New Posts
  • Hi there guest! Welcome to PoliticalJack.com. Register for free to join our community?

Us finalizing plans to send Abrams tanks to Ukraine

Do you define independence as rule from Moscow?
No.
I see an independent Ukraine free from US, EU, NATO, and Russian influence as extremely unlikely. Since Ukraine borders Russia, Putin has the same claim to national defense as the Monroe Doctrine provides in the US. Why do you think the US continually meddles in the domestic affairs of countries on the opposite side of the planet from DC?
 

middleview

President
Supporting Member
No.
I see an independent Ukraine free from US, EU, NATO, and Russian influence as extremely unlikely. Since Ukraine borders Russia, Putin has the same claim to national defense as the Monroe Doctrine provides in the US. Why do you think the US continually meddles in the domestic affairs of countries on the opposite side of the planet from DC?
US interference in Cuba, Honduras, Guatemala, Nicargua...etc...was nothing I'd justify as you seem to be trying to justify Russian invasion.

Ukraine was not a threat to Russia. That is why Putin thought he'd beat them in a few days.
 

middleview

President
Supporting Member
A large percentage of Ukrainians want independence from the IMF, EU, NATO, and the CIA. Many of these citizens are Russian-speakers whose duly elected president was driven from office by a violent mob which murdered protestors and police officers alike.

https://www.oaklandinstitute.org/sites/oaklandinstitute.org/files/OurBiz_Brief_Ukraine.pdf
Did you think that link was going to prove your opinion that the CIA and NATO and disliked among Ukrainians? It didn't. You also seem to want us to think the average Ukrainian wants to be aligned with Russia and not the EU.

Are there a lot of people in Eastern Ukraine who would prefer that? Probably. The referendum run by Moscow doesn't prove that and the prospect of a free and fair election are slim to none as long as Russian troops are there.
 

Dawg

President
Supporting Member
Ukraine is deeply factionally divided and its government … which is obliged to permit a measure of democracy only by popular resistance … depends on a capitalist base that cannot be maintained without suppression of the socialist parties supported by so many workers and peasants. The military reliance on Azov needed to maintain a measure of popular support for an anticommunist government is shameful, but Azov has actually been required to surrender much of its independence (through integration into the regular military) and to purge its ranks of strictly neo-Nazi elements. Zelenskyy is evidently a reactionary capitalist oppressor but that is the beginning of the analysis, not the end. Class-conscious labor gives military support to Ukraine’s defense against imperialist Russia for the same reason it supported Ethiopia under the reactionary, oppressive government of Haile Selassie against imperialist Italy. And FWIW, for all the repression of opposition parties in Ukraine that country remains much freer politically than Russia which is a model for right-wing repression and a pole of attraction for international reaction.
Search Pandora Papers for facts
 

EatTheRich

President
Much of your post makes a great deal of sense to me; however, Ethiopia and Italy didn't share a common border, and there was no imperialistic military alliance like NATO involved. It seems to me, a Russian "win" in Ukraine weakens (if not destroys) NATO as an arm of US hegemony. Would that be a bad thing?
Seems to me it is Russian strength that holds NATO together and increases the U.S.’s influence over it. Wasn’t NATO at its strongest and most U.S.-dominated at the peak of the USSR’s power in the 1950s? Anyway, I’d say this is less a proxy war between Russia and the U.S./NATO than a war between Russia and Ukraine in which NATO and the U.S. are peripherally interested. One reason class-conscious labor is discouraged by history from giving critical support to one of two rival imperialist is that it inevitably means concentrating more power in the hands of finance capital; but one of the clearest-cut exceptions is when one power is investing in allying with an oppressed nation against the colonial ambitions of an imperialist power.
 
Did you think that link was going to prove your opinion that the CIA and NATO and disliked among Ukrainians? It didn't. You also seem to want us to think the average Ukrainian wants to be aligned with Russia and not the EU.

Are there a lot of people in Eastern Ukraine who would prefer that? Probably. The referendum run by Moscow doesn't prove that and the prospect of a free and fair election are slim to none as long as Russian troops are there.
Ukrainians objected to IMF conditionalities that increased poverty, reduced social benefits, and produced an extended recession after a violent, US-supported coup drove a duly elected president from office in 2014:

https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/will-imf-bailout-turn-ukraine-another-greece/

"The IMF conditions for Ukraine won’t include any debt relief, and unlike the European Union-IMF bailout for Cyprus, they won’t impose any haircuts on the country’s creditors.

