US 2024 Presidential Election

Silvanus

Elite Member
Legacy
Jan 15, 2013
12,573
6,555
118
Country
United Kingdom
are you confused about what the Berkut was or what?
Nope, the FSB, who were directly involved at the behest of the SBU.

In any case, it seems weird that you of all people would take issue with Ukraine's elected government exercising "agency" and receiving foreign aid in maintaining its security.
It's almost as if a government's right to determine its own policy may extend to defending against foreign invasion, but doesn't extend to brutalising its own populace!
 

Seanchaidh

Elite Member
Legacy
Mar 21, 2009
5,977
3,631
118
Country
United States of America
It's almost as if a government's right to determine its own policy may extend to defending against foreign invasion, but doesn't extend to brutalising its own populace!
That's what domestic Banderite Nazis are for.
 

Hades

Elite Member
Mar 8, 2013
2,452
1,861
118
Country
The Netherlands
are you confused about what the Berkut was or what? In any case, it seems weird that you of all people would take issue with Ukraine's elected government exercising "agency" and receiving foreign aid in maintaining its security. But when it's protecting the elected government from Nazi paramilitary street gangs and their snipers, I guess it's different somehow.
On who's behalf did they gain this security? Certainly not on behalf of their citizens or their country which they tried betraying to the Russians. A corrupt president betraying his country to a hostile entity, and then inviting armed forces of said hostile entity to fire at protesters isn't a country showing ''agency''. Yanukovitch wasn't representing Ukraine during Maidan. That was the whole problem Ukraine had with him.
 

Agema

Do everything and feel nothing
Legacy
Mar 3, 2009
9,474
6,716
118
On who's behalf did they gain this security? Certainly not on behalf of their citizens or their country which they tried betraying to the Russians. A corrupt president betraying his country to a hostile entity, and then inviting armed forces of said hostile entity to fire at protesters isn't a country showing ''agency''. Yanukovitch wasn't representing Ukraine during Maidan. That was the whole problem Ukraine had with him.
The more sympathetic explanation for Yanukovich was that he was representing Ukraine by cancelling plans for a trade deal with Europe because Russia had threatened severe repercussions. It was known that Russia was directing heavy economic pressure on Ukraine, but it's entirely possible that Russia had also told Yanukovich that Russia might take military action against Ukraine. He might not however say that to Ukrainians, because to openly admit to Ukrainians that the country was in effect a vassal state of Russia would have serious downsides. It would make Russia much more unpopular in Ukraine, which could be bad for Ukraine due to general diplomatic friction, and would certainly be bad for him as a pro-Russia politician.

However, there are then all sorts of middle grounds between Yanukovich as a politician honestly trying to do the best for his country and as a Russian stooge, and I suspect it is somewhere in that middle ground. I wouldn't be surprised if in the final analysis, it wasn't so much about national interest as that he was heavily corrupt and probably saw Russia as the source of his and his party's benefit.
 

Silvanus

Elite Member
Legacy
Jan 15, 2013
12,573
6,555
118
Country
United Kingdom
That's what domestic Banderite Nazis are for.
You've discovered that state violence can quickly and cheaply be justified by just sticking unsubstantiated, nebulous, and generalised accusations at any & all targets. A tactic with a rich history in Russia and America both! They were no saints eh?