| Author |
 Topic Search  Topic Options
|
Het-field 
Roy Keane
By Appointment to His Majesty The King
Joined: 08 Mar 2016
Status: Offline
Points: 10759
|
 Post Options
 Thanks(0)
 Quote  Reply
 Posted: 23 Apr 2024 at 1:53pm |
 OohAah... wrote:
I didnt want to try and quantify it as I know We wont agree.
Why did Russia not suffer resistance? Also the threat of them losing their access to the only warm water port was their motive.
I genuinley do not defend the invasion of Ukraine, 2 years ago. It just didnt happen out of thin air with no outside infleunces pre dating it.
|
I’m not sure how avoiding quantification is helpful for the debate. I’m not sure how you can’t agree that in the scheme of things Russia had vastly more influence (and I mean vastly).
And it wasn’t their only warm water port. There was two. So that doesn’t stack up.
And yes, things happen in a vacuum like that.
Edited by Het-field - 23 Apr 2024 at 1:54pm
|
 |
OohAah...
Ray Houghton
Joined: 09 Apr 2011
Location: Ireland
Status: Offline
Points: 3527
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 23 Apr 2024 at 2:24pm |
Het-field wrote:
OohAah... wrote:
I didnt want to try and quantify it as I know We wont agree.
Why did Russia not suffer resistance? Also the threat of them losing their access to the only warm water port was their motive.
I genuinley do not defend the invasion of Ukraine, 2 years ago. It just didnt happen out of thin air with no outside infleunces pre dating it.
|
I’m not sure how avoiding quantification is helpful for the debate. I’m not sure how you can’t agree that in the scheme of things Russia had vastly more influence (and I mean vastly).
And it wasn’t their only warm water port. There was two. So that doesn’t stack up.
And yes, things happen in a vacuum like that.
|
Avoided the question as to why their invasion of Crimea was unresisted. I see.
Because You already think US infleunce had no bearing. and I think it did. So we wont agree about quantifying it. Again back 2004 they were at it. theres a clear lineage of US influence.
|
|
Het-field
Roy Keane
By Appointment to His Majesty The King
Joined: 08 Mar 2016
Status: Offline
Points: 10759
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 23 Apr 2024 at 2:35pm |
OohAah... wrote:
Het-field wrote:
OohAah... wrote:
I didnt want to try and quantify it as I know We wont agree.
Why did Russia not suffer resistance? Also the threat of them losing their access to the only warm water port was their motive.
I genuinley do not defend the invasion of Ukraine, 2 years ago. It just didnt happen out of thin air with no outside infleunces pre dating it.
|
I’m not sure how avoiding quantification is helpful for the debate. I’m not sure how you can’t agree that in the scheme of things Russia had vastly more influence (and I mean vastly).
And it wasn’t their only warm water port. There was two. So that doesn’t stack up.
And yes, things happen in a vacuum like that.
|
Avoided the question as to why their invasion of Crimea was unresisted. I see.
Because You already think US infleunce had no bearing. and I think it did. So we wont agree about quantifying it. Again back 2004 they were at it. theres a clear lineage of US influence.
|
I’m not dodging. It was poor form by the west not to stand up to Russian aggression.
I don’t believe the US had a bearing on Russian aggression. But if they did, the Russian’s were disproportionately involved in Ukrainian affairs, had already invaded it and came back for more. It is a pivotal point here, if the argument being made is that the involvement is in any way equal or comparable.
|
|
eireland
Ray Houghton
Joined: 12 Feb 2016
Status: Offline
Points: 4499
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 23 Apr 2024 at 2:42pm |
OohAah... wrote:
eireland wrote:
OohAah... wrote:
eireland wrote:
OohAah... wrote:
Net effect is the same lads. and you cant argue that. Pick away at the use of the word democracy all you want. 2 proftable military machines where the electorate has no say |
How is it the same? Has American invaded Mexico or Canada yet? That would be an equal bet result? Is president Bush ruling with an iron fist after 20 years in power and no end in sight? |
Do you really want to go down the route of talking about Central and south American countries who' had political differemce of opinion with the US |
You've gone further south though. Like I said get back to me when the US Invades Canada or Mexico like Putin I'm Ukraine. |
But why would they? They are politically aligned. A bit like Belarus and Russia. So look at countries nearby thay weren't politically alligned. Do I really have to mention the Cuban missile crisis?
|
If Russia was in America's shoes they would have invaded Cuba and russified it. America were and still are ****s for Cuba however. Seems like your best argument to defend Russia is but America do it too. Two wrongs don't make a right. Russia is wrong, Ukraine is right.
|
|
OohAah...
