Dizasta1, what 100% proof do you have of John McCain's involvement in the politics of the Ukraine and the cause of the Russian invasion of the Crimea? Thank you.
I know that Sen McCain visited Ukraine several times...they named streets after him.
I'm not one to who points the blame like a blind, raving lunatic who thinks their argument is correct and the rest are wrong. My approach is to study the events from the lense of history, which by the way, is a very effective method of determining the trends, behavior patterns of global politics. Also, it helps that I have lived through the Cold War, on both ends of the spectrum. When America was on the verge of becoming a great noble power, to the Soviet Union's absurdly ridiculous existence, to the corruption of America as a great power, the collapse of the Soviet absurdity, the emergence of Russia, as history intended it to be and now when the American empire is on the cusp of decay and decline. I have had the privilege to be the student that studied this period and lived through it.
Below, is an article of your so-called "Western Mainstream Media," the honest, the noble ones who couldn't tell a lie even if their life depended on it (forgive the sarcasm, I couldn't help myself). I have quoted part of the article from the British Guardian newspaper. In it, he has specified how McCain openly supported the Far-Right group in a full blown, armed revolt against a democratically elected government of Ukraine. Now, please explain, what would you say if a Russian Parliamentarian visited Canada and supported a known Far-Right group that sought the independence of Quebec? Wouldn't many Americans and Canadians be furious and ask what business does a Russian Parliamentarian has in Montreal?
No country has any right to meddle in any other country's internal affairs. It doesn't matter if you're as tiny as the state of Liechtenstein or a super power like America. Because if you did that, then it would lead a global state of affairs, which would be a hundred times worse than the Cold War. Countries would ban travel, ban trade and lines would be drawn to an extent that there would be two worlds on this planet. And America has a nasty record of meddling in other countries' internal affairs. Economic Hitmen that destroyed Central & South America. If you don't believe me, then go read The Confessions of an Economic Hitman by John Perkins.
The threat of war in Ukraine is growing. As the unelected government in Kiev declares itself unable to control the rebellion in the country's east, John Kerry
. The US and the European Union step up sanctions against the Kremlin, accusing it of destabilising Ukraine. The White House is reported to be set on
with the aim of turning Russia into a "pariah state".
That might be more explicable if what is going on in eastern
now were not the mirror image of what took place in Kiev a couple of months ago. Then, it was armed protesters in Maidan Square seizing government buildings and demanding a change of government and constitution. US and European leaders championed the "masked militants" and denounced the elected government for its crackdown, just as they now back the unelected government's use of force against rebels occupying police stations and town halls in cities such as Slavyansk and Donetsk.
"America is with you," then, standing shoulder to shoulder with the leader of as the US ambassador haggled with the state department over who would make up the new Ukrainian government.
When the Ukrainian president was replaced by a US-selected administration, in an
, politicians such as William Hague
about the legality of what had taken place: the imposition of a pro-western government on Russia's most neuralgic and politically divided neighbour.
Putin bit back, taking a leaf out of the US street-protest playbook – even though, as in Kiev, the protests that spread from Crimea to eastern Ukraine evidently have mass support. But what had been a glorious cry for freedom in Kiev became infiltration and insatiable aggression in Sevastopol and Luhansk.
After Crimeans voted overwhelmingly to join Russia, the bulk of the western media abandoned any hint of even-handed coverage. So Putin is now routinely compared to Hitler, while the
and
has been airbrushed out of most reporting as Putinist propaganda.
So you don't hear much about the Ukrainian government's
and pogromists, or the arson attacks on the homes and offices of elected communist leaders, or the integration of
into the national guard, while the
of the government's ultra-nationalists is assiduously played down, and false identifications of Russian special forces are relayed as fact.
Lastly, when one conducts an analysis of any given situation, is to determine who stands to gain the most from desired outcome. In the matter of Ukraine, nothing were to be gained by Russia in starting a conflict in Ukraine. It had already secured a long lease on the Naval Base in Sevastopol. There was also the mutually beneficial arrangement of Ukraine supplying Russia with turbine engines for its navy requirements. Besides that, Ukraine stood to gain from Gas Pipeline transiting through its territory, to supply Europe. Ukriane got subsidized gas from Russia, due to its transit route privileges. So Russia stood to lose the most by aggravating matters with its neighbor, Ukraine.
Whereas America stands to benefit the most from a Ukrainian conflict, in which Ukriane is anti-Russia. A Ukraine government that comes to power, which is actively hostile toward Russia, would be default cancel the Sevastopol lease, effective immediately. Cutting off Russia's access to the Black Sea means, that Russia would be left with our a home port for its Black Sea fleet for a prolonged period of time. Which in other words means, Russia would have zero presence in the Black Sea. And that is where America stands to gain the most, as it would begin long lead deployment of its Aegis Destroyers. Who knows, perhaps even lease Sevastopol from a Pro-Western Ukrainian Government. Establishing an Aegis Ashore ADN.
In other words, America would have ABM Network sprawled throughout Eastern Europe, from Poland, to Romania, to Ukraine. An ABM Network which would ensure America is well defended far away from its territory, when the inevitable Nuclear War breaks out. Choking Russia out of an effective nuclear response and re-establishing American dominance over the world.
If that's not enough of a reason to that forced Russia to take back Crimea
(the latter was part of Russian Empire, when the absurdity that is Soviet leadership, decided to incorporate it in the Ukrainian Socialist Republic) and ensure that it maintains a presence in the Black Sea, then one has to be blind and dumb not to see this as a legitimate reason. And if today Crimea wasn't reabsorbed into the Russian Federation, then Syria would've looked far worse than what Libya is today. And trust me when I say this, Libya is the breeding grounds for Wahhabi-Salafi terrorists.
And then I wonder, bewildered when people ask where do these terrorists come from. Whoever said that ignorance is bliss, is probably not human or from a different dimension of space and time.
