The question we should be asking and continue to ask is why the problems in the Ukraine are crucial to us here in the United States?
The answer may sound extreme but it is. The U.S. and its European comrades are pursuing policies that will possibly result in armed conflict with Russia, a country that also possesses nuclear weapons.
We must understand that the U.S. and NATO sponsored an overthrow of a democratically elected government last year in a coup that displaced President Viktor Yanukovych.
In our quest to spread democracy throughout the globe, the U.S. has, once again, decided not to accept the will of the Ukrainian people. Why, you ask? Because Yanukovych favored maintaining economic and political ties to Russia rather than the U.S. and the countries of the European Union.
While those in western Ukraine favored ties with the West, people in eastern Ukraine remained pro-Russian. The conflict within Ukraine was basically a civil war until the U.S. decided to demonize President Putin, accusing him of sending Russian troops into Ukraine as well as providing the eastern Ukrainians with weapons.
Despite supporting the overthrow of democratically elected Yanukovych, the U.S. now claims that it wants to protect the rights of the people of Ukraine. What is not often talked about is that the coup against Yanukovych’s government was spearheaded by neo-Nazis. Is it not interesting that in our desire to project notions of democracy throughout the world, we are supporting a coup against an elected government by neo-Nazis? Does anyone see a contradiction here?
Russian President Putin rightfully feels the threat of U.S. imperialism at work as the U.S. attempts to establish influence at Russia’s borders. How is this different than the U.S. response when the Soviet Union was helping Cuba develop missile sites?
More than 5,000 eastern Ukrainians have died in this conflict at the hands of the neo-Nazi led western Ukrainians. Who does the U.S. and its news media blame? Why, of course it’s the fault of the eastern Ukrainians themselves and/or Vladimer Putin for fomenting this rebellion. Even our own Henry Kissinger, former Secretary of State and in-house murderer, acknowledged that there is no evidence that Putin had any active role in this conflict. What is more evident is the U.S. role in organizing the coup which led to the overthrow of Yanukovych’s regime, a regime that favored maintaining its relationship with Russia.
Yanukovych was informed by his economic experts in Kiev that splitting from Russia would cost Ukraine over $160 billion. Washington Post correspondent, Anthony Faiola, in his interviews with eastern Ukrainians, writes that their resistance to supporting the Kiev move towards the European Union is their concern that such a move would create economic hardship. They expressed fear that the IMF austerity plan, used in other European countries, would make life unbearably difficult for them.
Many eastern Ukrainians felt disenfranchised by the overthrow of Yanukovych and they worried about the future of a Ukraine dominated by the U.S. and European Union.
These concerns are legitimate. But the U.S. has no sympathy for such concerns. Our agenda is world dominance, especially in countries that have many untapped resources. The Ukraine presents the Western “civilized” world with such an opportunity. The problem is it may ignite World War 3.
Dave Alpert has masters degrees in social work, educational administration, and psychology. He spent his career working with troubled inner city adolescents.
RSS
Is the US and EU headed for nuclear Armageddon with Russia?
Posted on February 13, 2015 by Dave Alpert
The question we should be asking and continue to ask is why the problems in the Ukraine are crucial to us here in the United States?
The answer may sound extreme but it is. The U.S. and its European comrades are pursuing policies that will possibly result in armed conflict with Russia, a country that also possesses nuclear weapons.
We must understand that the U.S. and NATO sponsored an overthrow of a democratically elected government last year in a coup that displaced President Viktor Yanukovych.
In our quest to spread democracy throughout the globe, the U.S. has, once again, decided not to accept the will of the Ukrainian people. Why, you ask? Because Yanukovych favored maintaining economic and political ties to Russia rather than the U.S. and the countries of the European Union.
While those in western Ukraine favored ties with the West, people in eastern Ukraine remained pro-Russian. The conflict within Ukraine was basically a civil war until the U.S. decided to demonize President Putin, accusing him of sending Russian troops into Ukraine as well as providing the eastern Ukrainians with weapons.
Despite supporting the overthrow of democratically elected Yanukovych, the U.S. now claims that it wants to protect the rights of the people of Ukraine. What is not often talked about is that the coup against Yanukovych’s government was spearheaded by neo-Nazis. Is it not interesting that in our desire to project notions of democracy throughout the world, we are supporting a coup against an elected government by neo-Nazis? Does anyone see a contradiction here?
Russian President Putin rightfully feels the threat of U.S. imperialism at work as the U.S. attempts to establish influence at Russia’s borders. How is this different than the U.S. response when the Soviet Union was helping Cuba develop missile sites?
More than 5,000 eastern Ukrainians have died in this conflict at the hands of the neo-Nazi led western Ukrainians. Who does the U.S. and its news media blame? Why, of course it’s the fault of the eastern Ukrainians themselves and/or Vladimer Putin for fomenting this rebellion. Even our own Henry Kissinger, former Secretary of State and in-house murderer, acknowledged that there is no evidence that Putin had any active role in this conflict. What is more evident is the U.S. role in organizing the coup which led to the overthrow of Yanukovych’s regime, a regime that favored maintaining its relationship with Russia.
Yanukovych was informed by his economic experts in Kiev that splitting from Russia would cost Ukraine over $160 billion. Washington Post correspondent, Anthony Faiola, in his interviews with eastern Ukrainians, writes that their resistance to supporting the Kiev move towards the European Union is their concern that such a move would create economic hardship. They expressed fear that the IMF austerity plan, used in other European countries, would make life unbearably difficult for them.
Many eastern Ukrainians felt disenfranchised by the overthrow of Yanukovych and they worried about the future of a Ukraine dominated by the U.S. and European Union.
These concerns are legitimate. But the U.S. has no sympathy for such concerns. Our agenda is world dominance, especially in countries that have many untapped resources. The Ukraine presents the Western “civilized” world with such an opportunity. The problem is it may ignite World War 3.
Dave Alpert has masters degrees in social work, educational administration, and psychology. He spent his career working with troubled inner city adolescents.