"Instead, the IMF recipe hinges on cuts to subsidies and social services and a floating exchange rate that will sink purchasing power even further.

"Kiev has already started to implement all of these measures.

"According to economists, the result will be growing poverty, reduced social benefits and an extended recession.

"In fact, the economic prognosis sounds a lot like Greece, which, four years after the start of an EU-IMF loan program, is suffering from 27 percent unemployment and rising risk-of-poverty rates.

"Ordinary people will be the undisputed losers in Ukraine, since they’ll pay for the so-called reform program rather than the oligarchs who continue to freely move billions of dollars to offshore tax havens.

"The biggest winners will be currency speculators; Western banks whose loans will be repaid via austerity measures; and European corporations who will gain access to the country’s markets and cheap Ukrainian labor under an EU association agreement set to be signed in May."
 

PhilFish

Administrator
Staff member
A large percentage of Ukrainians want independence from the IMF, EU, NATO, and the CIA. Many of these citizens are Russian-speakers whose duly elected president was driven from office by a violent mob which murdered protestors and police officers alike.

https://www.oaklandinstitute.org/sites/oaklandinstitute.org/files/OurBiz_Brief_Ukraine.pdf
You mean the very same Russian speakers whom Putin claimedd were his and has now bombed to hell ..?

No..they sure as shit want NATO now
 

middleview

President
Supporting Member
Ukrainians objected to IMF conditionalities that increased poverty, reduced social benefits, and produced an extended recession after a violent, US-supported coup drove a duly elected president from office in 2014:

https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/will-imf-bailout-turn-ukraine-another-greece/

"The IMF conditions for Ukraine won’t include any debt relief, and unlike the European Union-IMF bailout for Cyprus, they won’t impose any haircuts on the country’s creditors.

"Instead, the IMF recipe hinges on cuts to subsidies and social services and a floating exchange rate that will sink purchasing power even further.

"Kiev has already started to implement all of these measures.

"According to economists, the result will be growing poverty, reduced social benefits and an extended recession.

"In fact, the economic prognosis sounds a lot like Greece, which, four years after the start of an EU-IMF loan program, is suffering from 27 percent unemployment and rising risk-of-poverty rates.

"Ordinary people will be the undisputed losers in Ukraine, since they’ll pay for the so-called reform program rather than the oligarchs who continue to freely move billions of dollars to offshore tax havens.

"The biggest winners will be currency speculators; Western banks whose loans will be repaid via austerity measures; and European corporations who will gain access to the country’s markets and cheap Ukrainian labor under an EU association agreement set to be signed in May."
Your C&P is such a lame attempt to justify the war that Putin currently is waging against Ukraine. Do you actually think anyone in Ukraine would now wish to be closer to Moscow?
 
You mean the very same Russian speakers whom Putin claimedd were his and has now bombed to hell ..?

No..they sure as shit want NATO now
Who told you that, Azov?

https://mronline.org/2022/09/27/from-the-tops-market-massacre-to-ukraines-war-crimes-in-donbass/

"When 150,000 Ukrainian troops were lined up at the border of the Donbass region earlier this year, after increasing their bombings from 70 per day to 1,400 between Feb. 15 and Feb. 22, the people of the now independent republics of Lugansk and Donetsk formally requested protection from the Russian government to stop a humanitarian crisis caused by the Ukrainian military.

"The Russian military had a responsibility to stop a genocidal nightmare pushed by the U.S."
 
Your C&P is such a lame attempt to justify the war that Putin currently is waging against Ukraine. Do you actually think anyone in Ukraine would now wish to be closer to Moscow?
Millions of Ukrainians want this war to end before losing anymore territory and population.
The only way that happens is through negotiations with Moscow.
Russian speakers in Donetsk and Luhansk would much prefer Moscow to the IMF.
Ukrainians who regard Stepan Bandera as a role model probably do not.
Again, none of this would be happening right now without the US meddling in the domestic affairs of Ukraine since 1991.

https://www.rt.com/news/233439-us-meddling-ukraine-crisis/
 

middleview

President
Supporting Member
Millions of Ukrainians want this war to end before losing anymore territory and population.
The only way that happens is through negotiations with Moscow.
Russian speakers in Donetsk and Luhansk would much prefer Moscow to the IMF.
Ukrainians who regard Stepan Bandera as a role model probably do not.
Again, none of this would be happening right now without the US meddling in the domestic affairs of Ukraine since 1991.

https://www.rt.com/news/233439-us-meddling-ukraine-crisis/
Quoting RT is pretty funny.

