It sounded like there was already protests and civil unrest and the people trying to remove the dude and CIA might’ve (depending who you believe) helped that. So helping a goal the people were already going for
Hopefully you won’t categorize a 2014 BBC article transcribing a leaked call from Victoria Nuland as Russian Propaganda. She openly conspires as to who they wanna put as president of Ukraine, and propose Yatsenyuk, the guy who would go on to become prime minister after Yanukovich. From the transcribed call:
Nuland: Good. I don’t think Klitsch should go into the government. I don’t think it’s necessary, I don’t think it’s a good idea.
Nuland: [Breaks in] I think Yats is the guy who’s got the economic experience, the governing experience. He’s the… what he needs is Klitsch and Tyahnybok on the outside.
Oh Lawd! I’ve never heard about the Nuland telephone call! Not a banal conversation between two diplomats discussing who their preferences are for the election that’s ongoing in the country they reside in. There it is, folks! The big gotcha that CIA was involved.
That’s the standard of evidence we’re working with here, folks.
Helping people remove a corrupt president is generally good. If the KGB wanted to help us oust trump I wouldn’t cry about it. (Though let’s be real, they’re more likely to help him cling to power if anything)
I’m advocating for fascist and corrupt regimes to be overthrown.
Viktor Yanukovych was not taken out in a covert top down regime change, he was ousted by the Revolution of Dignity; there were over half a million people gathered in the capital demanding change and parliament voted to remove him without a single dissenting vote.
Imperialism is good if it’s against the “bad guys”. /s
It sounds like the Ukrainian people wanted the dude removed from power
Ok, Imperialism is good if we think “the people” wanted it. Got it. /s
I think popular will winning is generally a good thing
Who defines the “popular will”?
The people probably
So the CIA asks the people before they coup a government? O.o
It sounded like there was already protests and civil unrest and the people trying to remove the dude and CIA might’ve (depending who you believe) helped that. So helping a goal the people were already going for
That’s exactly the point: we’ll probably never really know how much the CIA “helped”.
deleted by creator
Hey nice buzzwords. Do you happen to have ANY evidence of Cia intervention? Just one thanks.
We have lots of evidence of popular unrest and demand for Yanukovich to be ousted by the people of Ukraine
Hopefully you won’t categorize a 2014 BBC article transcribing a leaked call from Victoria Nuland as Russian Propaganda. She openly conspires as to who they wanna put as president of Ukraine, and propose Yatsenyuk, the guy who would go on to become prime minister after Yanukovich. From the transcribed call:
Oh Lawd! I’ve never heard about the Nuland telephone call! Not a banal conversation between two diplomats discussing who their preferences are for the election that’s ongoing in the country they reside in. There it is, folks! The big gotcha that CIA was involved.
That’s the standard of evidence we’re working with here, folks.
I was referencing the hypothetical.
Why “buzzwords”? Would you care to explain why you think that “imperialism” wouldn’t apply to that (hypothetical) scenario?
Are you implying he wasn’t a bad leader?
Helping people remove a corrupt president is generally good. If the KGB wanted to help us oust trump I wouldn’t cry about it. (Though let’s be real, they’re more likely to help him cling to power if anything)
You realize you’re advocating for covert, top down regime change, right?
Not very democratic of you, mate
I’m advocating for fascist and corrupt regimes to be overthrown.
Viktor Yanukovych was not taken out in a covert top down regime change, he was ousted by the Revolution of Dignity; there were over half a million people gathered in the capital demanding change and parliament voted to remove him without a single dissenting vote.
What if the fascists (AZOV) do the overthrowing?
You’re changing the topic. You literally said that it’s ok to top-down regime change if someone’s a “bad leader”.
Ah yes, whataboutism to the rescue
Where’s the whataboutism?