Ray Houghton
Joined: 09 Apr 2011
Location: Ireland
Status: Offline
Points: 3527
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 23 Apr 2024 at 3:05pm |
eireland wrote:
OohAah... wrote:
eireland wrote:
OohAah... wrote:
eireland wrote:
OohAah... wrote:
Net effect is the same lads. and you cant argue that. Pick away at the use of the word democracy all you want. 2 proftable military machines where the electorate has no say |
How is it the same? Has American invaded Mexico or Canada yet? That would be an equal bet result? Is president Bush ruling with an iron fist after 20 years in power and no end in sight? |
Do you really want to go down the route of talking about Central and south American countries who' had political differemce of opinion with the US |
You've gone further south though. Like I said get back to me when the US Invades Canada or Mexico like Putin I'm Ukraine. |
But why would they? They are politically aligned. A bit like Belarus and Russia. So look at countries nearby thay weren't politically alligned. Do I really have to mention the Cuban missile crisis?
|
If Russia was in America's shoes they would have invaded Cuba and russified it. America were and still are ****s for Cuba however. Seems like your best argument to defend Russia is but America do it too. Two wrongs don't make a right. Russia is wrong, Ukraine is right. |
And not just Cuba( which if you remember almost brought the world to a Nuclear War)
My argument is not defending Russia. My argument is saying America Were meddling in Ukraine politics pre invasion. They have a form for it. Did it justify the invasion No. But to absolve America( with their track record) of all responsiblity is wrong.
|
|
OohAah...
Ray Houghton
Joined: 09 Apr 2011
Location: Ireland
Status: Offline
Points: 3527
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 23 Apr 2024 at 3:07pm |
Het-field wrote:
OohAah... wrote:
Het-field wrote:
OohAah... wrote:
I didnt want to try and quantify it as I know We wont agree.
Why did Russia not suffer resistance? Also the threat of them losing their access to the only warm water port was their motive.
I genuinley do not defend the invasion of Ukraine, 2 years ago. It just didnt happen out of thin air with no outside infleunces pre dating it.
|
I’m not sure how avoiding quantification is helpful for the debate. I’m not sure how you can’t agree that in the scheme of things Russia had vastly more influence (and I mean vastly).
And it wasn’t their only warm water port. There was two. So that doesn’t stack up.
And yes, things happen in a vacuum like that.
|
Avoided the question as to why their invasion of Crimea was unresisted. I see.
Because You already think US infleunce had no bearing. and I think it did. So we wont agree about quantifying it. Again back 2004 they were at it. theres a clear lineage of US influence.
|
I’m not dodging. It was poor form by the west not to stand up to Russian aggression.
I don’t believe the US had a bearing on Russian aggression. But if they did, the Russian’s were disproportionately involved in Ukrainian affairs, had already invaded it and came back for more. It is a pivotal point here, if the argument being made is that the involvement is in any way equal or comparable. |
The point is about Crimea. It was no resisted because there was alot of Russian support in Crimea from Ethnic Russians. Something that gets conveniently dropped out of reporting
|
|
Het-field
Roy Keane
By Appointment to His Majesty The King
Joined: 08 Mar 2016
Status: Offline
Points: 10759
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 23 Apr 2024 at 3:13pm |
OohAah... wrote:
Het-field wrote:
OohAah... wrote:
Het-field wrote:
OohAah... wrote:
I didnt want to try and quantify it as I know We wont agree.
Why did Russia not suffer resistance? Also the threat of them losing their access to the only warm water port was their motive.
I genuinley do not defend the invasion of Ukraine, 2 years ago. It just didnt happen out of thin air with no outside infleunces pre dating it.
|
I’m not sure how avoiding quantification is helpful for the debate. I’m not sure how you can’t agree that in the scheme of things Russia had vastly more influence (and I mean vastly).
And it wasn’t their only warm water port. There was two. So that doesn’t stack up.
