D. Trump: "You (Ukrainians) should have never started it."

Dissident

Gold Member
Joined
Jan 21, 2020
Messages
300
Reaction score
112
Points
178

US President D. Trump described the reason for the current situation in Ukraine last month as follows:​
"You (Ukrainians) should have never started it."​
see The Guardian

Below I present my view of what D. Trump meant by this sentence.
In February 2023, more than two years ago, D. Trump published a video message on his official website containing the following words:
"For decades, we've had the very same people, such as Victoria Nuland and many others just like her, obsessed with pushing Ukraine toward NATO, not to mention the State Department's support for uprisings in Ukraine. These people have been seeking confrontation for a long time…"

I believe that at the end of 2013, Ukrainians - provoked by then-US President B. Obama and his subordinates, including the aforementioned Victoria Nuland - began protesting against a completely insignificant issue: against the postponement of the signing of an Association Agreement between Ukraine and the EU. At some point during these protests, the opposition began committing arson and killings.

However, firstly, the next presidential elections in Ukraine should have taken place in 15 months, and then Ukrainians could have legally elected another President who would sign the above-mentioned agreement more quickly.
Secondly, in November 2013, not only Ukraine but also Azerbaijan, Georgia, and Moldova were offered to sign this Agreement. Azerbaijan too refused to sign the Agreement, and despite signing it in November 2013, Georgia and Moldova have not become EU members so far.
Thirdly, countries are constantly joining and leaving different unions, and nowhere (except in Ukraine) this has become a major problem.

From the above, we can conclude that Ukrainians should have never started killing and arson during the Euromaidan.

In addition, the Ukrainian Parliament (immediately after the illegal removal of then President V. Yanukovych from power) repealed by a majority vote the Language Law that had previously granted regional status to the Russian language in Ukraine.
And as even the first post-Maidan President of Ukraine, P. Poroshenko, called this a mistake, Ukrainians should have never started restricting the linguistic rights of ethnic Russians in Ukraine.

And then the situation developed according to the scenario that unfolded in Yugoslav Kosovo in the late 1990s.

Ethnic Russians in eastern Ukraine began to fight against the new Ukrainian government, but the Ukrainian media (like the Yugoslav media in the late 1990s) began to claim that the fighters in eastern Ukraine were actually foreigners who had received weapons from abroad.

There were only two differences between the situation in Ukraine and that in Yugoslavia.
The first difference was that the Yugoslav media had claimed that citizens of neighboring Albania were fighting in Kosovo, while the Ukrainian media claimed that citizens of neighboring Russia were fighting in eastern Ukraine.
The second difference was that NATO countries had supported the separatists in Kosovo by beginning to bomb Yugoslavia. In Ukraine, however, NATO countries supported the central government by beginning to supply it with weapons.

After the Crimea became part of the Russian Federation following a referendum, in 2021 the Ukrainian authorities began threatening Russia with military action to "reintegrate the Crimea into Ukraine." see the official website of the President of Ukraine. I believe that Ukrainians should have never started threatening Russia with this. In my opinion, these threats became one of the main reasons for the start of the Russian military operation in Ukraine in February 2022.

Source
 

US President D. Trump described the reason for the current situation in Ukraine last month as follows:

see The Guardian

Below I present my view of what D. Trump meant by this sentence.
In February 2023, more than two years ago, D. Trump published a video message on his official website containing the following words:
"For decades, we've had the very same people, such as Victoria Nuland and many others just like her, obsessed with pushing Ukraine toward NATO, not to mention the State Department's support for uprisings in Ukraine. These people have been seeking confrontation for a long time…"

I believe that at the end of 2013, Ukrainians - provoked by then-US President B. Obama and his subordinates, including the aforementioned Victoria Nuland - began protesting against a completely insignificant issue: against the postponement of the signing of an Association Agreement between Ukraine and the EU. At some point during these protests, the opposition began committing arson and killings.

However, firstly, the next presidential elections in Ukraine should have taken place in 15 months, and then Ukrainians could have legally elected another President who would sign the above-mentioned agreement more quickly.
Secondly, in November 2013, not only Ukraine but also Azerbaijan, Georgia, and Moldova were offered to sign this Agreement. Azerbaijan too refused to sign the Agreement, and despite signing it in November 2013, Georgia and Moldova have not become EU members so far.
Thirdly, countries are constantly joining and leaving different unions, and nowhere (except in Ukraine) this has become a major problem.

