|
|
|
|
|
|
by nullorempty
53 days ago
|
|
|
Right, the coup of 2014 ousted democratically elected president and part of a country disagreed. As far as russian vs ukranian... It's basically one nation. Many russians have ukranian blood in them, many ukranians have russian blood in them. There are million's of ukranians working in russia today. The divide was engineered from outside and it was well engineered. Divide and concur is an old strategy and the west is very-very good at it. Russian and Ukranians are too gullible. Less so now, but in 2014 they were like children. And Ukranians at Maidan were treated like children by Nuland who brought them cookies, quite fittingly. |
|
|
As I said earlier. Everything was fine while he was just "democratically" elected. And when he _started_ eroding democracy. But he took it too far going against the will of the people after being democratically elected, that he was democratically ousted.
> part of a country disagreed
A part of country, militarily supported by neighbouring Russia, took up arms. Started killing. Terrorist separatists.
> As far as russian vs ukranian... It's basically one nation.
I have already heard that kind of fantasy propaganda applied to a similar aggression. Your tricks are old. And the claim is inconsequential for the discussion tbh.
> The divide was engineered from outside and it was well engineered. Divide and concur is an old strategy and the west is very-very good at it.
I like how you, after all this, decided it's the west that is the only one to be named as the perpetrator of divide and conquer. I'd be surprised if "the west" didn't have its influence, but the fast deterioration happening under Yanukovych didn't really need outside influence to gain opposition because it's not at all logical Ukrainians would want it. Russians would because his policies were very pro-Russian. But they have Russia for that—killing Ukrainians to secede from Ukraine makes them wrong.
The rest isn't worth replying to.