And yes, things happen in a vacuum like that.
|
Avoided the question as to why their invasion of Crimea was unresisted. I see.
Because You already think US infleunce had no bearing. and I think it did. So we wont agree about quantifying it. Again back 2004 they were at it. theres a clear lineage of US influence.
|
I’m not dodging. It was poor form by the west not to stand up to Russian aggression.
I don’t believe the US had a bearing on Russian aggression. But if they did, the Russian’s were disproportionately involved in Ukrainian affairs, had already invaded it and came back for more. It is a pivotal point here, if the argument being made is that the involvement is in any way equal or comparable. |
The point is about Crimea. It was no resisted because there was alot of Russian support in Crimea from Ethnic Russians. Something that gets conveniently dropped out of reporting |
And totally flew in the face of the Budapest agreement. Who was behind the pro-Russian protests at the time? Was Russia meddling?
|
|
OohAah...
Ray Houghton
Joined: 09 Apr 2011
Location: Ireland
Status: Offline
Points: 3527
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 23 Apr 2024 at 3:16pm |
Het-field wrote:
OohAah... wrote:
Het-field wrote:
OohAah... wrote:
Het-field wrote:
OohAah... wrote:
I didnt want to try and quantify it as I know We wont agree.
Why did Russia not suffer resistance? Also the threat of them losing their access to the only warm water port was their motive.
I genuinley do not defend the invasion of Ukraine, 2 years ago. It just didnt happen out of thin air with no outside infleunces pre dating it.
|
I’m not sure how avoiding quantification is helpful for the debate. I’m not sure how you can’t agree that in the scheme of things Russia had vastly more influence (and I mean vastly).
And it wasn’t their only warm water port. There was two. So that doesn’t stack up.
And yes, things happen in a vacuum like that.
|
Avoided the question as to why their invasion of Crimea was unresisted. I see.
Because You already think US infleunce had no bearing. and I think it did. So we wont agree about quantifying it. Again back 2004 they were at it. theres a clear lineage of US influence.
|
I’m not dodging. It was poor form by the west not to stand up to Russian aggression.
I don’t believe the US had a bearing on Russian aggression. But if they did, the Russian’s were disproportionately involved in Ukrainian affairs, had already invaded it and came back for more. It is a pivotal point here, if the argument being made is that the involvement is in any way equal or comparable. |
The point is about Crimea. It was no resisted because there was alot of Russian support in Crimea from Ethnic Russians. Something that gets conveniently dropped out of reporting |
And totally flew in the face of the Budapest agreement. Who was behind the pro-Russian protests at the time? Was Russia meddling? |
Maybe, is meddling interference?
|
|
Mush Cassidys Donkey
Kevin Kilbane
Joined: 16 Feb 2024
Status: Offline
Points: 441
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 23 Apr 2024 at 3:24pm |
OohAah you're absolutely schooling these 2 f**king numpties 
|
|
Het-field
Roy Keane
By Appointment to His Majesty The King
Joined: 08 Mar 2016
Status: Offline
Points: 10759
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 23 Apr 2024 at 3:31pm |
OohAah... wrote:
Het-field wrote:
OohAah... wrote:
Het-field wrote:
OohAah... wrote:
Het-field wrote:
OohAah... wrote:
I didnt want to try and quantify it as I know We wont agree.
Why did Russia not suffer resistance? Also the threat of them losing their access to the only warm water port was their motive.
I genuinley do not defend the invasion of Ukraine, 2 years ago. It just didnt happen out of thin air with no outside infleunces pre dating it.
|
I’m not sure how avoiding quantification is helpful for the debate. I’m not sure how you can’t agree that in the scheme of things Russia had vastly more influence (and I mean vastly).
And it wasn’t their only warm water port. There was two. So that doesn’t stack up.
And yes, things happen in a vacuum like that.
|
Avoided the question as to why their invasion of Crimea was unresisted. I see.
Because You already think US infleunce had no bearing. and I think it did. So we wont agree about quantifying it. Again back 2004 they were at it. theres a clear lineage of US influence.
|
I’m not dodging. It was poor form by the west not to stand up to Russian aggression.