From the above, we can conclude that Ukrainians should have never started killing and arson during the Euromaidan.

In addition, the Ukrainian Parliament (immediately after the illegal removal of then President V. Yanukovych from power) repealed by a majority vote the Language Law that had previously granted regional status to the Russian language in Ukraine.
And as even the first post-Maidan President of Ukraine, P. Poroshenko, called this a mistake, Ukrainians should have never started restricting the linguistic rights of ethnic Russians in Ukraine.

And then the situation developed according to the scenario that unfolded in Yugoslav Kosovo in the late 1990s.

Ethnic Russians in eastern Ukraine began to fight against the new Ukrainian government, but the Ukrainian media (like the Yugoslav media in the late 1990s) began to claim that the fighters in eastern Ukraine were actually foreigners who had received weapons from abroad.

There were only two differences between the situation in Ukraine and that in Yugoslavia.
The first difference was that the Yugoslav media had claimed that citizens of neighboring Albania were fighting in Kosovo, while the Ukrainian media claimed that citizens of neighboring Russia were fighting in eastern Ukraine.
The second difference was that NATO countries had supported the separatists in Kosovo by beginning to bomb Yugoslavia. In Ukraine, however, NATO countries supported the central government by beginning to supply it with weapons.

After the Crimea became part of the Russian Federation following a referendum, in 2021 the Ukrainian authorities began threatening Russia with military action to "reintegrate the Crimea into Ukraine." see the official website of the President of Ukraine. I believe that Ukrainians should have never started threatening Russia with this. In my opinion, these threats became one of the main reasons for the start of the Russian military operation in Ukraine in February 2022.

Source
look 🇷🇺 bitch,
you are partly correct this time , many of our forum members dont understand Trump´s strategy, D. Trump is not Neville Chamberlain N2, Strategically speaking, D. Trump plays R. Reagan´s anti- imperialistic game with Moscow🇷🇺 empire

"I suggest that President TRUMP might want to study how Ronald Reagan defeated the Bolshevik empire "He did it without firing a shot, as we know, but he had a super weapon -- oil.

-Michael Reagan



ps


 
Dissident

You wrote:

-----
US President D. Trump described the reason for the current situation in Ukraine last month as follows:

"You (Ukrainians) should have never started it."
-----


Question: The Ukrainians should have never started what?
 
the opposition began committing arson and killings.
Nope.


It was a coup orchestrated by Ukraine's neo-nazis. Those were the folks responsible for the killing and arson.

". . . . The locations of the forces of the Yanukovych government during the massacre are well known, and they are identified in my studies, the government investigation charges, numerous videos, and in the SITU 3D model.

At the time of the killings of these three protesters, Berkut policemen were behind the barricades on Instytutska Street on the government side, while the protesters who were killed were in between Berkut and the Hotel Ukraina.

Forensic examinations of bullet holes by government experts described numerous bullet holes on the second, third, and higher floors and the roof of the Hotel Ukraina on the side that faced the government forces. But they did not identify a single bullet hole on the first floor on the Berkut facing side of the hotel behind these protesters. Simple positioning of the bullet hole locations described in these forensic reports clearly shows that almost all bullets from the Berkut and other positions flew above the heads of the protesters there or targeted poles, trees, and a flower box. This is also shown in vide and photos — including some I took there after the massacre — and in videos and reports of shooting at journalists in the hotel with a Google Street View image from the first Berkut barricade.

This confirms my study findings that the special Berkut police unit and the Omega unit of snipers of Internal Troops were shooting at snipers in the Hotel Ukraina.

After five long years, the failure by the Poroshenko government’s investigation to determine bullet trajectories by ballistic experts or conduct on-site investigative experiments for the same purpose — even after the Maidan massacre trial judges ordered them two years ago to do so — is therefore hardly surprising. It is impossible to bend physical reality. In a literal cover-up, large fences were recently erected on the crime scene for the construction of the Maidan massacre memorial, which would completely alter the landscape. The fences and the memorial would make it impossible to determine bullet trajectories on-site, which still has not been done by the investigation for five years after this mass killing. . . ."

