Biden to Congress: Help Ukraine Now or Send Americans to Fight Russia With NATO Later

On 12/7/2023 I asked you the following question:

So what can you tell me about Daria Morozova?

6 days later still no response. Is that because you know nothing about her either, or is it that what you know may shred light upon her credibility or lack there of?

I have no way to verify anything she brings to the table, but the violent acts of terrorism were only one of the issues facing the Russian speaking Ukrainians. The other major issue was denying them the right to work or collect pensions they had earned as citizens. So, what she reported as deaths, is really of little importance. While the deaths may have decreased, there were still acts of terrorism being executed, just not as effective in large part due to Russian forces making them less effective. But the underlying problems still existed with no resolution forthcoming.

You mention the following:

Even when people like Girkin were TELLING US they had been in Ukraine since the start.

Girkin is not Putin, and he has in fact been extremely critical of President Vladimir Putin and the army top brass for not pursuing the war in Ukraine harshly or effectively enough, in his opinion.

Could that be because Putin was not really committed to was with Ukraine, and only invaded in order to spark action to resolve the issues that still existed in eastern Ukraine?

Then you go on to say:

And, since Zhirinovsky and others kept telling the West that Ukraine was going to be absorbed into Russia one way or the other, the most obvious thing for Europe to do was tell Ukraine to keep slow-walking their Minsk agreements giving Russia no excuse to pull the plug... while readying itself for an invasion that we've known since 2008 would happen eventually.

So, 15 years after you knew what was going to happen, it happened. Was the color revolution, 6 years after you knew Putin's plans to invade Ukraine, to remove the duly elected president of Ukraine, Viktor Yanukovych, in 2014 a nudge to speed up that slow moving invasion plan of Putin & Russia?

Well, it did accomplish Putin going in & retaking the Crimea, which the Ukrainians hadn't been in possession of for literally centuries. Russia didn't take the Crimea from Ukraine, they took it from the Ottoman Empire who had controlled it since 1441 until Russia took control in 1783.

The reality is the Ukraine has not had much of a stable history of existence as a nation:

During the 14th and 15th centuries, present-day Ukrainian territories came under the rule of four external powers: the Golden Horde, the Crimean Khanate, the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and the Crown of the Kingdom of Poland. The latter two would then merge into the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth following the Union of Krewo and Union of Lublin. Meanwhile, the Ottoman Empire emerged as a major regional power in and around the Black Sea, through protectorates like the Crimean Khanate, as well as directly-administered territory.

After a 1648 rebellion of the Cossacks against the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth, Hetman Bohdan Khmelnytsky agreed to the Treaty of Pereyaslav in January 1654. The exact nature of the relationship established by this treaty between the Cossack Hetmanate and Russia remains a matter of scholarly controversy. The agreement precipitated the Russo-Polish War of 1654–67 and the failed Treaty of Hadiach, which would have formed a Polish–Lithuanian–Ruthenian Commonwealth. In consequence, by the Treaty of Perpetual Peace, signed in 1686, the eastern portion of Ukraine (east of the Dnieper River) was to come under Russian rule, 146,000 rubles were to be paid to Poland as compensation for the loss of right-bank Ukraine, and the parties agreed not to sign a separate treaty with the Ottoman Empire. The treaty was strongly opposed in Poland and was not ratified by the Polish–Lithuanian Sejm until 1710. The legal legitimacy of its ratification has been disputed. According to Jacek Staszewski, the treaty was not confirmed by a resolution of the Sejm until its 1764 session.

You then go on to say:

In fact I started a thread to talk about a documentary from Russia, made by a Russian journalist, revealing that Girkin, Pushilin and the other separatist ringleaders in the Donbas thought they could pull the same thing off in Donetsk and Lugansk as had happened in Crimea, but they didn't count on the overwhelming lack of support they got even from the Russian Ukrainians in the Oblasts from Lugansk to Kherson. Putin, and the Kremlin, knew they didn't have popular support and that's why Russia didn't do anything until spring 2022.

Read it and weep, mate - at one point the DPR even complained to Moscow that at best they had 2,000 people who actively supported Pushilin enough to even attend a street protest, and that was nowhere near enough for the DPR to maintain control over a 7 figure population that actually didn't like them very much.

What is it that I am supposed to weep abut MATE?

