayed and faced the charges, he chose to flee, turned out to be a coward.

When the Maidan mob repudiated the agreement, and turned to violence,

There was no violence after Feb 21

fell short of the required 3/4ths supermajority. They needed 338 votes in the 450-seat parliament and only got 328.

Communists and Regions members were fleeing the capital or country, some still haven't returned. This source counts 26 Regions members fleeing the capital/country on Feb 21 - the rats were abandoning the sinking ship. Given these extenuating circumstances, the 10 vote shy decision is legitimate. The February 22 Rada session had 328 out 334 present voting to oust Yanukovych.

(War in Lugansk-Donetsk)This is a war for independence.....It is in no way distinguishable from the American War for Independence.

I'm speechless that anyone would make that comparison. The hyperbole reminds me of Tsarev quote that the russian militants have the same eyes as Jesus

You may recall in that war that we had a military alliance with the French, who not only helped arm, equip, and finance the revolution, but sent an entire French army and navy to provide the decisive blow.

Russia isn't just assisting, it's the driving force. Prior to the war, separatism in Donbas was supported mostly by the Communists and the Russian nazi types and polls tell that these were a minority: less than 10% of the Donbas population had supported separating from Ukraine (poll from 2012, pre-war) to as high as 27.5% in April 2014

For US comparison to be valid, George Washington (the equivalent of the Russian supreme military leader, folk hero and Defense Minister of DNR, Strelkov-Girkin) would have to be French. Borodai - Prime Minister of DNR, the political leader and ideologue of the militants, would need the American equivalent, JohnAdams or Thomas Jefferson, also to be French. Imagine that most influential of the Founding Fathers are French citizens, along with men and equipment, all of which would make US a French, not an American project.

On a 75% turnout, Donetsk voted for independence by 89% and Lugansk by 96% on May 11, 2014.

Nobody takes those numbers seriously. It was a circus show, not a vote.

All the NAF fighters are volunteers

A dozen of interviews with the fighters can be presented where they say how much they're earning. For ex. this dead Russian was promised 50,000 RUB, as per his mother. This recruiter is offering 60-90,000 RUB a month for privates, 120-150K for officers.

and at least 80% are local Donbass people

A dozen of interviews can be presented where Russian soldiers say that they make up the majority of the fighting force. Here the Russians returning a body of a fallen comrade say that 75% of the DNR/LNR force are Russian citizens.

On the same link, there's a video of Ossetian mercenary (defender of Russian rights) saying he doesn't understand why people of Donbas are not joining the war. Strelkov also had made a video address to the people of Donbas criticizing them for not joining his war. English translation here, quote:

"..And there came the moment when each Donetsk citizen, capable to bear arms and to use them against enemies of the people, can arrive and receive the weapons directly in their hands. To receive and rise in as self-defense (opolchenie) in order to expel the castigators out of limits of the native land. But what do we see? Anything, but the crowds of volunteers at the gates of our headquarters.

The population of Slavyansk is 120 thousand, Kramatorsk has twice as many people. There are 4,5 million people in Donetsk region. Not all of them are men of capable age. Not all of them are healthy and unoccupied in important manufacturing. Not all of them can come to us – because of family and any other circumstances. But honestly, I never expected that there would be not even a thousand men , who are ready to risk their lives even on the barricades next to their house, half a day driving time to the nearest national guardsman – let alone being on the front line where the actual shooting is.

Nevertheless, it is true..."

Repeating the theme, another Russian folk hero, Motorola, made a video recently saying he also doesn't understand why people of Donbas are not joining them. They flee the fighting, come to Russia, where they receive refugee benefits, while Russian men fight the war.

Strelkov admitted elsewhere that if it hadn't been for him and his men, there wouldn't have been a war on Donbas (it would've died out like it did in Kharkiv and Odesa). It might come as surprise but the reason people of Donbas are not joining the war is simple, they didn't start it, they don't want it, it's not their war. As for Ukraine's effort, while it's true that there are conscripts, the real heroes who make the difference are professional military men of the Ukrainian armed forces and the volunteers battalions, who fight with minimal support from the government, surviving on donations and Ukrainian spirit alone.

There are certainly no regular Russian units in Donbass as even the Ukrainian military chief of staff has admitted, contradicting another Poroschenko lie.

Some people, like Muzhenko, require proof beyond all reasonable doubt. He needs to see Russian generals on the ground and Putin on TV saying that Russia is fighting in Ukraine. Others, like yours truly, don't have that high of a threshold. When I hear Zakharchenko say that Russian servicemen on active duty take a vacation to fight in Ukraine , I don't know what else it can mean. How is Russian not responsible for thousands of its soldiers?

