What is really happening in the Ukraine Conflict?

[Scott777]

So can you show proof that an external country was involved in the riots? Was Russia responsible for the riots in the UK?

You're changing the point of the subject.  We were discussing if the state of Ukraine was anti-EU before the revolution and pro-EU after.  You denied it, but provided no evidence, let alone proof.  The facts are the government AND president were influenced by a revolution, becoming pro-EU BEFORE a vote to remove the president.  It's a separate point whether the revolution was CIA or not.

[Borg Refinery]

I don't think Dugin means Putin is imperialist.  It's not evidence he is, just because Putin likes him.  It's possible to like some things and not others.  All things considered, NATO had expanded far more than Russia has with Crimea and territory from Georgia. Ukraine remains to be seen whether it will be part of Russia or just a neutral country.

Evidence that Putin is imperialist includes things such as him invading Georgia and Ukraine and the fact Dugin is in his inner circle and he subscribes to Dugin's beliefs. What NATO has done has been at times wrong, but when Russia had designs on Ukraine from the early 1990s even under Yeltsin, it seems obvious that bad things were going to happen, Ukraine should never have surrendered their nukes. You can blame the yanks for that one in part if you like.

I just have to point out, Ukraine was sovereign until the Maidan coup.  Did Putin have a problem with that sovereignty?

No Ukraine wasn't "sovereign" until the Maidan coup (using your definition of sovereign), both the West and Russia have been trying to interfere in its affairs for years prior to that just as they have done after that, many of their presidents have either been puppets for one or the other

Nope.  Just because thousands of Russian bot accounts say something does not make it true.

Yanukovich was voted out of office by a parliament his own party had a majority in.  Just because just about every right thinking person incl the USA, EU and UK leaderships wanted the deceitful, embezzling and eventually murdering Putin puppet gone does not make it an externally organised coup.

Oh goody, so you think the pro Western alternatives were any better? How naive. 



That country is very corrupt and rated as one of the most corrupt in the region, the Western puppets are no more or less corrupt than the Eastern puppets. Everyone who disagrees is a Russian bot account and it says borg so I must be a Russian bot. Of course.



Then again those who opposed the Iraq war were lefty anti-western types right? And others were right to support that Iraq war such as yourself?

[BeElBeeBub]

First, Azarov government resigned because of 'protesters' and riots.  'Protesters' occupied government buildings.  21st February 2014, revolutionaries took control of Central Kiev because the police abandoned it.  That was a coup.  22nd February, parliament voted to remove Yanukovich.  So the coup came first, then the "government" became pro-EU, then he was voted out.

Parliament had voted for the EU association agreement before the protests. Viktor Yanukovich had said he would sign the agreement before the protests.

The protests erupted because VY suddenly reversed course. The Lithuanian foreign minister claims VY told her it was directly because of pressure from Russia (who had taken economic steps and and made threats about Ukraine moving towards the EU)

So to say that Ukraine was anti EU before the revolution is bollocks. The revolution happened because Ukraine wanted closer ties with the EU and they were thwarted

[BeElBeeBub]

So can you show proof that an external country was involved in the riots? Was Russia responsible for the riots in the UK?

I mean, they probs my did covertly fund infulamcers and news sources that helped stoke tensions in the Uk.

It's their MO. Find a wedge issue, in the UK it was Brexit, Scottish independence, immigration. In the US It's guns, abortion, race. Then assist voices that make that division more stark.

I don't think it's a coincidence that Alex Salmonfmd and George Galloway had shows on RT.

The NRA had a Russian lady involved in the higest levels through thr early 20teens. She is now a Russian MP.

[BeElBeeBub]

Well, ok, but you implied it.  Otherwise this comment doesn't make sense:  "Is it your contention that a person can use "they are out to get me" as a defense against any and all charges even if thry are not related to his claimed persecution?"