You have confirmed that Putin was not aggressive towards Ukraine, but was instead rejecting the desire of a few separatists, and that even the vast majority of citizens didn't share the desires of the small group of separatists either.

But did your discussion also delve into the Nazi's, another reality that you Ukraine/Zelenskyy supporting Putin haters refuse to acknowledge as being a real threat to the stability of the region? In fact, they were a far greater threat than the small cabal of separatist, which finally pushed the Russian speaking Ukrainian citizens into seeking to leave Ukraine and abandon their original desires to operate as an Autonomous region while remaining as Ukrainian territory.

You further ignore that Putin had resisted making them territories a part of Russia.

Did you also, in your discussion, mention how Zelenskyy ran on the platform of resolving the issues in eastern Ukraine?

Do you now talk about how this shining example of a "DEMCORACY", that you all fawn over, has cancelled the elections? Did he cancel them because he is afraid that he might lose those elections, and then perhaps become a hunted man himself by the citizens of Ukraine for what he has heaped upon the nation and the slaughter of their male citizens? Do you also discuss his destruction of Christianity in Ukraine?

The answers to all of my questions, is without question no.

Should I sigh here, MATE?

Which one are you talking about? There’s a ballet dancer from Russia with that name, and several notable others - professors, businesswoman, and a staffer at the FSB building in Donetsk who is the Kremlin appointed Ombudsman, also with that name. Also , there’s a rather well known (in Cyber circles) expert in AI with that name. Be specific.

Because you might as well be playing whataboutism with any other name. What about Sergei Popov?

I don’t get my information from single sources curated by useful idiots, which is why I already know of more than one Daria Morozova. Which is why your question is infantile based on you only knowing about one of them based on whatever vranyo source cherry picked for your delectation.

But let’s assume you’re talking about the Ombudsman herself. She’s a diligent individual who is very scientific when dealing with statistics and evidence. But she is also, on occasion, called upon to make political statements by her Kremlin superiors. So when the facts clearly prove there was no genocide going on against Russians she massages the wording to highlight abuses against Russians while airbrushing out who actually committed that abuses when it was the pro Russian contingent attacking Russian Ukrainians.

When that happens she becomes a Vranyo merchant whose opinions are word for word aligned to the Kremlin script, for example in criticizing Prighozin she literally lifted and shifted the Kremlin bullshit about Minsk, verbatim.

She’s a supporter of the invasion of Ukraine. She first came to prominence calling out Zelenskyy for saying Russians (not Russian Ukrainians) should leave Ukraine despite that actually being Russia’s commitment in the Minsk agreements. She spun it as though all Russians have a right to be in the Donbas because of blood, soil, ancestry and patriotism. So, vy on message with Putin and Duginists.

So what are you banging on about?

“Do you now talk about how this shining example of a “DEMCORACY”, that you all fawn over, has cancelled the elections? Did he cancel them because he is afraid that he might lose those elections, and then perhaps become a hunted man himself by the citizens of Ukraine for what he has heaped upon the nation and the slaughter of their male citizens? Do you also discuss his destruction of Christianity in Ukraine?”

Oi. Don’t talk to me about democracy - You can’t even spell the bloody word.

When the cities within the United States of America are under daily aerial attack like British ones were during the Blitz, call me.

Maybe America is dumb shit enough to host a very well signposted general election with all information about the polling locations in the public domain so as to give the enemy an absolutely perfect way to target maximum civilian casualties, on the rather retarded notion that getting the exact date right is what “democracy” is all about.

Actually, “democracy” is about getting public opinion captured in a free and fair way, without coercion or fraud. Come back to me when the USA does that. There are people on FR who say the USA isn’t a democracy, and they’re right. You’ve had election fiddling up to the eyeballs since before the Hanging Chads, and you would stick to a date even if it was completely against the principles of modern democracy to do so.

Many “proper” democracies have plans in place in the event that the election date has to be moved. But you can’t plan for the country being occupied by an invading force, or being under constant bombardment.

Winston Churchill and the Government of National Unity he headed postponed our elections during World War 2 for this reason. They couldn’t trust Hitler not to exploit such an event for maximum carnage. And the postponement of elections until the threat was over, was ENTIRELY democratic because it was supported by all politicians on all sides, and the people themselves agreed it made sense.

That is what proper democracy looks like. You wait until it’s SAFE to hold the elections.

