I'm posting this in two parts because it exceed the character limit - Part 1
Did you delete that last response to me
I haven't deleted any responses.
you were nervous that you were out of your league?
Pfft, I've been arguing with American trolls on the interwebs since 1995. You are nothing.
It's easy to bullshit your way through an argument when you're arguing with someone who doesn't know how to properly debate.
Try me.
In any case, I wasn't making any argument in regards to your use of argumentum ad hominem and tu quoque.
Actually, you explicitly stated that I do nothing but post "ad hominem" arguments. Other people can look at my comment history and judge for themselves, but that claim was specifically an attempt to imply that my argument was wrong because of the type of arguments I make, rather than the argument itself.
You made no effort to address the argument. You simply stuck your retarded nose in to try and act smart.
You're not. Not even close.
I made a statement of fact.
No, you lied by stating I only make "ad hominem" arguements, despite plenty of evidence in this thread alone that disproves that claim, and in response to this comment, no less:
The Crimeans brokered their own change of power.
The US paid 5 billion dollars and recruited neo-Nazi thugs to overthrow the government of Ukraine.
Big difference.
I can, and have proved every single one of those statements using western media sources.
You made no attempt to address that argument, but instead went straight on the attack and chose to talk about me rather than the argument I made.
If you do, however, I plan on making you look like a complete asshole.
Go ahead retard, you've already proved you haven't got the brains to do it.
Let's have a full on, sources included, argument about the cause of the civil war in Ukraine. If you check my comment history, you will see that I am more than ready to go.
Or would rather keep talking about me?
One of your posts made mention of you fighting against American propaganda. I can sympathize with that position.
Good. At least you're not a total idiot.
However, I would like to ask you if what you're really doing here is opposing Western propaganda. The US government, whether stated or not, did have a position on the 2014 Ukrainian revolution. Whether or not they supported it materially is up for debate.
First argument supported by documentary evidence (by the way, I'm simply cutting and pasting this from another comment I made on this thread):
Nuland: Good. I don't think Klitsch should go into the government. I don't think it's necessary, I don't think it's a good idea.
...
Nuland: [Breaks in] I think Yats is the guy who's got the economic experience, the governing experience. He's the... what he needs is Klitsch and Tyahnybok on the outside.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26079957
Posted 7 February 2014, two weeks before armed thugs stormed the Ukrainian parliament and forced them to vote to impeach Yanukovych despite not having the 338 votes required. They then appointed "Yats" as the new Prime Minister to run the country until an election could be held.
For his part, "Klitsch" announced his intention to run in that sham election, but within a month and despite being a favoured candidate, had changed his mind for unknown reasons and instead chose to run for Mayor of Kiev.
He won that election, and was thus forced out of Parliament due to Ukrainian law not allowing him to be both Mayor of Kiev and a Deputy in the parliament. "Yats" is still the leader of the parliament, and "Klitsch" is now on the outside. Just as Nuland and Pyatt had planned.
As I said, weeks before the "revolution" the US Ambassador to Ukraine and Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland were caught planning who the US was going to put in power.
Another piece of supporting evidence:
ASSISTANT SECRETARY NULAND: I didn’t hear Mister Nikonov speaking. The United States has invested some five billion dollars in Ukraine since 1991 when it became an independent state again after the collapse of the Soviet Union. And that money has been spent on supporting the aspirations of the Ukrainian people to have a strong, democratic government that represents their interests.
http://iipdigital.usembassy.gov/st/english/texttrans/2014/04/20140423298186.html
The US admits it spent 5 billion dollars in Ukraine to manipulate Ukrainian politics to be more "acceptable" to the US.
There is a lot more.... I'll wait for you to try and dispute these ones first.
It was the British, Polish, and French governments, however, that offered the most support to the opposition in Ukraine.
I never said they weren't also involved. However, they were not caught planning exactly who would be in government and who would be out, and they certainly did not spend 5 billion dollars in Ukraine over the preceding decades to build up the pro-Western sentiment.
I also note that even Angela Merkel is becoming concerned with the US' attempts to keep this war going:
MUNICH — Differences within the Western alliance over whether to send defensive arms to Ukraine were thrust into the open on Saturday when Angela Merkel, the German chancellor, bluntly opposed providing lethal military support to Kiev and called instead for continued efforts to persuade Russia and separatist forces to cease fire.
Svoboda (the neo-fascist political party) never came into power.
They did however gain seats in the parliament, along side the thugs from Right Sector:
Svoboda 6 seats, Right Sector 1 seat
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukrainian_parliamentary_election,_2014
But just because the openly fascist parties won few seats, that does not mean that the other parties are clear of fascist tendencies:
The People’s Front led by prime minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk also involved extreme right candidates: Andriy Biletskiy, leader of the neo-Nazi Social-National Assembly and commander of the Azov regiment, and Vadym Troyan of the same affiliation, ran in single-member districts and were supported by the People’s Front. At the time of writing, it is not clear whether Biletsky and Troyan have been elected.
http://www.interpretermag.com/ukraines-parliamentary-elections-and-the-far-right/
Crimea did vote in favor of independence and Russian integration. That vote, however, was plagued by irregularities, voter-intimidation, and wasn't carried out in accordance to Ukrainian law
Actually, most neutral observers said it was relatively free and open, and polling since then has pretty much macthed the vote at the time (as did exit polls).
As for being carried out in accordance with Ukrainian law, neither was the impeachment of Yanukovych:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viktor_Yanukovych#Constitutionality_challenged
Of course that doesn't bother the US/EU or the new "government". According to the Ukrainian constitution, Yanukovych remains president until a full democratic election is held (including the Donbass region) or he is lawfully impeached. Neither of those things has happened.
Yanukovych is still the legal President of Ukraine, according to Ukrainian law.
So you might want to leave that out of your argument.