I can see why there was confusion, but I was speaking in the general there not specific about JA ie any person could use the fact they fear onward extradition to avoid extraditiom to a third country.

You have contradicted yourself. If they don't find "substantial grounds" then they won't protect him, and therefore it is false to claim they have an obligation against such extradition, and so there is no gaurantee he won't be tortured.

They have an obligation against extradition if JA can demonstrate a substantial risk of torture. There would also be the onward request from the UK as well. But the point is his protection was no worse (and probably better) in Sweden vs the UK. 

If Sweden had a policy of extraditing anyone at the slightest hint of a US request, no questions asked, whikst the UK had a history of being extremely tough on requests then he would have a point. But the two jurisdictions were similar in their treatment of requests. So there was no additional risk. 

He isn't in the UK, he's in Australia.

You're right, I forgot he decided to stop fighting extradition and took a plea deal. Interestingly his deal included him going to a US territory to appear in US court - surrendering to US jurisdiction (which he was so afraid of). Now the only way he would do that is because the details had been worked out before hand and the US had promised the UK and Australia they would follow the script and allow him onwards home after he appeared in court. So.afger all his "oh noes I can't go to Sweden because they might ha d me over to the big bad USA" he happily took assurances and went to the USA. It's almost as if it was Sweden he didn't want to go to....

This is non sequitur. It has been proven he was prepared to go to Sweden, if they agreed not to extradite him, so there cannot be another reason he refused to go.

No, his lawyer said he was prepared to go under specific conditions. That's not the same as being prepared to go. 

I can't say I've offered to visit the in-laws but they didn't take me up on the offer when I specified i'd only go if they provided a helicopter and put me up in a 5 star hotel. It S an offer I know the other side won't accept but allows me to say I've made the offer. 

[Nick]

First, Azarov government resigned because of 'protesters' and riots.  'Protesters' occupied government buildings.  21st February 2014, revolutionaries took control of Central Kiev because the police abandoned it.  That was a coup.  22nd February, parliament voted to remove Yanukovich.  So the coup came first, then the "government" became pro-EU, then he was voted out.

So can you show proof that an external country was involved in the riots? Was Russia responsible for the riots in the UK?

[Unlucky4Sum]

But it is true, and not just Russians who say so.  Try the Oliver Stone docu, Ukraine on Fire.  Just because loads of media and politicians tell us there are WMDs, does not make it true.  😉

Why are you bringing the irrelevance WMDs into this?

As for Oliver Stone anyone who takes his output as fact needs serious help.  

[Scott777]

  are you serious?  Ukraine was anti-EU before because Yanukovich was in power, he was voted out and then Ukraine was pro-EU. No it's not Russian propaganda, it's simple politics  

First, Azarov government resigned because of 'protesters' and riots.  'Protesters' occupied government buildings.  21st February 2014, revolutionaries took control of Central Kiev because the police abandoned it.  That was a coup.  22nd February, parliament voted to remove Yanukovich.  So the coup came first, then the "government" became pro-EU, then he was voted out.

[Scott777]

I didn't claim he was charged.

Well, ok, but you implied it.  Otherwise this comment doesn't make sense:  "Is it your contention that a person can use "they are out to get me" as a defense against any and all charges even if thry are not related to his claimed persecution?"

the Swedish courts, the ECJ and ECHR have the an obligation against extrditing a person to a country where they might be tortured.

To quite the Swedish supreme Court in 2023

"Article 3 of the ECHR provides that a state may not extradite a person to another country if there are substantial grounds for believing that he or she would face a real risk of torture or inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment in that country."

You have contradicted yourself.  If they don't find "substantial grounds" then they won't protect him, and therefore it is false to claim they have an obligation against such extradition, and so there is no gaurantee he won't be tortured.

And, as. I mentioned, JA is currently fighting extradition to the US from the UK,

He isn't in the UK, he's in Australia.

so his argument that his risk of being extradited was a reason to not go to Sweden was rejected by all the UK courts.

