John McCain addresses Ukrainian protesters in Kiev

You're having an anachronism. The events in Crimea only came after 'their president' was overthrown, and were directly and indisputably caused by it. The reason I say 'their president' is because Crimea is majority ethnic Russian and before them it was Tatars. It's never been Ukrainian in ethnicity or even close to such. And the event that was exploited into a crisis point was Yanukovych signing an economic agreement with Russia instead of the EU. The US wasn't just doings things behind the scenes. This [1] is John McCain at a rally in Kyiv. Imagine if during the BLM (or January 6th or whatever) protests/riots if China/Russia/etc had sent high level officials to overtly rally people to try to overthrow the government. It's a completely surreal sight if you really think about what you're seeing. The US is right there saying 'Yeah, we're gonna overthrow you in plain sight - try to do anything about it and you'll be wishing that's all that happened.' And if you think there was nothing going on behind the scenes on top of that stuff that overt in front of the cameras, then I'd say you're not arguing in good faith! In any case, none of this happens with good relations. A simple agreement to economically save Ukraine shouldn't have been an adversarial East vs West thing, but just another agreement to the benefit of Ukrainians. But that poor country's strategic positioning, and easily exploitable nationalist minority, means it was doomed to inevitably just end up as little more than

They don't create them, they foment them. Like in the most recent protests in Iran, we were agitating those but it's not like we created them out of nothing. Those divisions and issues are very real. And we tried our hardest to use them to overthrow the government, but there just wasn't enough momentum. And I think the same was initially true in Ukraine, so we took it to the next level. This [1] is John McCain, in Kyiv, giving a speech trying to embolden and agitate the protesters onward. 'America is with you. I am with you! Your destiny lies in Europe!' It seems unlikely that we would have done that if we thought the protests would have organically led to insurrection (even with covert instigation), because not only does it make our involvement completely overt, but it's also just a ridiculously hostile action. Imagine if in the leadup to January 6th, you had some high ranking Chinese official, in DC, riling up protesters 'China is with you. I am with you! Your destiny lies in a multipolar world!' It's just so unimaginably crass and overt that it would be just shy of a defacto declaration of war, as it's obviously an effort to try to rile up a group of people to overthrow a democratically elected government. [1] - ▶ this video

It was never planned for 3 days. That's just another fake sound bite. The war was brewing since 2014 and everyone in U.S. government knew it and everyone in Russia knew it. Here's the late Senator McCain 9 years ago in Kiev: ▶ this video Here's him and Lindsey Graham again 8 years ago talking about arming and training Ukrainians: link

During the leadup to the coup in Ukraine in 2014, she and McCain were literally on the ground in Ukraine actively agitating protesters encouraging them to overthrow their government. This [1] is a speech from McCain, in Kyiv, Ukraine , in late 2013. To understand how screwed up this is you really have to try to put yourself in the situation. Imagine the US was a relatively weak nation, and during the leadup to the mass protests comes riots around January 6th, in DC, you had leading politicians from China or Russia giving speeches, "Russia is with you. China is with you! The destiny you seek lies in China!" Think about the impact this is going to have on people dissatisfied with their government. It's not only going to work as a catalyst towards radicalism for the existing protesters, but also draw out others who might otherwise not have been interested because 'This could really be it!' [1] - ▶ this video

There's a relatively reasonable timeline of the coup available here. [1] And it was a coup in the most classical definition of the word. The military began refusing to carry out government orders, entire regional police departments were defecting to the protesters, cities were openly refusing to recognize the government, and so on. Had Yanukovych stayed, he would likely have been killed, with or without a Ceaușescu style kangaroo court. And if you want to see the sparking of the coup, this [2] is a video of John McCain (who was working alongside Nuland) instigating and emboldening the protesters, "America is with you. Europe is with you. The destiny you seek lies in Europe!" At the same time this was happening, Nuland was on the ground with protesters, memed as 'handing out cookies.' Try to imagine something comparable happening in America. Imagine America was a relatively weak nation, and you had e.g. leading politicians from China out there rallying the protesters in DC, telling them that "China is with you! The destiny you seek lies in China!" That is going to not only dramatically embolden the existing protesters, but also draw out people from everywhere in the country who start thinking 'this could be it.' And indeed it was "it." [1] - link [2] - ▶ this video

I don’t follow “Russian propaganda”, I think for myself. Every source I have shared with you is a mainstream Western source, including experts whose JOB it was to deliver analyses for their governments. If I lived in Russia, I’d be surrounded by Russian propaganda and also would have to cut through it like any independently-thinking person. If anything, I am constantly exposed to “US propaganda” since I live here, and it is a concerted effort to shut out anything that is even slightly away from the predetermined, official line, (in this case that the invasion is “unjustified and unprovoked”). After 9-11 it was going to be “Islamofascism” but that didn’t poll well, so they switched to “they hate us for our freedoms” and “weapons of mass destruction”. You can sometimes tell propaganda by how contrived the phrase is (eg “hacking the election”) and how it is repeated verbatim like it was normal and not contribed at all. In Russia it is “special military operation”. Everyone has propaganda. The attempt to label what half the world believes as “Russian Propaganda” is itseld a deligitimization tactic. Even within the most hawkish countries (like UK) there have been tons of voices clearly not on Russia’s payroll, but just as systematically ignored. This is a systemic problem: link link link link The Israeli PM walked back No, that lame attempt by someone at Business Insider to try to spin it was already addressed in the Krystal Ball video I posted. Did you watch it? They argu