Because the Ukrainian government and its President are not fantastically retarded, and because they’re not a FAKE democracy like the Donbas, they applied the exact same logic. Even Zelenskyy’s opposition agrees, it would be utterly insane to hold publicised elections in Ukraine’s cities while Russia’s looking for opportunities to target missiles into cities for maximum effect.

“You further ignore that Putin had resisted making them territories a part of Russia.”

Well, if you want to be very oversimplistic. The issue was HOW Ukrainian territories could become part of Russia without triggering an international response.

If Zhirinovsky had been President he would’ve sent the army into Ukraine like Saddam did in Kuwait, to take it over militarily. He said as much.

Putin was far more pragmatic. He knew it’d be a heck of a lot easier if the Ukrainian government joined the Customs Union, or if administrations inside an Oblast, actively voted to join the Russian Federation without any opposition from Kyiv.

THAT was the motivation for the blackmail of 2013. If Ukraine started EU integration, the Customs Union option would be off the table. Without the CU, the chances of getting Kyiv ever to sign off on a secession of Crimea were zero.

This war has never been about NATO expansion, or biolabs, or EU integration, or even about Russian defense. It’s always been about a salami-slicing ultranationalism, Russia’s massive xenophobia, and delivering the romantic vision of a restored empire incorporating “Novorossiya” and in future other ex-Soviet and Warsaw Pact countries... without a mask slipping.

Putin knew he had enough support inside Crimea (an autonomous region within Ukraine’s borders, not actually part of the contiguous unitary state) to sponsor a color revolution, and used Euromaidan as the excuse to do it. He also knew that the separatists didn’t have anywhere near enough support within the Donbas let alone in the cities of Zaporizhzhia, Kherson, and Odessa.

Even the DPR and LPR were telling the FSB and GRU that they had a couple of thousand active supporters from their own population - nowhere near enough. Why do you think THEY never went to the polls? The reason THEY didn’t hold elections is because they knew they’d be wiped out. Which was a huge problem for Russia - Zhirinovsky’s expectation that Russia would have to conduct a military takeover was fast becoming a reality.

https://jamestown.org/program/zhirinovskys-remarks-add-to-rising-inter-ethnic-tensions-in-russia-2/

By late 2013 Zhirinovsky was known to be the guy who could say publicly what Kremlin insiders and senior politicians couldn’t say openly. As the article said, The Kremlin was already oppressing opposition figures like Alexei Navalny and diverting power toward the ultranationalists. So Zhirinovsky wasn’t really the lunatic fringe, he was a tool Putin used to test public opinion.

In March 2014, Zhirinovsky proposed that Ukraine could not be allowed to exist as an independent nation, and it should be broken up and annexed - by Poland, Hungary, Romania and Russia. He also called for a militarized Russian economy in order to reestablish the Empire. Well, that’s what Putin’s now doing but for eight years Putin hasn’t wanted to put boots on the ground to take southern Ukraine by force. He wanted southern Ukraine to SECEDE, he didn’t want to have to invade.

In 2021, Zhirinovsky said several things - that Ukrainian statehood was a myth, and that Russia would do something special in Ukraine in late February 2022. Putin’s late February address to the nation said much the same - that Russia would not tolerate an independent Ukraine, recognised the occupied areas as parts of Russia, and a few days later initiated the SMO.

Anyone with two brain cells can see, Zhirinovsky said publicly what Putin could not. Time was running out for the secession option, and it was going to fail. Putin, and his fellow travellers, had no option but to invade - but, what crappy excuse could they come up with for doing it?

The SMO therefore wasn’t triggered by anything Ukraine, the EU, or NATO, did. It was “necessary” from the revanchists’ perspective. If the Ukrainian Rada and Zelenskyy had panicked at the sight of the 14 mile long convoy headed to Kyiv, and collapsed, the replacement regime in Ukraine would’ve likely ceded Crimea and the Donbas over to Russia. Because Russia would’ve parachuted Yanukovych back into power (he was already in Belarus in anticipation of this happening). And this time his Presidency would’ve been fully subordinate to Moscow, not subordinate to the Ukrainian Constitution. The breakup of Ukraine could’ve then been handled as an “internal matter” within Ukraine, directed by its own President; and the West would have been able to do nothing because Ukraine ceding its own territory to Russia would not be an example of another country violating its sovereignty.