This is non sequitur.  It has been proven he was prepared to go to Sweden, if they agreed not to extradite him, so there cannot be another reason he refused to go.

[Nick]

And it's a fact that Ukraine was anti EU before the revolution, and pro EU after.  Are you saying that's Russian propaganda?

    are you serious?  Ukraine was anti-EU before because Yanukovich was in power, he was voted out and then Ukraine was pro-EU. No it's not Russian propaganda, it's simple politics   

[papasmurf]

Sweden dropped the case back in 2019. 

Julian Assange: Sweden drops rape investigation - BBC News

[BeElBeeBub]

He wasn't charged, as you claimed.

I didn't claim he was charged. He couldn't be charged because he never went to Sweden. That is why thry wanted him to go to. Sweden so they could charge him

What you miss is that unlike the UK, the Swedish charging happens at the end of the investigation process when they have built a case. 

The fact thr swedes wanted to charge him means they had they had built a good case. 

You don't know he would have had protection of both the Swedish and the Echr courts. You're not a legal expert. 

Neither are you, but the Swedish courts, the ECJ and ECHR have the an obligation against extrditing a person to a country where they might be tortured. 

To quite the Swedish supreme Court in 2023 

"Article 3 of the ECHR provides that a state may not extradite a person to another country if there are substantial grounds for believing that he or she would face a real risk of torture or inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment in that country."

And, as. I mentioned, JA is currently fighting extradition to the US from the UK, so his argument that his risk of being extradited was a reason to not go to Sweden was rejected by all the UK courts.

Obviously he may not want to go to Sweden, but that's not his decision 

[Scott777]

That is just Russian propaganda, like everything that comes out of Russia, it's BS.

As for the EU, that's just whataboutery, just cause we were taken into a political union without a say doesn't mean others were.

It's not whataboutery.  It proves that others could be.  It's foolish to deny it.  

And it's a fact that Ukraine was anti EU before the revolution, and pro EU after.  Are you saying that's Russian propaganda?

[Scott777]

Just because thousands of Russian bot accounts say something does not make it true.

But it is true, and not just Russians who say so.  Try the Oliver Stone docu, Ukraine on Fire.  Just because loads of media and politicians tell us there are WMDs, does not make it true.  😉

[Nick]

I agree that Maidan was a US-EU backed coup and the West have done many similar things re interference in both Ukraine and other nearby countries, the Maidan coup was just one in a long running saga as I'm sure you full well know. They also interfered in Russia's presidential election in 1996 to stop the Communists from winning - Clinton himself did so. It's hypocritical of the West to complain about a lot of stuff, nonetheless, that still can't justify imperialism and invading a sovereign country and that's that - full stop, it's not acceptable when any country does it - Western or otherwise - so you can't accuse me of being a hypocrite about it

If they're not imperialist, why does Putin refer to the ancient Kyivan Rus and the great Empire they built up then? And talk of how Ukraine today shouldn't even be a sovereign country?

I find it hilarious that the nominally Russian Orthodox United Russia party and their preferred candidate, Putin, does anything but actually follow their religion while priests bless nuclear missiles with holy water, a practice they stopped after the outcry.

I suggest they knew Ukraine was going to get full NATO support, so saying they'd invade it successfully in a few weeks is basically a lie

Putin is paranoid, The Kremlin doesn't even trust its own citizens let alone a foreign country. I went to the Russian Embassy in London, left my passport and got it back through the post 10 days later so they had plenty of time to determine if A) my passport was real and B) Check if my LOI was genuine. It still took 4 hours to get through immigration at St Petersburg because they got a magnifying out and started checking the VISA, even though it was issued by the Embassy and the number was on their screen telling them I had a VISA, that's how much distrust they have for everyone. It took over an hour getting out of the country 7 weeks later. My son and I were also followed everywhere for the duration, but all they learned was where we ate and what supermarkets we used