US now uses sophisticated “color revolutions” to overthrow governments, using USG funded NGOs to fund opposition parties, media, etc.

Ok, so in this world where CIA and NGOs are behind everything, is there still room for genuine protests? Also, the original color revolutions in Communist Chekhoslovakia, Poland etc., are they genuine expressions of people's will or they too were special operations.

My view is, for a "color revolution" operation to be successful, there needs to be a fertile ground. This fertile ground wouldn't be there if the government was behaving well towards its population. Since disgruntled population is a requirement, the "schemer" of a color revolution now plays a secondary role.

“Are you seriously suggesting that if thousands of demonstrators in Washington stormed the White House and the government buildings?”

The point is that the USG would forcefully put down any violent attempt to overthrow it. Tymoshenko is a mega-scale crook, not some Joan of Arc; if you google, “Tymoshenko corruption,” you will find plenty of details from Western and Ukrainian sources. For example, the Russia hating Edward Lucas in the Russia hating “Daily Mail “wrote:

“In those economically unstable years, murky connections with officialdom could be a company’s most valuable asset.

For two lucrative years [T]ymoshenko’s] company United Energy Systems controlled Ukraine’s entire gas imports from Russia. In the former Soviet Union, gas traders could make colossal profits. With the right connections, gas could be acquired cheaply — and sold at a juicy premium.

Ukraine’s heavy industry and hard winters mean gas is consumed in vast amounts. Mrs Tymoshenko became known as the ‘gas princess’. Ukrainians did not mean that as a compliment.

She served as energy minister in the government of Prime Minister Pavlo Lazarenko. During that two-year period, £120 billion, according to the United Nations, was looted from Ukraine. Mr Lazarenko is now serving a nine-year prison sentence in America for money-laundering, wire fraud and extortion.

According to court documents, Mr Lazarenko allocated Mrs Tymoshenko concessions which gave her a third of Ukraine’s gas industry — and about a fifth of its GDP.’
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2566299/Dont-fooled-angelic-looks-shes-ruthless-shes-corrupt-A-withering-portrait-Ukraines-saviour-EDWARD-LUCAS-Russia-expert-knows-well.html

Whatever one thinks of Sarah Palin, she has not been accused of massive corruption.

“Former President Viktor Yushchenko testified against Tymoshenko during the trial, which he called “a normal judicial process.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yulia_Tymoshenko Yushchenko of course is the former onetime Western backed President who came into office following the “Orange Revolution.”

Yanukovych did not extend his term in office by declaring term limits unconstitutional. As to the 2004 amendments, which dealt mainly with whether Ukraine would have a Presidential or Parliamentary system, we find this from the pro-EU source cited inthe Wiki article referenced previously:

“The constitutional changes made in 2004 were not only rushed through very quickly and without proper consultation or discussion, they were also highly criticized by everyone - from Ukrainian political parties to international institutions including the Council of Europe, the European Parliament and the Venice Commission.

The way in which they were carried out also represented a violation of legal and democratic procedure. Back then, Yulia Tymoshenko called the changes unconstitutional citing them as the main reason for political chaos in Ukraine. It created a hybrid system which resulted in a totally dysfunctional system of governance.” https://euobserver.com/opinion/30970

In other words, the constitutional changes of 2004 were broadly considered illegal by Ukrainian political parties, EU organizations, and even Tymoshenko herself, and thus we can conclude that the Constitutional Court decision, which merely returned the nation to the 1996 constitution was correct, and hardly a basis for legitimate grievance. In any event, the change certainly did not abolish elections or term limits, which would strike at the very heart of the system.

Most of the “anti-protest laws” to which you refer were repealed within days of their adoption in January 2014. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/29/world/europe/ukraine-prime-minister-resign.html?_r=0 You conveniently omit this fact.

I won’t disagree that riot police may have overreacted in certain instances, but that is commonplace in such situations the world over. Just the other day, Poroschenko’s riot police similarly used violence to disperse crowds protesting economic conditions. http://fortruss.blogspot.com/2015/02/financial-maidan-in-kiev-violently.html And don’t forget the famous “police riot” during antiwar demonstrations at the time of the 1968 Democratic National Convention. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1968_Democratic_National_Convention Or consider the illegal mass arrests conducted by DC police during the anti-IMF/World Bank protests in 2000. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington_A16,_2000

Under your theory, since Obama approval rating is upside down (reference to your poll on Maidan), and Obama has engaged in many illegal actions, including NSA surveillance, misuse of the IRS, “Fast and Furious,” executive amnesty for illegal aliens, and many more, http://dailycaller.com/2014/05/07/ted-cruz-releases-definitive-list-of-76-lawless-obama-actions/, violent revolution is justified right now in the US. In fact, using Ted Cruz’s list you can make a better case out against Obama than Yanukovych. I don’t, however, think many Americans, myself included, would agree that violent revolution is justified.