This is by far the most sensible interpretation of why Putin launched the SMO. The rest of the stuff is pathetic vranyo and I seriously wonder how anyone can fall for that Banderites / NATO expansion nonsense when there’s not a single shred of evidence from anywhere that those issues have ever been anything more than rhetorical arguments.

Oi. Don’t talk to me about democracy - You can’t even spell the bloody word.

I know exactly how to spell it, I also know that democracy is 3 wolves & a chicken deciding what is for dinner.

I'm an old man with macular degeneration, and I will often hit keys in the wrong order, and then miss that they are misspelled.

But you on the other hand are a paranoid self-proclaimed soothsayer who sees things 15 years out but needs intervention for those visions to come to fruition, such as a coup d'état followed up with a proxy war made to order. Problem was. Ukraine couldn't do the heavy lifting it was tasked to do. Especially with the sparse tools they were provided to execute it. At first it was all good, until the people started to feel the impacts in their personal lives as a result of propping up Ukraine, while their needs were being ignored.

It is a well known fact that Boris Johnson & Joe Biden told Zelenskyy that the UK & US would have Ukraine's back should Putin invade, because that is exactly what they wanted to happen, but neither of them are equipped to be leaders, and most certainly not trustworthy leaders. they didn't really care about Ukraine or its sovereignty, it was the money to be made via the military-industrial complex utilizing the corruption that is rife in Ukraine with their money laundering operation.

You are also dishonest with regards to the history of Ukraine. Had Ukraine not provoked the Bear, they wouldn't have faced the Bear's reaction to protect itself. Not from Ukraine per say, but those who kept pushing the encroachment envelope. Especially after being promised that NATO would not expand.

NATO 1990:

MATO 2022

What exactly do you think would have been the result if the USSR had continued to push the envelope in Cuba during the Bay Of Pigs in the 60s? Another World War is the answer.

While the Russians were responsible for the encroachment in the Americas, the Democrats applauded this encroachment, because they have always embraced tyrannically led nations. They only give Democracy lip service to obfuscate their real desires, because they know people would reject them. China has seized the initiative in the Americas after the USSR collapsed financially, and now the Democrats have embraced China, because the Democrats have always embraced the power tyrannical leaders had over the people and the wealth they realized for the leadership & their supporters.

You really have a misguided grasp upon forces in this world who pretend to be one thing, but in reality are nothing more than tyrant wannabes themselves. given time though they have made great strides in becoming that which they have desired.

There is no DEMOCRACY in Ukraine, and there never will be, because their leaders sold the country to the New World Order, which I guarantee you have no intentions of giving the unwashed masses anything resembling freedom.

You are like the frog who passively accepts the slow incremental increase in heat as it is boiled alive, but you and the rest of you useful idiots think you are bright & righteous. Nothing could be further from the truth.

The sad part is you not only allow these criminal politicians to fleece you while they are destroying the people & their homelands, but you stupidly support their actions. I guess it's a form of Stockholm syndrome, that is affecting the entire western societies who have shown that they are no better in reality & now self-flagellate themselves as penitence.

And that post was brought to us by Sesame Street.

Walk you through it one by one.

1. Lech Kaczyński, the Polish leader, warned Ukraine and NATO way back in 2008 that Poland had credible intelligence that the Russian action in Georgia was going to be repeated in Ukraine. He was right.

2. There was no “coup d’état in Ukraine unless you count Russia’s siezure of Crimea via proxies bussed into Crimea to support the separatists. Ukraine’s disposal of Yanukovych followed the resignation of his own government, and was entirely consistent with their Constitution.

Do you think America would ever allow an executive President to still stay in office despite moving to Moscow and taking the knee in front of Putin? Wouldn’t it move to impeach and then using Constitutional powers to remove him from the Chain of Command?

If you wouldn’t allow a US President to do it, why the hell do you think Ukraine should’ve done?

3. It is a well known fact that Boris Johnson & Joe Biden told Zelenskyy that the UK & US would have Ukraine’s back should Putin invade, because LIKE RUSSIA, WE WERE SIGNATORIES TO THE BUDAPEST MEMORANDUM.

4. Ukraine didn’t provoke the Bear, in any way other than exercising its rights under the Belovezha Accords, the Budapest Memorandum, and the UN Charter. Ukraine was entirely at liberty to choose to join the EU Customs Union instead of Russia’s Customs Union. It was entirely at liberty to choose to be in NATO instead of CSTO.

