this post was submitted on 23 Feb 2025
808 points (89.1% liked)
Memes
51673 readers
2856 users here now
Rules:
- Be civil and nice.
- Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.
founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
So you’re not simply claiming the events weren’t as described. You’re claiming they didn’t happen at all, and there was no transfer of power at all? Wow.
So then clarify. What did you mean? What is your point? What is your claim?
Because it sounds like you’re just pushing NATO propaganda with no actual understanding of the events. You’re not claiming one narrative has credibility over another version of events. You’re just proclaiming blanket denial.
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.
Then shouldn't his content be published by some trusted outlet?
Many have, but this is the kind of guy they’ll be sourcing from.
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.
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.
Ahh. Haha. Caught you moving that goalpost! So now holding the US accountable for their actions is also an attack on Ukrainians?!
Hahahaha. Fucking pathetic.
Since you’ve read hundreds of experts debunking Sachs, you should be able to provide at least one source. Right?
Did you read your own link? It’s a blanket denial, even of US involvement which you’ve already acknowledged. And it’s written by someone with a conflict of interest, as an economist directly profiting from the regime.
Funny that you NAFO bots love to pretend you support Ukrainian agency, while you defend those who took over their government and refuse to allow the Ukrainian people to participate in elections. Almost like you don’t actually give a fuck about Ukrainian agency, unless they’re willing to die in a proxy war for the west. Feigning such care for their agency, while not having an ounce of interest in protecting their lives.
Btw you severely overplayed it with your ‘criticizing the US is also attacking Ukrainians’ attempt. Sloppy.
Oh now you’re changing the story again to match your link?
Done with this NAFO shit. You’re not good enough to even keep your talking points in order. Blocked.