“What do you call storming, sacking, and burning the opposition party headquarters building and the Trades Union building”

I think I have adequately dealt with your meritless justifications for violence in the previous section, including your reference to the negation of the 2004 Constitutional Amendments, the repealed “anti-protest,” laws and the police actions. Formerly you were asserting that the protests were peaceful, now you justify their violence.

“The article clearly states: “most respondents (63.3%) believe that in order to achieve a positive outcome of protests it’s necessary to sit at the negotiating table, and the process should be made public.”

The poll, which you yourself offered up as evidence of popular opinion, was conducted between January 24 and February 1, 2014; in other words after all the events which you cite to justify violent overthrow of the government. As of the late date of the poll, only one in ten Ukrainians approved of a violent resolution, and the overwhelmingly majority desired a peaceful resolution. The Maidan mob therefore had no right to disregard the feelings of the nation as a whole and proceed to violence.

“on Feb. 1, he reached agreement with the Maidan leaders ... That agreement was immediately abrogated by the Maidan mob the next day by violence.”

Perhaps “threat of violence” would indeed have been more precise, but hardly different in import under the circumstances. From Wiki:

“Activists on Maidan responded to the deal by booing opposition leaders. Activist Volodymyr Parasiuk warned from the stage that if Yanukovych does not resign by 10:00 the next day, an armed coup would be staged. From the stage of Maidan Oleh Lyashko expressed his support to the demand that Yanukovych resign by 10:00, “Either he resigns, or we take him away.” Lyashko told Maidan. Outside of Kiev, it was later discovered that the summer home of pro-Russian politician Viktor Medvedchuk was set on fire.

By late afternoon, hundreds of riot police officers guarding the presidential compound and nearby government buildings had vanished. Polish foreign minister Radoslaw Sikorski described the withdrawal of forces as “astonishing,” noting it was not part of the agreement. The riot police withdrew since early in the morning because they feared the government of Yanukovych would shift the responsibility of the violence of the previous days on them and they feared they would get attacked by the around 1,200 pistols and Kalashnikov rifles that protesters had stolen on 18 February from the police during the occupation of government buildings in Lviv. . . . “
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Ukrainian_revolution

“I’m amazed you would dare bring Hitler’s name up, since the Kiev regime is infested with neo-Nazis”

I think you know that “Right Sector” and “Swoboda” and the many neo-Nazis paramilitaries are not “fringe groups” in Ukraine. The Right Sector “offensive” beginning February 18 kicked off the violent denouement to the revolution. The commandant of “Maidan,” Andriy Parubiy, co-founded the neo-Nazi“Social National Party” of Ukraine (later “Swobpda”), and headed the security apparatus of the Poroschenko government until August 2014; and later became Deputy Speaker of the Rada. Right Sector neo-Nazi leader Dmitri Yarosh served as his deputy and is now a Rada member. Several other neo-Nazis received high posts in the new government.

Please read the link previously supplied to the Russia-hating “Daily Telegraph”article, wherein it is stated, “Recently formed battalions such as Donbas, Dnipro and Azov, with several thousand men under their command, are officially under the control of the interior ministry but their financing is murky, their training inadequate and their ideology often alarming.” http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/ukraine/11025137/Ukraine-crisis-the-neo-Nazi-brigade-fighting-pro-Russian-separatists.html

Please also review the video link I supplied of the Ukrainian Ambassador to Germany defending the use of these battalions, saying,inter alia,“These (neo-Nazi) units are fighting together with our army, with the National Guard and other units, and they are coordinated and controlled by Kiev”, quoted in article on subject (with video) in http://www.globalresearch.ca/kiev-ambassador-to-germany-neo-nazis-are-part-of-our-forces-without-them-russia-would-have-defeated-us/5433051

You certainly don’t deny that mass murdering Nazis collaborator Stepan Bandera was made a “Hero of Ukraine,” under Yuschenko, or that he is widely celebrated and idolized throughout Ukraine, especially in the torchlight neo-Nazi parades held all over Ukraine. Nor can you deny that Yatsenyuk referred to Russians as “subhumans,” Hitler’ favorite term for Slavs. http://www.globalresearch.ca/americas-nazis-in-kiev-russians-are-subhuman/5389119

In short neo-Nazis spearheaded the Maidan revolution, received important government posts in the new regime, and form fighting battalions based on their odious ideology to defend the Poroschenko government.