I don’t believe the US had a bearing on Russian aggression. But if they did, the Russian’s were disproportionately involved in Ukrainian affairs, had already invaded it and came back for more. It is a pivotal point here, if the argument being made is that the involvement is in any way equal or comparable. |
The point is about Crimea. It was no resisted because there was alot of Russian support in Crimea from Ethnic Russians. Something that gets conveniently dropped out of reporting |
And totally flew in the face of the Budapest agreement. Who was behind the pro-Russian protests at the time? Was Russia meddling? |
Maybe, is meddling interference? |
Russia was meddling in Ukraine. It had indirect control via a sympathetic government which came to a conclusion and then they started trying to take parts off of it. It wasn’t interference, it was indirect control, and they decided that the democratic will was irrelevant.
|
|
Het-field
Roy Keane
By Appointment to His Majesty The King
Joined: 08 Mar 2016
Status: Offline
Points: 10759
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 23 Apr 2024 at 3:32pm |
Mush Cassidys Donkey wrote:
OohAah you're absolutely schooling these 2 f**king numpties |
And here comes the clown. 🤡
|
|
OohAah...
Ray Houghton
Joined: 09 Apr 2011
Location: Ireland
Status: Offline
Points: 3527
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 23 Apr 2024 at 3:44pm |
Het-field wrote:
OohAah... wrote:
Het-field wrote:
OohAah... wrote:
Het-field wrote:
OohAah... wrote:
Het-field wrote:
OohAah... wrote:
I didnt want to try and quantify it as I know We wont agree.
Why did Russia not suffer resistance? Also the threat of them losing their access to the only warm water port was their motive.
I genuinley do not defend the invasion of Ukraine, 2 years ago. It just didnt happen out of thin air with no outside infleunces pre dating it.
|
I’m not sure how avoiding quantification is helpful for the debate. I’m not sure how you can’t agree that in the scheme of things Russia had vastly more influence (and I mean vastly).
And it wasn’t their only warm water port. There was two. So that doesn’t stack up.
And yes, things happen in a vacuum like that.
|
Avoided the question as to why their invasion of Crimea was unresisted. I see.
Because You already think US infleunce had no bearing. and I think it did. So we wont agree about quantifying it. Again back 2004 they were at it. theres a clear lineage of US influence.
|
I’m not dodging. It was poor form by the west not to stand up to Russian aggression.
I don’t believe the US had a bearing on Russian aggression. But if they did, the Russian’s were disproportionately involved in Ukrainian affairs, had already invaded it and came back for more. It is a pivotal point here, if the argument being made is that the involvement is in any way equal or comparable. |
The point is about Crimea. It was no resisted because there was alot of Russian support in Crimea from Ethnic Russians. Something that gets conveniently dropped out of reporting |
And totally flew in the face of the Budapest agreement. Who was behind the pro-Russian protests at the time? Was Russia meddling? |
Maybe, is meddling interference? |
Russia was meddling in Ukraine. It had indirect control via a sympathetic government which came to a conclusion and then they started trying to take parts off of it. It wasn’t interference, it was indirect control, and they decided that the democratic will was irrelevant. |
Grand, so Interference in Ukraine by Russia and US. Russia more so.
Lets not talk about democracratic states
|
|
Het-field
Roy Keane
By Appointment to His Majesty The King
Joined: 08 Mar 2016
Status: Offline
Points: 10759
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 23 Apr 2024 at 3:52pm |
OohAah... wrote:
Het-field wrote:
OohAah... wrote:
Het-field wrote:
OohAah... wrote:
Het-field wrote:
OohAah... wrote:
Het-field wrote:
OohAah... wrote:
I didnt want to try and quantify it as I know We wont agree.
Why did Russia not suffer resistance? Also the threat of them losing their access to the only warm water port was their motive.
I genuinley do not defend the invasion of Ukraine, 2 years ago. It just didnt happen out of thin air with no outside infleunces pre dating it.
|
I’m not sure how avoiding quantification is helpful for the debate. I’m not sure how you can’t agree that in the scheme of things Russia had vastly more influence (and I mean vastly).
And it wasn’t their only warm water port. There was two. So that doesn’t stack up.
And yes, things happen in a vacuum like that.
|
Avoided the question as to why their invasion of Crimea was unresisted. I see.
