| I've been following all international reporters on the ground from day one (Twitter journalism is truly a game-changer) and corroborating it by getting personal perspectives from people related to Maidan and within Crimea. My partner is Ukrainian from Russian parents and we regularly compare Russian and Western reporting, statements and propaganda. All in all I'm quite sure I've got a pretty solid grip on the situation incorporating information from all perspectives. As for a referendum at gunpoint; it's not really debatable as it refers to armed Russian forces having taken over Crimea during the referendum. As for it's validity; it's not about the constitutional framework, it's about the occupation, selective media blackout, voting irregularities, lack of independent international observers etc. etc. The comparison with the internationally recognized Scottisch referendum [1] explains it well. As for taking over buildings; I don't find it at all odd that a movement consisting mostly of the general population and also militant far-right extremists (disproportionately present due to obvious selection bias) operates strategically in a way that maximised disruption. Self-organisation is a much more likely explanation than nefarious foreign strategic advice. As for the snipers; are you seriously arguing that the US shot these protesters as a false flag operation? It sounds to me like, at the core, you just can't comprehend a bona-fide populist uprising lying the root of Euromaidan. Have you considered that that might be because at some level it invalidates the learned helplessness many in post-Soviet states were raised with? [1] https://secure.flickr.com/photos/foreignoffice/13306114335/ |