Gubarev no longer holds any official position so far as I am aware, and has apparently reconsidered his views and describes himself as “centre left.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pavel_Gubarev

You distort your own selective quotation from Zakharchenko. “Zakahrchenko . . . claimed that Kiev’s pro-Western leaders were “miserable representatives of the great Jewish people.” Obviously, Zakharchenko is actually expressing admiration for the Jewish race in general and singling out such as Yatsenyuk who uses the “Hitler’s own term, “subhumans,” to describe Russians.

The other link you quote cites only a single epithet by Dremov hurled against the LNR Premier in the heat of the moment, hardly sufficient to term him or others “confirmed anti-Semites.”

In any case, your three pathetic citations are trivial compared to the massive evidence of neo-Nazis leadership in Maidan, in the Ukrainian government, in the military campaign, and in society generally.

“The 2004 Amendments to the Ukrainian constitution were ruled unconstitutional by the Ukrainian Constitutional Court, not by Yanukovych”

“You are certainly right here.”

“Yanukobych, then, at worst, did nothing his predecessor had not done and there is nothing to choose between them on this score.”

I have dealt with the issue of the Constitutional change in more detail above. In short, the Court reached the right conclusion about the 2004 amendments for the reasons noted. I said “at worst,” Yanukovych did nothing his predecessor hadn’t

“Tymoshenko was a political opponent of Yanukovych but even you would probably be willing to acknowledge she is one of the biggest corrupt oligarchs in the country.”

“Lutsenko, also an opponent ...they were not arbitrarily jailed and their cases went before public courts.”

It’s hard to believe that Tymoshenko was not guilty of massive corruption in the “gas case,’ especially where her confederate , Lazarenko, was jailed for nine years in the US on money laundering charges. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pavlo_Lazarenko She was in fact found guilty of embezzlement and abuse of power in the gas case as her entry in Wiki shows.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yulia_Tymoshenko

“In the other cases, there has been absolutely no proved responsibility of the Yanukovych government”

In other words, you have no evidence Yanukovych’s government was responsible for these incidents. As far as extrajudicial violence is concerned, a hundred fold cases from the Poroschenko era could be cited. http://rt.com/news/178560-amnesty-international-lyashko-abductions/

“since an aide to Poroschenko admitted last month that, in 2014, $450 million, or between a fifth and fourth of the entire defense budget was stolen and that the defense department was “total corruption.”

If anything, Biruukov would have a motive to downplay the level of corruption. Perhaps it is to his credit that he does not. As a key Poroschenko adviser, he is certainly in a position to receive accurate information from the responsible organs of government.

“Why not let the people of Ukraine decide what is propaganda and what isn’t?”

The point is that Ukraine is denying information to its people those conflicts with its propaganda. There is far more freedom of expression in Russia now than Ukraine. I won’t comment further to avoid opening new topics that exceed previous bounds. We probably have already set an FR record for back-and-forths as it is.

“Jailing journalists for “treason” for opposing the war is “tyranny.””

Ok. A rare point of agreement.

“alleging that Surkov, a senior, pro-Western adviser to Putin, personally directed the sniping on the Maidan.”

You link twice to the same article. I don’t doubt Surkov was in Kiev on the date mentioned. What I am saying is that the allegation of Surkov directing the sniping is absurd on its face and there is no evidence of it.

“Yanukovich did not flee the country out of his own “free will” - he fled in fear for his life.”

Sure, Yanukovych could have stayed and faced charges from illegal coup government – if he survived that long. The Maidan mob showed clearly it had no regard for the democratic rights of 45 million Ukrainians and I am sure it would have had a good deal less regard for the personal rights of Yanukovych.

“When the Maidan mob repudiated the agreement, and turned to violence”

See my previous comment under “on Feb. 1,he reached agreement with the Maidan leaders . . . That agreement was abrogated by the Maidan mob the next day by violence.”

“fell short of the required 3/4th supermajority. They need 338 votes in the 450-seat parliament and only got 338

Of course, deputies were fleeing for their lives given the neo-Nazi –led violence that had just overturned the government. The deputies who remained met in an atmosphere of intimidation that alone would have rendered the vote illegitimate. What occurred is similar to what happened when Hitler pushed the 1933 Enabling Act through the Reichstag. Look it up.