A questionable source exhibits one or more of the following: extreme bias, consistent promotion of propaganda/conspiracies, poor or no sourcing to credible information, a complete lack of transparency, and/or is fake news. Fake News is the deliberate attempt to publish hoaxes and/or disinformation for profit or influence (Learn More). Sources listed in the Questionable Category may be very untrustworthy and should be fact-checked on a per-article basis. Please note sources on this list are not considered fake news unless specifically written in the reasoning section for that source. See all Questionable sources.


  • Overall, we rate RT Questionable based on promoting pro-Russian propaganda, conspiracy theories, numerous failed fact checks, and a lack of author transparency.
Reasoning: Russian Propaganda, Conspiracy, Lack of Transparency, Some Fake News
Bias Rating: RIGHT-CENTER
Factual Reporting: VERY LOW
Country: Russia
Press Freedom Rank: LIMITED FREEDOM
Media Type: TV Station
Traffic/Popularity: High Traffic
MBFC Credibility Rating: LOW CREDIBILITY









History


Founded in 2005, RT, originally Russia Today, is a television network funded by the Russian government. It operates cable and satellite television channels directed to audiences outside of Russia and provides Internet content in various languages, including Russian. Critics of RT claim they are a source of disinformation and pro-Russian propaganda.
Read how the Russian Government influences Media.
Funded by / Ownership
ANO “TV-Novosti,” owns RT News, which the Russian Government funds. The network is funded through advertising and 307 million USD from the Russian Government as of 2016.
Analysis / Bias
In review, RT News presents news that is generally in line with the Russian Government’s narrative. When it comes to covering USA/International News, they provide right-of-center coverage. They are highly biased in favor of Russia and occasionally run Pro-state conspiracy stories. The Columbia Journalism Review calls RT “The Kremlin’s propaganda outlet.

In general, most international news stories on RT are factual and relate to actual events; however, there are occasional pieces that spin these facts into a different narrative that is misleading. Another concerning aspect of RT is they do not list author information for articles published on the website. This presents a lack of transparency that makes it difficult to verify the information.
Failed Fact Checks
Overall, we rate RT Questionable based on promoting pro-Russian propaganda, conspiracy theories, numerous failed fact checks, and a lack of author transparency. (5/18/2016) Updated (D. Van Zandt 09/17/2022)
Source: https://www.rt.com/news/
 

middleview

President
Supporting Member
Who told you that, Azov?

https://mronline.org/2022/09/27/from-the-tops-market-massacre-to-ukraines-war-crimes-in-donbass/

"When 150,000 Ukrainian troops were lined up at the border of the Donbass region earlier this year, after increasing their bombings from 70 per day to 1,400 between Feb. 15 and Feb. 22, the people of the now independent republics of Lugansk and Donetsk formally requested protection from the Russian government to stop a humanitarian crisis caused by the Ukrainian military.

"The Russian military had a responsibility to stop a genocidal nightmare pushed by the U.S."
Really? You think the Ukrainian army had 150,000 troops on active duty in 2014?

In 2014, Ukraine’s military was called “decrepit” by one national security analyst, and its navy was in “a sorry state.” Ukrainian General Victor Muzhenko, a former top commander of Ukraine’s armed forces, went as far to say that the military was “an army literally in ruins.”

In 2014, the 'decrepit' Ukrainian army hit the refresh button. Eight years later, it's paying off (theconversation.com)
 
Quoting RT is pretty funny.

A questionable source exhibits one or more of the following: extreme bias, consistent promotion of propaganda/conspiracies, poor or no sourcing to credible information, a complete lack of transparency, and/or is fake news. Fake News is the deliberate attempt to publish hoaxes and/or disinformation for profit or influence (Learn More). Sources listed in the Questionable Category may be very untrustworthy and should be fact-checked on a per-article basis. Please note sources on this list are not considered fake news unless specifically written in the reasoning section for that source. See all Questionable sources.