The real problem Putin, Medvedev, Zhirinovksy and Dugin had all along was that Ukraine even had a choice. As far as they’re all concerned, there is only one allowed choice for Ukraine, and it’s for Ukraine to be Moscow’s bitch.

That Russia is a whining childish bitch of a country whose own leaders find it “provocative” that Ukraine saw literally no advantage to being in CSTO / RF’s Customs Union beyond it making an invasion from Russia less likely. Whose fault is it that even Tajikistan, not exactly the diaspora’s most innovative country, is basically saying that these clubs exist only for the pleasure of Muscovy?

5. “Especially after being promised that NATO would not expand.” Jesus, I’ll put you in the dumbass pile now. The USSR received verbal assurances in that direction by James Baker and by the German leadership but they never allowed those assurances to be formally issued in a treaty statement because they did NOT want anything written down on paper implying that the Soviet Union was so close to collapse that the Warsaw Pact countries COULD join NATO.

The independent Russia post-USSR was never given such assurances because, guess what, even Russia could’ve applied to join NATO under the open door policy. That’s the whole frickin’ point of an open door policy. As soon as Russia, Ukraine and Belarus jointly declared that the USSR was dead, gone and “no longer a geopolitical reality”, the ENTIRE continent of Europe was free to choose its security partners.

OK, if you won't even take the admissions of the FSB and the DNR Ombudsman and Prighozin and Girkin and Zhirinovsky as fact, then will actual meeting minutes from the Kremlin website, discussing Azarov's resignation and Putin's reaction (and that of his ministers) finally dispossess you of your Vranyo addiction?

January 15th, 2014: Azarov resigned. http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/20122

Minutes from Putin's meeting with his ministers commence by pointing out:

"The Ukrainian Prime Minister resigned yesterday, and this has changed the situation completely. We are continuing our working contacts with our colleagues in the Ukrainian Government, but we realise that further changes can take place. In order to ensure that these plans are carried out in full, we should probably wait first for a new government to be formed, and then we will immediately hold consultations with them and will carry out in full your instructions and make sure that all of our plans and agreements are indeed implemented."

See? Not one word of any color revolution or a coup. Azarov resigned, the government was likely to collapse, Russia should wait for the new government to be formed. In fact Russia's biggest concern was the need to wait for a new government to be appointed in lieu of certain agreements being signed by Yanukovych and Azarov. Of course, other ministers in that government also resigned.

February 21st, 2014: The EU brokered an agreement that would transfer presidential executive powers to the Ukranian parliament to enable the formation of a “national unity government”, which would remain in place until presidential elections were held. In effect, Yanukovych had already conceded that he had no power to govern.

February 22nd, 2014: Yanukovych fled Ukraine to avoid impeachment, and took up residence in Russia. The Kremlin published nothing about it, although there were some news reports. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2014/2/22/ukraine-president-yanukovich-impeached for example.

March 4, 2014: http://en.kremlin.ru/acts/assignments/execution/20366 - Putin was asked directly about it and he confirmed that what Ukraine and the EU was saying was true.

"I would like to stress that under that agreement (I am not saying this was good or bad, just stating the fact) Mr Yanukovych actually handed over power. He agreed to all the opposition’s demands: he agreed to early parliamentary elections, to early presidential elections, and to return to the 2004 Constitution, as demanded by the opposition." .... "He had in fact given up his power already, and as I believe, as I told him, he had no chance of being re-elected. Everybody agrees on this, everyone I have been speaking to on the telephone these past few days."

So, even Putin said openly not just that what had happened in Ukraine WASN'T a coup, he went further and said Yanukovych had handed over power voluntarily as part of the negotiated arrangement for the government of national unity, and Putin even agreed that there wasn't a remote cat in hells chance of Yanukovych being re-elected. Note, he's talking about the February events.

And yet, later on in the exact same interview, he said, in the present tense:

"First, the issue of legitimacy. As you may know, we have a direct appeal from the incumbent and, as I said, legitimate President of Ukraine, Mr Yanukovych, asking us to use the Armed Forces to protect the lives, freedom and health of the citizens of Ukraine."

So, Vladimir Putin was initially recollecting that he'd already told Yanukovych he'd already quit the Ukrainian Presidency and handed over power, AND saying that he stood no chance of getting back into power at the ballot box, the next he was claiming that a few weeks later Yanukovych - by then a full time resident of Muscovy - was still the rightful President of Ukraine.