In the article I cited previously on this point, Professor Hendrickson notes:

“Americans have previously acknowledged a right of revolution in a circumstance where there has been no previous instance of an election and no possibility of one. But in a regime that has a constitution and that has prescribed rules for the transfer of power? Revolution in those circumstances has been generally seen as deeply illegitimate, and for the simple reason that once you depart from that rule you are in no man’s land.”

“War in Lugansk-Donetsk) This is a war for independence . . . it is in no way distinguishable from the American War for Independence.

“You may recall that in that war we had a military alliance with the French, who not only helped arm, equip, and finance the revolution, but sent an entire French army and navy to provide the decisive blow.”

You have a very selective way with polls, don’t you? The two polls you cite were taken before the May 2 Odessa massacre, which changed everything. Furthermore, I cited a poll taken by Western news organizations at the time of the May 11 referendum showing that, at that time, 94% backed independence. You fail to reference it, strangely, but push out-dated polls.

And, no Russia, is not the “driving force’ behind the rebellion. As you very well know, Putin has from the beginning sought a solution of federalism within Ukraine and a ceasefire, even pulling Poroschenko’s butt out of the fire twice with Minsk I and II after his army was about to be defeated in September last year and February of this year.

As to the revolution comparison, since the referendum and the poll, showed overwhelming support, it matters not whether residents or nonresidents are chosen for initial leadership since independence is the goal in any case. Not only were numerous foreign generals in the revolutionary army, there were huge numbers of officers and soldiers from all over Europe – plus an entire French army and navy. Russia has contributed peanuts to Donbass by comparison.

“On a 75% turnout, Donetsk voted for independence by 89% and Lugansk by 965 on May 11, 2014.”

“Nobody” takes the results seriously means you don’t. It was confirmed by a Western public opinion poll, noted above, and is a far more accurate gauge of sentiment than any you have been able to assemble to show majority support for violent overthrow of the Kiev government. I showed your own poll demonstrated the opposite of what you claimed. If you are wondering whether the people of Donbass support the NAF now, take a look at the crowds in Lenin Square, Donetsk, on the recent Defender of the Fatherland holiday. https://twitter.com/GrahamWP_UK/status/57002431997324492

If Kiev really believed it could have won a plebiscite on independence in Donbass, Ukraine could easily have offered it and solved the entire problem. After all, the Soviet Union gave Ukraine a referendum in 1991, Canada gave Quebec one in 1996, and Britain gave Scotland one in 2014. Why the need for bloodshed? – just offer an internationally supervised vote. If Donbass/Russia turned it down, they would have been placed in the wrong and Ukraine’s position immeasurably strengthened.

“All the NAF fighters are volunteers”

Foreign language sources are unacceptable. If there were any widespread validity to this, there would be English language reports. Even if you could find a couple of isolated instances, it wouldn’t change the central fact that Ukraine relies on conscription and NAF does not. On the other hand, virtually all the neo-Nazi battalions are privately funded by notorious gangsters like Kolomoisky, or other corrupt oligarchs. Yes, a mafia don like Kolomoisky was actually appointed a Governor in the new regime!

“at least 80% are local Donbass peop0le’

Foreign language sources are still unacceptable. If there were truth to this, the US/NATO propaganda machine would have flooded the press with it as we both know. Strelkov’s statements were made in the infancy of the rebellion in an effort to hasten recruitment. So too Motorola was trying to maximize numbers by embarrassing those who had fled to Russia. NAF’s victories are sufficient indication that enough volunteer. Zakharchenko said the other day that 200 daily are joining. On the other hand, draft dodging is rampant in Ukraine. http://foreignpolicy.com/2015/02/18/the-draft-dodgers-of-ukraine-russia-putin/

“There are certainly no regular Russian units in Donbass as even the Ukrainian military chief of staff has admitted, contradicting another Poroschenko lie.”

The Ukrainian chief of staff is in the best position to know the facts, even better than you, and he would have every incentive to make the allegations to boot. Even if we assume that “3,000 or 4,000” Russian soldiers, per Zakharchenko, have spent vacation time in Donbass, that would imply a much smaller constant level of fighters since vacations don’t last indefinitely. More important, as there are probably 40,000 NAF soldiers, you have defeated your own argument that 75% of the NAF consists of Russian soldiers.

“US now uses sophisticated “color revolutions” to overthrow governments, suing USH funded NGOs to fund opposition parties, media, etc.”

The “color revolutions” began with Serbia in 2000, so earlier uprisings are not apposite. In Ukraine, the “fertile ground’ was nurtured over 20 years by $5 billion US dollars and, if memory serves, a half a billion euros.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.