"All I have" are US state officials confessing to funneling billions of USD to Ukraine, and being deeply involved in the construction of the post-coup government. — Tzeentch

In what world would you ask "Is that all?" when this happens in a supposedly democratic country? — Tzeentch

Whether you accept that the United States played a role in the coup is largely irrelevant, because this is more than enough proof of American meddling in Ukraine, which as many have argued is what sparked this conflict. — Tzeentch

I’m trying to find more information on the history of CEO compensation and changes in performance metrics. I think the shift started around 1990 or so. — Mikie

Russia is opposed to the US. It's going to promote any story that reflects negatively on the US.

If you're going to repress all Russian propaganda you're effectively denying all opposition to the US, since all negative actions of the US will undoubtedly figure in Russian propaganda. — Isaac

↪ssu scarcely acknowledged the possibility of US involvement. — Tzeentch

Buybacks should be banned immediately.

More evidence of capitalism gone off the rails. Thanks, Reagan. — Mikie

There is no secret about the pursuit of U.S. interests and their intention to support ties to the E.U.

This influx of support does not show that the revolution was engineered by outsiders.

Since the violence wielded by the Yanukovych regime was a decisive factor in the growth of the revolution, your planners would have had to have been behind that as well. Pretty crafty. — Paine

Foreign NGOs and IGOs did indeed provide some small levels of support to several independent news groups, and SMOs in 2013, but this was clearly ad hoc and recipient actioned. Moreover, as was explained by one Kyiv based embassy worker, most foreign actors, be they diplomats or NGOs focused on elite actors and attempted to help broker a deal (author’s correspondence February 14, 2014, NYC). Ukrainian political insiders, have informally also complained about the lack of initial interest and then later mismanagement of the EuroMaidan crisis specifically by leaders of the EU (and EU member states) and the United States. Thus it is difficult to discern the real influence these actors had on the mobilization process.

It is possible, as I have argued elsewhere, that our focus on foreign actors oftentimes over-exaggerates not only their role in the mobilization process, but also their ability to influence actors and events.

The United States played a role in the successful effort to stage a coup d'etat in Ukraine in 2013-2014 to overthrow Yanukovyc. Sachs marks this event and the subsequent invasion of Crimea in February of 2014 as the start of the Ukraine war. — Tzeentch

Are Canada worried? Is Mexico? America is the single most interventionist country in the world, by a long, long way. — Isaac

As to... "just has invaded in the past decades two of it's neighbors"... are Israel imperialist? — Isaac

Is India, Pakistan, Bangladesh Myanmar, Ethiopia, Eritrea, Djibouti, Morocco, Spain, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Sudan, Syria, Turkey... All of whom have been involved in military clashes over border territory in the last two decades. — Isaac

the policy, practice, or advocacy of extending the power and dominion of a nation especially by direct territorial acquisitions or by gaining indirect control over the political or economic life of other areas

Or neutral (double emphasis) border states - what Ukraine was and threatened to no longer be as a result of continued United States foreign policy. — Tzeentch

there is no evidence for it, — Tzeentch

I am entertaining the hypothesis that the United States intentionally sought to provoke long-lasting conflict between Europe and Russia. — Tzeentch

It seems inevitable that the only ending to this war can be great disaster - either great disaster for Putin, or great disaster for the whole world. — Wayfarer

Wishful thinking. — Isaac

No. The point was that your definition becomes pointless by being too inclusive. If Russia is 'imperialist' in your sense, then it's nothing to worry about. — Isaac

You want 'imperialism' to mean something so much more sinister. — Isaac

Why would it be impossible for a nation to seek to acquire territory in pursuit of a national security goal? — Tzeentch

Then what fucking country isn't imperialist? — Isaac

June 9 (Reuters) - Russian President Vladimir Putin paid tribute on Thursday to Tsar Peter the Great on the 350th anniversary of his birth, drawing a parallel between what he portrayed as their twin historic quests to win back Russian lands.

"Peter the Great waged the Great Northern War for 21 years. It would seem that he was at war with Sweden, he took something from them. He did not take anything from them, he returned (what was Russia's)," Putin said after a visiting an exhibition dedicated to the tsar.

In televised comments on day 106 of his war in Ukraine, he compared Peter's campaign with the task facing Russia today.

"Apparently, it also fell to us to return (what is Russia's) and strengthen (the country). And if we proceed from the fact that these basic values form the basis of our existence, we will certainly succeed in solving the tasks that we face."

Imperialism is the state policy, practice, or advocacy of extending power and dominion, especially by direct territorial acquisition or by gaining political and economic control of other areas, often through employing hard power (economic and military power), but also soft power (cultural and diplomatic power).