In other words, Putin was bullshitting his own people and pitching a completely new narrative - that far from Ukraine's Prime Minister, government and Presidency all collapsing due to the actions of its own President and the impact of Euromaidan, President Yanukovych was still in office as if nothing had happened. Maybe he was just working from home. His new home. In Russia. From where he was enabling Russia's invasion of Crimea. Heck, even Benedict Arnold didn't have THAT much chutzpah.

March 18th, 2014: Putin reveals the real reason for annexing Crimea had nothing to do with Banderites or any of that junk - he genuinely was just very pissed off that when the Cold War ended, Russia ended up not owning the lands that were part of other countries. http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/20603

"Unfortunately, what seemed impossible became a reality. The USSR fell apart. .... Many people both in Russia and in Ukraine, as well as in other republics hoped that the Commonwealth of Independent States that was created at the time would become the new common form of statehood. They were told that there would be a single currency, a single economic space, joint armed forces; however, all this remained empty promises, while the big country was gone. It was only when Crimea ended up as part of a different country that Russia realised that it was not simply robbed, it was plundered." "Russia seemed to have recognised Crimea as part of Ukraine, but there were no negotiations on delimiting the borders. Despite the complexity of the situation, I immediately issued instructions to Russian government agencies to speed up their work to document the borders, so that everyone had a clear understanding that by agreeing to delimit the border we admitted de facto and de jure that Crimea was Ukrainian territory, thereby closing the issue."

Putin has openly admitted this, in addresses to his own people, more than once. The takeover of Crimea came after Russian attempts to take it over through political interference failed, and Putin knew darned well that "de facto and de jure" Russia had no claim over Crimea when he did it. His claim is based entirely on revanchist ideological and emotional argument.

It's only for fools sucking on RT and Lavrov's teats, that the Kremlin pitches an alt-narrative where Revanchism ain't the real excuse for what they've been doing in Ukraine for ten years.

You idiot, the so-called “color revolution” by the CIA only filled the INTERIM government positions; the CIA had no hand in the elections that followed.

You are extremely naive, MATE. But hey, at least you admit that a color revolution did occur. That coup d'état sparked the retaking of the Crimea coupled with the rumbling of Ukraine not allowing Russian access to the Crimea.

But for the sake of argument, let's pretend that the CIA had no involvement after the color revolution. The person they installed, Petro Poroshenko. was a crooked SOB. Zelenskyy in the meantime campaigned on the promise to bring about a resolution to the issued in eastern Ukraine. That campaign promise coupled with Petro Poroshenko criminality of enriching himself financially, got Zelenskyy.

But it was the coup d'état that started the events in motion that would unfold. Ukraine remains a very corrupt nation, on par with that rivals the corruption in Russia.

Ukraine is not a Democracy, and never will be a Democracy. Not that a Democracy is a good thing anyway. That is why the founders of the United States decided to go with a representative republic like that of ancient Rome, and not a Democracy.

Bottom line is that Ukraine allowed the CIA to foment a violent coup d'état. Thus it was a problem of their own making, with an assist from the CIA. Not our problem. If it was anyone's problem it was an EU problem, and it involved no NATO nations.

Like the UK's overreach, the same malady will be the US's downfall.

As you admitted the initial push for eastern Ukraine to separate from Ukraine, was the desires & actions carried out by a small cadre of individuals, of which the majority of Russian speaking Ukrainian's rejected, and Putin himself rejected.

The majority supported autonomy in order to allow Russian language to be used & taught in schools in those areas heavily populated by Russian speaking Ukrainians, who had lived there for generations. But that autonomy wasn't allowed.

When conditions continued to deteriorate, only then did the majority realize that they couldn't stay as part of Ukraine and separation from Ukraine became necessary.

The truth regarding Yanukovych’s deal, is that he was prepared to sign both trade agreements, which was actually beneficial to Ukraine. However, when the EU discovered that he intended to sign both agreements, the EU informed him that the EU trade agreement would be withdrawn if he signed both trade agreements.

Yanukovych described the EU's disclosure as that of a bride that finds out on the day of the wedding that she was to sign a nuptial agreement. Had the EU not threatened to take the deal off the table if Ukraine signed Russia's trade agreement also, none of what ensued would have taken place.

Yanukovych was fully prepared to sign both trade agreement's, as he stated back when this had occurred.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.