Kit, latest, media watch
Comments 28

Five things Netflix’ documentary on Maidan doesn’t tell you about Ukraine

by Pedro Marin from New Cold War.org

maxresdefault
The following article was originally published by Revista Opera (Brazil) on October 10, 2015. Translation to English by New Cold War.org.

An historical video that was broadcast in Brazil some decades ago warned, “Lies can be told even when speaking truths.” Netflix’s new documentary film ‘Winter on Fire: Ukraine’s Fight for Freedom’ is a exquisite example. By ignoring fundamental details of Ukraine’s history and of the composition of the 2013-early 2014 political movement in Ukraine called ‘Maidan’ (or ‘Euromaidan’), the documentary’s half-truths pave the way to disconcerting lies. Here are some of those:

The Ukrainian people

Right at the documentary’s beginning, it is stated that “while the people of Ukraine were looking to the West, the leader [President Yanukovych] was looking to the East.”

The statement, at first innocent, ignores Ukraine’s history and the characteristics of its people. Ukraine is the result of a complex ethnic formation, stemming from numerous conflicts between nations and ethnic groups that have ruled or resided on the territory since the fifth century. Not coincidentally, the word Ukraine actually means ‘borderland’. It has always been a conflictual territory. Such a formation would obviously end up with divided historical interpretations and political scenarios.

According to data from a 2012 USAID survey, 37% of Ukrainians were in favor of the country adopting closer ties with Russia while 27% thought it would be better to draw closer to the European Union. Twenty six per cent said it was important to maintain economic relations with both. In other words: the “Ukrainian people” have very different thoughts about the EU.

Geographic variations are highlighted by the survey. In Kyiv, where the largest Maidan protests were later held, 51% were in favor of closer association with Europe. That rises to 57% for the entire west of Ukraine. In contrast, 71% of people in Crimea favored better relations with Russia while 53% of those in eastern Ukraine had the same view. In the center of the country, 37% chose better relations with Russia and 23% chose the EU.

‘Non-partisan’

The view of Euromaidan as a “non-partisan” movement with broad opposition to the political class is also widely propagated by the Netflix documentary. The documentary has many scenes of flags of the extreme-right Svoboda Party and Congress of Ukrainian Nationalists flying prominently over the Maidan protests and showing the hatred of Maidan protesters against ex-UDAR party member and present Mayor of Kyiv, Vitali Klitschko. He is a figure in the ‘Petro Poroshenko Bloc’ electoral machine. In the May 2014 election issuing from the Maidan protests, Klitschko was elected mayor of Kyiv with 57% of the vote. No other candidate reached nine per cent. The non partisan claims of Maidan cannot be taken seriously.

Berkut provocateurs

At a certain moment during Euromaidan, some leaders of the protest decided it was a good idea to head to the presidential palace in Kyiv. Their path was blocked by Berkut special police. Right-wing militants linked to Svoboda and the Social National Assembly clashed with the police. In Netflix’s documentary, this clash is portrayed as the work of “provocateurs” paid by the government to incite the Berkut police into repressive acts.

In an article published in Foreign Policy (in which, by the way, sharp critiques are levelled against Russian President Vladimir Putin), it is stated that Ukraine is home to Svoboda, arguably Europe’s most influential far-right movement today. Party leader Oleh Tyahnybok is on record complaining that his country is controlled by a “Muscovite-Jewish mafia,” while his deputy party leader has derided the Ukrainian-born film star Mila Kunis as a “dirty Jewess”.

So we have a portrayal in the film of neo-Nazi militants fighting against a “Muscovite –Jewish mafia” and its government and who are victims of paid provocateurs of the mafia-government’s police. This turns reality on its head.

In fact, right-wing extremists had a active role during Euromaidan, both inside the movement’s defense units and during the occupations of buildings. The infamous Azov Battalion went from Maidan Square to fighting the rebel uprising in the east of the country, under contract of Ukraine’s Ministry of Interior Affairs. Several members of the inglorious battalion who participated in the fight to seize the international airport at Donetsk, including the notorious Belarussian neo-Nazi Serhiy Korotkykh, would later be honored by President Poroshenko.

‘Berkut snipers’

Probably one of the most problematic points in the documentary is the absolutely biased and irresponsible narrative concerning the events from February 18 to 20, 2014. On those dates, at least 90 people – including 20 Berkut police officers – were shot dead by snipers. It’s still unclear what happened during those days or who is to blame, but more and more video and other revelations show it to have been a provocation staged by the Euromaidan extremists.