654.png

". . . A female Maidan medic during the massacre was pointing to the top of this green building and shouting about snipers. But her words were translated in a BBC report as referring to six protesters killed by the snipers in that area. A Maidan protester and another Maidan medic, who were wounded near the same spot where these two protesters were killed, both testified at the Maidan massacre trial that they were shot from this building. Government ballistic experts confirmed this during on-site investigative experiments. . . "

Shooting of Maidan Protesters from Maidan-Controlled Locations (2018)​

Nov 15, 2018
"This six minute-long online video appendix shows shootings of Maidan protesters from Maidan-controlled buildings and areas during the Maidan massacre in Kyiv in Ukraine on February 20, 2014 and a massacre of Maidan protesters in Khmelnytskyi on February 19, 2014. It uses content analysis of brief segments of well-known videos of these massacres and unbroadcast segments of a widely broadcast Belgian VRT News TV video of the Maidan massacre to reveal such shooting. This video appendix also matches manifest and latent content of this shooting of Maidan protesters from Maidan-controlled locations with evidence of such shooting in the same place and time in testimonies of wounded Maidan protesters at the Maidan massacre trial and investigation, government investigation findings, an interview of a VRT News journalist, photos, and American and German documentaries of the Maidan massacre. It is created for academic research purposes from brief segments of videos, including unbroadcast video segments provided by the VRT News, and from photos. They are cited in the video appendix. "


Is the US backing neo-Nazis in Ukraine?
 
Dissident

You wrote:

-----
US President D. Trump described the reason for the current situation in Ukraine last month as follows:

"You (Ukrainians) should have never started it."
-----


Question: The Ukrainians should have never started what?
Discrimination, abuse and genocide of local Russian population, of course.
 
Discrimination, abuse and genocide of local Russian population, of course.

What's just simple a lie. Putin sended since 2008 combatants (soldiers without uniforms) into the Donbass region on reason to provoke a civil war. The most victims of this international Russian crime had been Ukrainian civilists in the Donbass region. Sure the Ukrainians did also try to defend themselves - but it came never to anything what someone could call an organiced attack on Russian civilists or even genocide.

And your answer had in general nothing to do with my question. No one understands what Donald Trump is saying because he often is using only half sentences which others complete in their mind - as you did do here for example. This was for example so when he attacked the USA in January 6th 2021. So "What said Donald Trump really?" was my question and not what others interpret.
 
Last edited:
Is the 1994 Treaty invalid then?
As far as I know, there was no any 1994 "Treaty". Budapest Memorandum isn't a "treaty".


The Treaty about Friendship and partnership between Russian Federation and Ukraine, signed in 1999 was cancelled by Kievan regime in 2018 (and it was another proof of aggressive intentions of NATO and their Kievan proxies).

Why?
 
As far as I know, there was no any 1994 "Treaty". Budapest Memorandum isn't a "treaty". ...

The Budapest Memorandum is an international treaty from 1994 in which Russia reaffirms its commitment to Kazakhstan, Belarus and Ukraine to respect the sovereignty and existing borders of these countries.

Since 2008 Russia did send combatants to the Ukraine, in 2014 Russia annexed the Crimea and in 2022 Russia started a war on Europe in the Ukraine.

When the people of Ukraine voted Lukashenko out of office Lukashenko asked his former enemy Putin for help so Belarus is meanwhile totally under control of two tyrants - Putin and his slave Lukashenko.

And what to say about Kazakhstan? It is not a free country at all.
 
Russia violated the 1994 treaty.

Rebels were defeated in the eastern Oblasts in 2014.
 
As far as I know, there was no any 1994 "Treaty". Budapest Memorandum isn't a "treaty".


The Treaty about Friendship and partnership between Russian Federation and Ukraine, signed in 1999 was cancelled by Kievan regime in 2018 (and it was another proof of aggressive intentions of NATO and their Kievan proxies).

Why?
It functions as such, Russia has violated, so it is a criminal country. We will have to divide the west of it among Lithuania, Poland, and Ukraine. Maybe Romani gets a taste.
 
Ukraine's neo-nazis
did you get 🇷🇺RT JOB, finally ? :lol:
 
Back
Top Bottom