  • Overall, we rate RT Questionable based on promoting pro-Russian propaganda, conspiracy theories, numerous failed fact checks, and a lack of author transparency.
Reasoning: Russian Propaganda, Conspiracy, Lack of Transparency, Some Fake News
Bias Rating: RIGHT-CENTER
Factual Reporting: VERY LOW
Country: Russia
Press Freedom Rank: LIMITED FREEDOM
Media Type: TV Station
Traffic/Popularity: High Traffic
MBFC Credibility Rating: LOW CREDIBILITY









History


Founded in 2005, RT, originally Russia Today, is a television network funded by the Russian government. It operates cable and satellite television channels directed to audiences outside of Russia and provides Internet content in various languages, including Russian. Critics of RT claim they are a source of disinformation and pro-Russian propaganda.
Read how the Russian Government influences Media.
Funded by / Ownership
ANO “TV-Novosti,” owns RT News, which the Russian Government funds. The network is funded through advertising and 307 million USD from the Russian Government as of 2016.
Analysis / Bias
In review, RT News presents news that is generally in line with the Russian Government’s narrative. When it comes to covering USA/International News, they provide right-of-center coverage. They are highly biased in favor of Russia and occasionally run Pro-state conspiracy stories. The Columbia Journalism Review calls RT “The Kremlin’s propaganda outlet.

In general, most international news stories on RT are factual and relate to actual events; however, there are occasional pieces that spin these facts into a different narrative that is misleading. Another concerning aspect of RT is they do not list author information for articles published on the website. This presents a lack of transparency that makes it difficult to verify the information.
Failed Fact Checks
Overall, we rate RT Questionable based on promoting pro-Russian propaganda, conspiracy theories, numerous failed fact checks, and a lack of author transparency. (5/18/2016) Updated (D. Van Zandt 09/17/2022)
Source: https://www.rt.com/news/
Some of RT's claims are accurate.
For example:

https://www.rt.com/news/233439-us-meddling-ukraine-crisis/

"Ukraine didn’t hesitate to appoint several foreigners as ministers, hastily giving them Ukrainian citizenship necessary for the jobs.

"Among them is Finance Minister Natalie Jaresko, a former section chief at the US embassy and chair of an investment fund, which distributed US Congress money provided thorough the US Agency for International Development (USAID)"

I'm sure you would find it hard to stop laughing if a belligerent foreign country appointed key members to US bureaucracy all in the interests of "freedom" and "democracy."o_O
 

middleview

President
Supporting Member
Some of RT's claims are accurate.
For example:

https://www.rt.com/news/233439-us-meddling-ukraine-crisis/

"Ukraine didn’t hesitate to appoint several foreigners as ministers, hastily giving them Ukrainian citizenship necessary for the jobs.

"Among them is Finance Minister Natalie Jaresko, a former section chief at the US embassy and chair of an investment fund, which distributed US Congress money provided thorough the US Agency for International Development (USAID)"

I'm sure you would find it hard to stop laughing if a belligerent foreign country appointed key members to US bureaucracy all in the interests of "freedom" and "democracy."o_O
Her parents were immigants from Ukraine. She lived in Ukraine for a number of years. RT reports the facts that suit them. I find nothing about her working in the embassy.
Natalie Jaresko - Wikipedia
 
Last edited:
Her parents were immigants from Ukraine. She lived in Ukraine for a number of years. RT reports the facts that suit them. I find nothing about her working in the embassy.
Natalie Jaresko - Wikipedia
She's an investment banker who formerly worked for the US State Department which likely put her in a US Embassy at some point.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natalie_Jaresko

"Natalie Ann Jaresko (Ukrainian: Наталія Енн Яресько; born 24 April 1965) also known as Natalia Ivanivna Yaresko (Ukrainian: Наталія Іванівна Яресько) is an American-born former U.S. State Department official and Ukrainian investment banker who served as Ukraine's Minister of Finance from December 2014 until April 2016."
 

Raoul_Luke

I feel a bit lightheaded. Maybe you should drive.
Russian troops have been forced out of most of the territory they held last year. The only option for humiliating defeat seems to be at the Kremlin. They are buying ammunition and weapons from Iran and North Korea. They are hiring troops from prisoners in Russian prisons. They have been attacking civilian targets in an attempt to demoralize Ukrainian civilians because they aren't doing very well against the Ukrainian army. Putin called for the mobilization of 300,000 draftees....so they left the country.

Putin is jailing people who criticize him. He has no allies to speak of. What countries have recognized Russias annexation of the Donbas? Anybody?


 
Top