No, I linked an article written by a trusted journalist and geopolitical expert, who has been deeply involved in de-escalation efforts and present as an advisor at negotiations.
I am not. You’re just parroting the nonsense the whores of the Kremlin have been putting out for a decade.
There was never any promise by the US not let Ukraine into NATO. Even if there was, Russia has done enough to justify saying that promise doesn’t matter anymore.
Sure, the US supported Euromaidan. That doesn’t make it a CIA plot. Why shouldn’t we support protests against a corrupt, authoritarian regime backed by our biggest opponent on the international stage? You and the overestimated Mr. Sachs reach the conclusion that because Ukraine leaving the Russian sphere was in America’s interest, America must have acted to cause it, despite the total lack of actual evidence.
Here’s an idea: maybe Russia wouldn’t have to worry about encirclement if it didn’t constantly threaten it’s neighbors.
I’m not shifting the goalposts. The mere fact the US supported Euromaidan is not the same as the whole thing being a CIA coup.
Except you’re not listening to geopolitical experts. You’re listening to an economist’s opinion on geopolitics, platformed only by Russian assets that is contradicted by most actual geopolitical experts on Earth.
I ask again: how do I source proof of something not happening.
LoL. “An economist.” Please tell me what your qualifications are that you believe you have a better understanding and closer involvement than Jeffrey fucking Sachs. Not “platformed by Russia,” but literally there to assist Ukraine in negotiations.
How many more geopolitical experts dissuading NATO escalation in Ukraine would you like? So you don’t move the goalposts further, let’s set it now: how many more? And what is it that you believe “backed by the US” to mean in a coup?
No one blamed the Ukrainians. Especially not Jeffrey Sachs.
Maybe if you weren’t talking out of your ass, you would be invited to participate in negotiations yourself or speaking in front of the EU on your expertise. But that’s not gonna happen because you are in no way his equal, regardless of how much esteem you hold for yourself for dutifully repeating NATO propaganda.
When you consider your beliefs and biases to be equivalent to the actual expertise of others, it’s time to talk to a doctor about a possible personality disorder.
I’m saying that Euromaidan was a popular revolt against the corrupt, pro-Russian government which the CIA has no meaningful influence on.
I don’t understand where this “blanket denial” stuff is coming from.
You are wrong.
https://www.jeffsachs.org/newspaper-articles/yjae8gc8hp2p293tmt4dlr4z2dpe2s?format=amp
Did you just link some dude’s blog as a source?
“Some dude”
No, I linked an article written by a trusted journalist and geopolitical expert, who has been deeply involved in de-escalation efforts and present as an advisor at negotiations.
I am not. You’re just parroting the nonsense the whores of the Kremlin have been putting out for a decade.
There was never any promise by the US not let Ukraine into NATO. Even if there was, Russia has done enough to justify saying that promise doesn’t matter anymore.
Sure, the US supported Euromaidan. That doesn’t make it a CIA plot. Why shouldn’t we support protests against a corrupt, authoritarian regime backed by our biggest opponent on the international stage? You and the overestimated Mr. Sachs reach the conclusion that because Ukraine leaving the Russian sphere was in America’s interest, America must have acted to cause it, despite the total lack of actual evidence.
Here’s an idea: maybe Russia wouldn’t have to worry about encirclement if it didn’t constantly threaten it’s neighbors.
You’re just parroting NATO propaganda. Glad to see you shifting goalposts on the US backing, though. Shows you understand on some level you’re lying.
Think I’ll trust the word of geopolitical experts over a NATO bot that can’t produce any of their own sources.
I’m not shifting the goalposts. The mere fact the US supported Euromaidan is not the same as the whole thing being a CIA coup.
Except you’re not listening to geopolitical experts. You’re listening to an economist’s opinion on geopolitics, platformed only by Russian assets that is contradicted by most actual geopolitical experts on Earth.
I ask again: how do I source proof of something not happening.
LoL. “An economist.” Please tell me what your qualifications are that you believe you have a better understanding and closer involvement than Jeffrey fucking Sachs. Not “platformed by Russia,” but literally there to assist Ukraine in negotiations.
How many more geopolitical experts dissuading NATO escalation in Ukraine would you like? So you don’t move the goalposts further, let’s set it now: how many more? And what is it that you believe “backed by the US” to mean in a coup?
I’m not getting paid by Russia to shill for them on RT propaganda shows. That’s what.
It don’t see how blaming Ukraine for starting the war helps the Ukrainians.
You’re begging the question. NATO isn’t escalating. It wasn’t a coup.
No one blamed the Ukrainians. Especially not Jeffrey Sachs.
Maybe if you weren’t talking out of your ass, you would be invited to participate in negotiations yourself or speaking in front of the EU on your expertise. But that’s not gonna happen because you are in no way his equal, regardless of how much esteem you hold for yourself for dutifully repeating NATO propaganda.
When you consider your beliefs and biases to be equivalent to the actual expertise of others, it’s time to talk to a doctor about a possible personality disorder.
Putting blame for the war anywhere but the Russians is effectively blaming Ukraine.
Putin has also spoken in front of the EU. It does not make Sachs’s opinion anything other than stupid.
I’m basing my beliefs of off the expertise of the hundreds if not thousands of experts who agree that Sachs is a moron.