Well, a single person is going too far. Obviously there is diversity of thought throughout various cities. But having said that, yes I specifically mentioned Chernivtsi because it is in Western Ukraine and to show that I am acquainted with people who live there. Cities like Ivano-Frankivsk and Chernivtsi and Lviv are historically Polish Galicia, they really have had quite anti-Russian sentiment for a very long time. Even during Soviet times, the USA tried to reach them with Radio Liberty —- started by the CIA (bet you didn’t know that). People living there are the ones who hope the most that USA will come and help them escape having to deal with “the Russian-speaking world”. Many of them don’t like the Eastern Ukrainians, calling them “katsapy” as far back as 70 years ago. And the Russians — well, they are “Muscovites” while Ukrainians are the “true Russians” in their view. Again, this is not everyone but a prevailing sentiment. Just like with sunnis and shiites and kurds, it is a very convenient tinderbox for an outside power (the US, say) to come in and play one side against the other, just as they have done in many other countries. (And KGB used to do as well, eg with Palestinians in Israel/Jordan etc.) It is a playbook that predates the US by millennia. In the Bible, the Egyptians worried about Jews becoming numerous and siding with their enemies etc. Anyway, Wikipedia has a textbook entry on “proxy war” that literally describes it all: link A lot of far-right groups en

This [1] is a video of John McCain in the capitol of Ukraine in 2013, shortly before the occasionally violent protests turned into an outright insurrection. He was saying, with minimal sugar coating, "revolt and we'll have your back." Victoria Nuland, currently part of Biden's cabinet, was also there actively agitating protesters. Imagine this in a parallel world in the US. Where the US is a relatively weak, impoverished, and deeply corrupt nation. And the speaker was from ostensibly the most powerful nation in the world. You'd have brought out every anti-government individual in the country, all with that twinkle of violence in their eyes. Which is exactly what happened. I don't really think we would have taken these steps if we felt that the protests would have played out as desired without our meddling, because it ruins even the perception of independence. It was just another in the endless line of long US driven coups. That's not to say the Ukrainian people (particularly of Western Ukraine) were happy. But there's a dramatic difference between dissatisfaction, even to the point of occasionally violent protest, and an actual successful insurrection. I have an immense amount of empathy, and compassion, for the people of Ukraine. But I don't think we're making their lives, or even the lives of their children to come, any better. To say the least. [1] - ▶ this video

Apologies for the hoard of links here, but I think they're necessary. There's so much disinformation and misinformation on this topic that I want to emphasize everything I'm stating is accurate and can be verified easily. The motion you are mentioning was the Ukraine cabinet passing a resolution (in other words a statement of intent) to continue working towards an EU Association Agreement, the exact same sort they currently have with places such as Israel, Egypt, South Africa, Syria, and many other such nations. [1] That cabinet then chose to not pass any further acts that would have been necessary to move forward with said agreement. Instead it started moving towards the creation of a 3-way association agreement between Ukraine, the EU, and Russia that would help ensure trade could flow amongst all parties. [2] That's when you started getting protests, which quickly escalated into riots and insurrection efforts. And you then also get completely bizarre scenes like this [3]. That is John McCain in the capital of Ukraine, telling protesters that America is with them and that their future is with America and Europe. Imagine if you had something comparable during January 6th from comparably high level Chinese/Russian officials. It's not only completely surreal, but also understates the issue. Because this was effectively a superpower declaring war on the current establishment of a much weaker country, which is going to endlessly embolden insurrection efforts. As for merit, neith

Unmasked as a shill for saying that great powers engage in propaganda, false flagging and dissent crushing. I have no skin in the game. War, no war, it doesn't matter to me the outcome of this war to be honest. EDIT: But if you are all moral highground, answer me this: Why did the US goad Ukraine into taking a hostile stance against a neighbouring (and somewhat rival) great power? Whas this to the interest of Ukranians? Or to the geopolitical interests of US? ▶ this video

Imagine this [1] scene playing out during one of the various protest come riot movements in the US over the past years. That is John McCain giving a speech to the protesters in the capitol of Ukraine, telling them that America is with them and that Europe will make Ukraine better. And to be clear he was doing this while the democratically elected [pro-Russian] president was still securely in office and would be for months to come. I feel like we largely lack any perspective because so many of things that are happening are something so completely foreign to us that it's difficult to even realistically imagine it. Imagine if Russia formed a 'defensive' military alliance whose primary mission was to contain the US. And they then gave speeches, such as McCain's, in Mexico City shortly before a pro-US Mexican government was overthrown by an insurrection and replaced with a pro-Russian one. And then they now moved to integrate the new Mexico into their military alliance which would undoubtedly result in 'defensive' weapons, arms, soldiers, etc being placed right along the US border - possibly to the point of imperiling our credible nuclear deterrent. I would certainly agree that Ukraine is not just a US pawn and wants to decide it's own fate, and deserves that. But there's also no doubt that it's political present and future is instead repeatedly decided by outside actors. [1] - ▶ this video