Because You already think US infleunce had no bearing. and I think it did. So we wont agree about quantifying it. Again back 2004 they were at it. theres a clear lineage of US influence.
|
I’m not dodging. It was poor form by the west not to stand up to Russian aggression.
I don’t believe the US had a bearing on Russian aggression. But if they did, the Russian’s were disproportionately involved in Ukrainian affairs, had already invaded it and came back for more. It is a pivotal point here, if the argument being made is that the involvement is in any way equal or comparable. |
The point is about Crimea. It was no resisted because there was alot of Russian support in Crimea from Ethnic Russians. Something that gets conveniently dropped out of reporting |
And totally flew in the face of the Budapest agreement. Who was behind the pro-Russian protests at the time? Was Russia meddling? |
Maybe, is meddling interference? |
Russia was meddling in Ukraine. It had indirect control via a sympathetic government which came to a conclusion and then they started trying to take parts off of it. It wasn’t interference, it was indirect control, and they decided that the democratic will was irrelevant. |
Grand, so Interference in Ukraine by Russia and US. Russia more so.
Lets not talk about democracratic states |
And what does that achieve for your argument? Tell me, what does this discreet point prove?
And yes, America is a democracy. Russia isn’t.
Edited by Het-field - 23 Apr 2024 at 3:52pm
|
|
OohAah...
Ray Houghton
Joined: 09 Apr 2011
Location: Ireland
Status: Offline
Points: 3527
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 23 Apr 2024 at 3:55pm |
Het-field wrote:
OohAah... wrote:
Het-field wrote:
OohAah... wrote:
Het-field wrote:
OohAah... wrote:
Het-field wrote:
OohAah... wrote:
Het-field wrote:
OohAah... wrote:
I didnt want to try and quantify it as I know We wont agree.
Why did Russia not suffer resistance? Also the threat of them losing their access to the only warm water port was their motive.
I genuinley do not defend the invasion of Ukraine, 2 years ago. It just didnt happen out of thin air with no outside infleunces pre dating it.
|
I’m not sure how avoiding quantification is helpful for the debate. I’m not sure how you can’t agree that in the scheme of things Russia had vastly more influence (and I mean vastly).
And it wasn’t their only warm water port. There was two. So that doesn’t stack up.
And yes, things happen in a vacuum like that.
|
Avoided the question as to why their invasion of Crimea was unresisted. I see.
Because You already think US infleunce had no bearing. and I think it did. So we wont agree about quantifying it. Again back 2004 they were at it. theres a clear lineage of US influence.
|
I’m not dodging. It was poor form by the west not to stand up to Russian aggression.
I don’t believe the US had a bearing on Russian aggression. But if they did, the Russian’s were disproportionately involved in Ukrainian affairs, had already invaded it and came back for more. It is a pivotal point here, if the argument being made is that the involvement is in any way equal or comparable. |
The point is about Crimea. It was no resisted because there was alot of Russian support in Crimea from Ethnic Russians. Something that gets conveniently dropped out of reporting |
And totally flew in the face of the Budapest agreement. Who was behind the pro-Russian protests at the time? Was Russia meddling? |
Maybe, is meddling interference? |
Russia was meddling in Ukraine. It had indirect control via a sympathetic government which came to a conclusion and then they started trying to take parts off of it. It wasn’t interference, it was indirect control, and they decided that the democratic will was irrelevant. |
Grand, so Interference in Ukraine by Russia and US. Russia more so.
Lets not talk about democracratic states |
And what does that achieve for your argument? Tell me, what does this discreet point prove?
And yes, America is a democracy. Russia isn’t.
|
Absolving america of Interference in Ukrainian matters pre Invasion
And We can agree Democracy is not a safeguard against a profitable Military complex with motives to do as they see fit
|
|
Het-field
Roy Keane
By Appointment to His Majesty The King
Joined: 08 Mar 2016
Status: Offline
Points: 10759
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 23 Apr 2024 at 4:00pm |
OohAah... wrote:
Het-field wrote:
OohAah... wrote:
Het-field wrote:
OohAah... wrote:
Het-field wrote:
OohAah... wrote:
Het-field wrote:
OohAah... wrote:
Het-field wrote:
OohAah... wrote:
I didnt want to try and quantify it as I know We wont agree.
