[thodin]

So you think that US had to invade Russia to remove Eltsin?! He was elected in 1991 (even before USSR collapsed) and had very strong support in Moscow and major cities.

And elections in 1993 (after the dissolution of parliament) were won by Zhirinovsky's party, communists were only 3rd. US never supported Zhirinovsky and he wasn't a communist.

I don't see how US could be blamed for anything that happened in 1993 because they were really trying to stop the crisis, but far-right nationalists (like Barkashov and Makashov) started military actions, like mayor's office assault and TV building attack.

This is not a "returning to power ... through elections" for sure.

[medo-bear]

> So you think that US had to invade Russia to remove Eltsin?!

You should practice reading plain English.

> This is not a "returning to power ... through elections" for sure.

Communists returning to power in Russia was an actual concern for the US foreign policy. For example it is unclear if Yeltsin fairly won against Zyuganov in 1996. Even today the Communist Party of the Russian Federation polls around 20%. They are the largest opposition party. Although it is pretty obvious they are a fake Communist Party

[thodin]

You should study our history better - 1993 and 1996 were very different years, in 1993 communists lost elections to pro-Eltsin party and to LDPR (Zhirinovsky). As a party they got only 12% seats and this had nothing to do with US at all.

Major problems with economy happened during 1994 (like famous black Tuesday) and communists became more popular, but they were not the same people who tried to start military coup in 1993 (Zyuganov was very much against any military actions).

In 1996 Zuyganov lost because Lieutenant General Lebed supported Eltsin, he was Berezovsky's creature and was much more "brutal" that Zyuganov (who was looking exactly as Soviet era nomenklatura) . I highly doubt that anyone in US gave this idea to Berezovsky, because people in US had very little understating what rural Russians wanted to see and hear.

[medo-bear]

> You should study our history better

In 1993 Yeltsin tried to disolve the parliament without a legal basis in the Russian constitution. He did this to push through a new constitution which granted the president far reaching powers (hello Putin). In other words, he commited a coup. Every Western history book will tell you that the West supported him and that it would have been impossible for him to succeed without Western support, which is only logical because the coup happened in order to fasten Russia's transition to a Western-style market economy. At the time communists in Russia were extremely disorganised but the nation began to realize that they were sold a turd with the collapse of planned economy and the dissolution of the Soviet Union. Grass root communists supported the parliament and in Moscow took to street action in much the same way that Nazi groups like Right Sector did during Maidan. Russia also had Nazis supporting the parliament (eg. National Bolsheviks ... Commie Nazis like in the Simpsons) but in the end who the US supports in ex-USSR will determine the success or failure of the coup and/or acceptability of using heavy handed methods of suppression. And dont worry, if you get confused about Nazis as your comrades, the US will also help you decide which Nazis/Jihadists/Nationalists/Terrorists are good and which are bad. So I guess that maybe you should study the history of foreign intervention in your country better.

[thodin]

We had referendum in April 1993 when people of Russia voted for new parliament elections and supported Eltsin. Parliament was elected in 1990 in USSR, not in new Russia and was very much disconnected from reality.

It wasn't a coup because we had new elections in December and people also voted during those elections in favor of new constitution. So you think that US had to be against people's vote?! Elections were real, not like in modern Russia.

And your idea that 1993 events had something in common with Maidan is really delusive - rural Russia just watched CNN live reports from Moscow and did nothing. No one was going to support "nazis" in Moscow. In couple of days everyone returned to their private lives and almost no one was prosecuted.

And during referendum in December people decided their own fate, US had nothing to do with it. Or you are trying to tell me that my parents voted in 1993 twice because someone from US told them how to vote? This is just some silly foreigner's view which is real nonsense.

[medo-bear]

I think you should look up the meaning of the word 'coup'. In the mean time here is one foreigner telling your fellow countryman that he did a good job: https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/briefing-book/russia-programs/2018...

[thodin]

Coup in Russian is "Путч" and we had one in 1991 - coup is when you take power from popular people and give it to unpopular people. In 1993 Eltsin was very popular and parliament was not - this is why Russians voted for new Constitution and communists lost elections.

And who really cared about Clinton? Next year Eltsin started 1st Chechen war without asking anyone's permission. What Russia needed back then was money. And US was giving it to us because they were scared: Russia with nuclear weapons and without money was a really scary monster, ready to sell anything to the highest bidder. From nuclear to biological and chemical weapons.

BTW, one of the scientists who was working with "Novichok" sold it to Chechen gangsters and they actually killed local banker and some other guys around. And he is still not feeling guilty about this story. Russia was ready to sell anything to anyone. That's why Clinton had to support someone and pay. Eltsin was mostly ok, not worse than any other former communist leader.