Easily thwarted? What makes you say that? — Tzeentch

I've said there is no evidence for it, and you have yet to present any. — Tzeentch

You've been claiming Ukrainian NATO membership was not the reason the Russians invaded. — Tzeentch

With a significant number of heavy tanks from the West now heading for Ukraine, including the Leopard tanks from Germany. Things just escalated! Much bigger booms coming or Russian bust? — universeness

And as for Mearsheimer and his points regarding alledged "Russian imperialism", for which again there is no evidence whatsoever: — Tzeentch

The United States clearly decides what happens in NATO, and even if NATO member states stop NATO membership, nothing stops and nothing did stop the United States from turning Ukraine into a de facto NATO member, which it did. The Europeans had no say. — Tzeentch

f you're not interested in the views of experts — Tzeentch

The production, deliberate lacing with addictive substances and aggressive advertising of "snacks" turns a necessary, healthy and pleasurable activity, eating, into the harmful consumption of junk. So does the commodification and vulgar packaging of sex turn it into trash. — Vera Mont

Truth is really the only counter to falsity in every case. For this we need more information, more data, more debate, more education, more transparency, not less of it. The more and more people rely on a group of people to tell them what is true or false, like a government or corporation or church, the less and less they become able to figure it out for themselves, only compounding the problem to begin with. — NOS4A2

You're grossly overstating the importance of countries who have no real power to speak of. — Tzeentch

A nice theory, but there's no evidence to support it — Tzeentch

- a point which Mearsheimer makes repeatedly. — Tzeentch

What we were talking about back in February was whether or not he was interested in conquering all of Ukraine, occupying it, and then integrating into a greater Russia. And I do not think he’s interested in doing that now. What he is interested in doing now that he was not interested in doing when we talked is integrating those four oblasts in the eastern part of Ukraine into Russia. I think there’s no question that his goals have escalated since the war started on February 24th, but not to the point where he’s interested in conquering all of Ukraine. But he is interested for sure in conquering a part of Ukraine and incorporating that part into Russia.

I was also thinking about the best comedy movies: That's probably another at least top ten:
It's a mad mad mad mad mad mad world
Duck Soup
Are two of my favourites. — universeness

Westerns — T Clark

And damn, I Jjust remembered The Thin Red Line. Has to be top ten. — Bradskii

Of course it does. That's why the US decided in 2008 that Ukraine would become part of NATO even though that was against the will of Germany at the time. — Tzeentch

You're just missing the point. Clearly had Ukrainian ties with the United States threatened to become like those of Israel, we'd be in the exact same position, with Russia invading before such a defense pact could be sealed. — Tzeentch

- it's all fine and good, but when the end result stays the same it was all for naught. — Tzeentch

Nice list. And where is Ukraine now? On a course to defeat. — Tzeentch

and that it somehow proves that NATO membership for Ukraine wasn't the driver behind this conflict — Tzeentch

And what I'm arguing is that what the other NATO countries thought about NATO membership for Ukraine is completely irrelevant, — Tzeentch

This answer shows how little understanding of NATO you have.

It's a defense pact between members states which all have to accept new members. It's not just a sock-puppet of the US President as you think it is. Just look at how many times the US has gone to war without NATO and how many times US Presidents have been angry about the whole organization. And we should remember that it's sister organizations CENTO and SEATO have already sidenotes on history pages.
— Tzeentch

because the policy that the United States pursued made Ukraine a de facto member of NATO anyway, whether the other member states liked it or not. — Tzeentch

Coming back to my point, the Europeans do not play a role of significance in this conflict. — Tzeentch

Then how do you explain this: — Tzeentch

Also, why do you only respond to half my post? — Tzeentch

What do you think such a statement really means, when the United States is already training and supplying Ukraine like its gearing up for another Vietnam? You need to get a sense of reality. — Tzeentch

When I say commit, I mean commit to a Ukrainian victory, obviously, which is going to involve NATO boots on the ground. — Tzeentch

At the onset of the Russian invasion Ukraine was already a NATO member in all but name. — Tzeentch

Statements by Germany at this point aren't worth anything, since Ukraine entering the US sphere of influence was a de facto reality. — Tzeentch

The United States can not and will not commit itself to a Ukrainian defense, because getting involved in a protracted land war with Russia would basically cede world hegemony to China without a fight. — Tzeentch

The Germans know this, and they are none to keen on getting thrown the hot potatoe of taking leadership in that protracted land war instead of the United States. — Tzeentch

Thank God the Germans have some sense of how this game works. Merkel understood it too, that's why she blocked the American efforts to stir up a conflict in Germany's backyard. — Tzeentch