Why did Russia not suffer resistance? Also the threat of them losing their access to the only warm water port was their motive.
I genuinley do not defend the invasion of Ukraine, 2 years ago. It just didnt happen out of thin air with no outside infleunces pre dating it.
|
I’m not sure how avoiding quantification is helpful for the debate. I’m not sure how you can’t agree that in the scheme of things Russia had vastly more influence (and I mean vastly).
And it wasn’t their only warm water port. There was two. So that doesn’t stack up.
And yes, things happen in a vacuum like that.
|
Avoided the question as to why their invasion of Crimea was unresisted. I see.
Because You already think US infleunce had no bearing. and I think it did. So we wont agree about quantifying it. Again back 2004 they were at it. theres a clear lineage of US influence.
|
I’m not dodging. It was poor form by the west not to stand up to Russian aggression.
I don’t believe the US had a bearing on Russian aggression. But if they did, the Russian’s were disproportionately involved in Ukrainian affairs, had already invaded it and came back for more. It is a pivotal point here, if the argument being made is that the involvement is in any way equal or comparable. |
The point is about Crimea. It was no resisted because there was alot of Russian support in Crimea from Ethnic Russians. Something that gets conveniently dropped out of reporting |
And totally flew in the face of the Budapest agreement. Who was behind the pro-Russian protests at the time? Was Russia meddling? |
Maybe, is meddling interference? |
Russia was meddling in Ukraine. It had indirect control via a sympathetic government which came to a conclusion and then they started trying to take parts off of it. It wasn’t interference, it was indirect control, and they decided that the democratic will was irrelevant. |
Grand, so Interference in Ukraine by Russia and US. Russia more so.
Lets not talk about democracratic states |
And what does that achieve for your argument? Tell me, what does this discreet point prove?
And yes, America is a democracy. Russia isn’t.
|
Absolving america of Interference in Ukrainian matters pre Invasion
And We can agree Democracy is not a safeguard against a profitable Military complex with motives to do as they see fit |
It’s fair to absolve them. The issues are Russia’s. They lost control of Ukraine in 2013, and have looked to recoup their ‘loss’ through severing tranches of land. There’s a world of difference between political statements and visits, and on the other hand sympathetic leaders who are acting against the will of the people to maintain the relationship with Russia as was. That’s what inspired the Euromaidan.
There are key facts at play here. And trying to avoid quantifying the extent of interference or comparing it is a deliberately deflective approach.
Edited by Het-field - 23 Apr 2024 at 4:02pm
|
|
OohAah...
Ray Houghton
Joined: 09 Apr 2011
Location: Ireland
Status: Offline
Points: 3527
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 23 Apr 2024 at 4:11pm |
|
WTF were the US doing financially backing opposition parties in Ukraine?
|
|
Het-field
Roy Keane
By Appointment to His Majesty The King
Joined: 08 Mar 2016
Status: Offline
Points: 10759
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 23 Apr 2024 at 4:16pm |
OohAah... wrote:
WTF were the US doing financially backing opposition parties in Ukraine? |
What parties were they backing? And to the tune of how much? Genuine question.
|
|
OohAah...
Ray Houghton
Joined: 09 Apr 2011
Location: Ireland
Status: Offline
Points: 3527
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 23 Apr 2024 at 4:22pm |
Het-field wrote:
OohAah... wrote:
WTF were the US doing financially backing opposition parties in Ukraine? |
What parties were they backing? And to the tune of how much? Genuine question. |
In the two years before the 2004 Ukrainian presidential election, the United States spent $65 million "to aid political organizations in Ukraine, paying to bring opposition leader Viktor Yushchenko to meet U.S. leaders and helping to underwrite exit polls indicating he won a disputed runoff election."[442] State Department spokesman Richard A. Boucher said that the U.S. money was not going to help a particular candidate, but to institutions that are necessary for free elections.[442] Freedom House and the National Democratic Institute also funded civic groups that counted votes and announced exit poll results.[443] In late November 2004, Senator Richard Lugar arrived in Kyiv as a representative of President George W. Bush and delivered a message to President Leonid Kuchma: "you play a central role in ensuring that Ukraine’s election is democratic and free of fraud and manipulation. A tarnished election, however, will lead us to review our relations with Ukraine."[444]
|
|
Tweet
