General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Wanted: Proof that what happened in Ukraine actually constituted a "western sponsored coup." [View all]Tommy_Carcetti
(43,166 posts)Consider that less than a week after Yanukovych high tailed it out of Ukraine with his oil paintings, armed men in green fatigues started appear in Crimea. Vladimir Putin at that time denied these were Russian troops. Then a very questionably and hastily run referendum was held in Crimea where the margin of victory was unusually high even taking into consideration the large amount of ethnic Russians living there. Crimea seceded and was annexed into.....Russia. And only after the dust settled did Putin decide to come clean and admit, yeah, those were Russian troops all along.
So think about it--territory belonging to Ukraine and recognized as Ukrainian by way of treaty (to which Russia was a signatory) was invaded by Russian troops who helped facilitate a sloppy plebiscite which purported to cede that land to Russia, land which Russia gladly accepted. That is an incredibly audacious amount of interference in Ukraine on Russia's part. And that's not even considering the same exact story which is replaying itself in Ukraine's eastern territory as we speak, albeit with a little more complication.
Meanwhile, the US interference is what? US aid money given to NGOs working in Ukraine over a 20 year period? Victoria Nuland handing out cookies on the Maidan? Victoria Nuland playing what amounts to fantasy football as to who she wanted to see in charge in Ukraine?
Whatever interests the US has taken in Ukraine for whatever the reasons they may be, they are not even remotely close to what Russia has done, which is to actually seize land belonging to Ukraine and call it for their own. There simply is no comparison between the two.
Anyways, you said the majority of Ukrainians supported Yanukovych prior to the change in power, and clearly they did not. So however you spin it, that's just not the case.