Continuing the discussion from When did the American Empire begin:
I was just going to leave it there, but since @What_Exit suggested a new thread…
Why the fuck is @Charlie_Tan repeating Putin’s Color Revolution conspiracy theories in unrelated threads?
Russian Agent? Useful Idiot? Porque no los dos?
Evidence in the “idiot” column: he doesn’t even know when Ukraine’s revolution happened.
Well, getting people to believe it is kind of the whole point of propaganda, isn’t it?
So it’s hard to tell.
@Charlie_Tan you don’t need to start a thread - I already did. If you want to debate your Putinist narrative, do it here, in the open - not over PM.
I was just going to post that I PM’d you, since I din’t think it warranted a new thread. But sure.
First. You’re confusing the Orange revolution (2004) with the Revolution of Dignity (2014) which is what I was referring to. The one where Yanuovych was ousted.
Second. My post what a bit of a dig at @Exapno_Mapcase as it seemed to read as if the C.I.A. stopped their shenanigans after the 50’s.
Third. I was wrong. It wasn’t the C.I.A. that was caught on tape. It wss U.S. ambassador Geoffry Pyatt and Assistant Secretary of State Victor Nuland.
Yeah. I guess… in terms of him not going into the government, just let him stay out and do his political homework and stuff. I’m just thinking in terms of sort of the process moving ahead we want to keep the moderate democrats together.
Pyatt from the transcription.
Full story:
This might have been something that played into Putin’s hands, but - as I said politely in the PM but not now - Don’t fucking accuse me of being a tankie.
ETA: I just dawned on me that if you’d just read the PM, with the linked BBC story, this would all have been moot. Or maybe you accuse the Beeb of being Putinists.
The transcript shows some US officials whose job it is to monitor the situation in Eastern Europe discussing the situation in Eastern Europe. They are certainly expressing their preferred outcomes, but that doesn’t mean that they have any kind of nefarious control over said outcomes.
The idea that it shows that the US is responsible for the revolution, in the way that the US is allegedly responsible for revolutions in Central America, is not only misleading - it’s Putinist propaganda.
You’ll note that the BBC doesn’t accuse them of trying to control Ukraine through covert means, the way you did - the BBC focuses on the Americans’ criticism of and frustration with the EU.
No, you slimy Putin dupe, here’s what you said by PM:
I don’t care if you moat-and-bailey your way back to the slightly more defensible position that it wasn’t a CIA led coup, it was just the US sticking it’s fingers places. You’re Putin’s tool either way.
Here’s what the Ukranians have to say about people like you:
I don’t give a flying fuck about how polite you are while you amplify Putin’s propaganda.
I won’t accuse you of being a Tankie when you stop acting like one (by the way, I didn’t call you a Tankie, I said you were repeating Putin propaganda; but if you want to self identify as one I won’t argue.)
He’s showing some anger.
For context. The original thread was discussing how American imperialism had changed to supporting groups they favor, especially after Vietnam. As I said, I was just making a slight dig @Exapno_Mapcase. We all, of course know, that the U.S. has been meddling in affairs of other countries. It’s not only been outright wars (Iraq a.s.f).
Now, to the matter at hand. You accuse me of
Well, how about that? Do I or don’t I know when Yanukovych was sent packing. And who doesn’t know what he is talking about.
As for the BBC story: you might read it as two detached gentlemen talking about things happening and how they don’t care whichever way it goes. I don’t. I don’t think there’s anything sinister going on beyond what happens in that world.
AND WHAT I DIDN*T SAY WAS THAT THE U.S: STARTED THE RESOLUTION IN 2004 or even 2014.
I said that they were having their sticky fingers “in or adjacent.” And for anyone who bothers to read the article, I think that’s pretty clear.
You know, it’s possible to criticize a country/government/regime without actually being supportive of the opposition.
You should try that yourself.
ETA: No, you didn’t call me a tankie by using that word. I think it’s quite obvious that this was implkied when you accuse me of being Putinist and serving his propaganda.
Again - you seem very angry about a minor, flippant comment.
Then why did you respond to a post about the US starting revolutions up to the 30s by saying “they never stopped, look at Ukraine”?
Tankies are specifically pro-Putin because of a Lefty brand of America Bad brain rot. I have no idea what flavor of brain rot you’ve got, all I know is that you repeat Putinist talking points.
If you do that because you’re a braindead far leftist, that would make you a Tankie; but far right people like Tucker Carlson are just as good at licking Putin’s ass, so I wouldn’t want to presume.
The problem is that you seem to think that discrediting Ukraine’s sovereignty by implying that outside forces caused their move away from Russia - the very same reasoning that Putin uses to justify his invasion - is a minor matter that it is appropriate to be flippant about.
You put that in quotation marks.
You couldn’t use the QUOTE feature of the board, because I never said those words. You did use them for your OP, so anyone is welcome to scroll up and see.
This, howver made me go back to the original. I think my replies here are clear, b ut I seems I made a mistake, and so all the replies are somewhat not valid.
My initial post:
Was macde with the impression about the meddling behind the scenes that the U.S. and its Agency has been doing ever since the 50’s. (Not the Trujillo/Palavi kind, and not even the Augusto Pinochet kind That they (and of course Russia) were at it in Ukraine shouldn’t be a surprise or controversial.
I am fully aware that Russia probably leaked that phone call in order to paint the U.S. in a bad light. The article says so. But that doesn’t change the basic facts and the only thing I’ve said:
The U.S. has, and probably is, moving behind the scenes to gain an advantage in international politics whenever they can.
Oh, in South Africa, we definitely know this.
The real Mandela Effect is how Americans forget the CIA was the only reason he was in prison in the first place.
And that’s not even touching Lumumba.
Charlie does seem to be giving off Tankie vibes.
“Supporting a group” does not equate to “meddling behind the scenes”.
Bearing repetition:
“The US did not cause revolution in Ukraine. That is an excuse the Russians manufactured to invade.”
*And no, I’m not “angry”. 
All I’m seeing is you said exactly what Babale said you did, which was also quoted in the OP. I’ll leave the rest for others to read the original thread instead of your revisionist backtracking here.
Ah yes, the classic “It can’t be that my wife divorced me because I’m a bad husband; it must be that some other chad deliberately lured her away from me.”
Not the best analogy since Ukraine and Russia weren’t spouses, but you get what I mean.
And I often tell such trolls, vatniks or tankies: “So what if the West did stir up Ukraine against Russia, or Hong Kong against China? It’s your own fault for being too feeble to do the same to us. Get back to me when you have the means to stir up an anti-USA protest in Mexico. Even just one.”
Here is Russia working against Canada via every incels favourite drunk uncle Jordan Peterson and noted dickhead Fucker Carlson:
Im just having this little reverie of Jordan Peterson fucking off to Russia.
One can dream.
He did, for a while, so he could be put into a medically induced coma and wake up with his benzo addiction gone.
Either his brain actually broke during this “treatment”, or the Russians got some serious komoromat on him while he was there, because he went full throated pro Russian afterwards.
I wonder if he’ll settle in the ‘Caucasus Mountains’…
He was wacky before the treatment.
But he got much, much worse after.