According to an article from the BBC published in February of this year, a Maidan protester identified as ‘Sergei’ said he shot at Berkut officers during the demonstrations from the top of a building in central Kyiv. Ottawa researcher Ivan Katchanovski has used the available, extensive amateur video of events those days to show that the deadly sniper fire came from buildings controlled by the Maidan protesters, and he is one of the rare commentators to be closely following the government “investigation” of events which he says is delayed and deeply flawed.[1]

During a phone call after a visit to Kyiv on February 25, 2014, Estonian Foreign Affairs Minister Urmas Paet told the EU’s Catherine Ashton, “There is now stronger and stronger understanding that behind the snipers was not Yanukovych but somebody from the new coalition.” Ashton replied, “I think we do want to investigate. I mean, I didn’t pick that up, that’s interesting. Gosh.”

According to Paet, the bullets that hit protesters and Berkut troops were similar, and the new government had no interest in a investigation. Yet, in Netflix’s documentary, government troops are pointed to as responsible for the mass killings.

Crimea’s ‘annexation’

In the 98-minute documentary, only one minute was devoted to examining what has happened to Ukraine since Yanukovych’s fall from power. The repressive measures against communists, persecutions of journalists and the death toll in the country’s east from Kyiv’s civil war are all simply ignored.

Concerning Crimea, we are simply told it was “annexed” by Russia. Maybe it would be relevant for the film to explain that Crimea was transferred to the jurisdiction of Soviet Ukraine in 1954 during the USSR government of Nikita Krushchev. Russian is still the language of the majority in the region, with app. 50% of Crimean people being ethnic Russian. In March 2014, a reported 96% of residents of Crimea voted to secede from Ukraine and join the Russian Federation. That preference has been confirmed by several polls since then.


Pedro Marin is the editor of the online journal Revista Opera, published in Brazil. In January and February of this year, a correspondent for the journal travelled to eastern Ukraine to report for the journal.

Notes:

[1] From the Facebook page of Ivan Katchanovski on October 23, 2015:

New Maidan massacre trial revelations that, again, have not been reported.

Replication by other scholars is the best way to check findings of existing studies. This specifically concerns the Maidan massacre and its analysis in my paper, which contains links to publicly available data that make such replication easy to do. But there is still no other scholarly study of this crucial case of mass killing. However, the ongoing Maidan massacre trial continues to corroborate findings of my study that the Maidan protesters were killed from the Maidan-controlled locations.

During her testimony in the last trial sessions on October 8 and October 9, sister of Parashchuk stated under oath that her brother was shot dead in the back of his head from the Hotel Ukraina (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MUqHEVRcnMo 1h57m). She made this conclusion based on the forensic medical report and the moment of his killing in a video shown in court (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y7TZMjrkAB4). The defense lawyer revealed during the trial that even an on-site experiment by the government investigation concluded that Huryk could have been killed from both the Berkut positions and from the Maidan-controlled positions, specifically from the Hotel Ukraina (58m).

The trial showed that the prosecution did not establish the exact time and place of killings of Bondarchuk and Vaida. But disclosures during the trial of forensic medical reports findings about directions and locations of their wounds and their positions at the time of their killings in the video indicated that Bondarchuk and Vaida were killed from the Hotel Ukraina, respectively by a 6-7mm bullet and by pellets (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aDViXaeicRQ (1h47m, 5h38m).

The prosecution charged the two Berkut policemen with killings these four protesters from an open Berkut barricade. No eyewitnesses of killings of these protesters were mentioned during the trial sessions. The trial on these dates examined testimonies by the relatives of these four victims and the same videos that I used in my study. But a defence lawyer also revealed during the trial that there is a non-published video which shows protesters in a massacre area shouting about gunshots from the Hotel Ukraina (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MUqHEVRcnMo 1h37m).

These trial revelations again have not been reported by the mainstream Western and Ukrainian media.


28 Comments

  1. Pedro Marin says

    And by the way I haven’t been paid by the Kremlin – but in case Voice of Reason can arrange it, I’d love to.




    0



    0
    • roycohn says

      Problem with all this is you’re ignoring what truly went on there. You don’t need to be a genius to notice how the Berkut forces repeatedly hit people fallen to the ground. Is it such a huge step from that, and from the obvious killings these men have carried out in the name of a dictator, to, say, snipers? Against civilians protesting?
      That was the point of this documentary in my opinion. How a man can throw thousands of men against each other for what, exactly? Hunger for power? Foreign interests? Isn’t it striking how Putin gave asylum to a man who should definitely be hanged?

      Putting down a documentary due to the possibility of a few bad apples falling on the inside of the barricade is just plain silly and lazy journalism. If the Kremlin does not sponsor you, neither should The Guardian which I regarded as a more serious publication than a newspaper which allows such a person as you write under their name.

      And all this comes from a Romanian dude who was very interested (and concerned) in what was going on with my neighbors. Sadly enough, during those times, the media failed to represent the conflict appropriately, accordingly and comprehensively. Only now mushroom pieces like yours are sprouting, trying to undermine what was done.

      Russia will pay for its involvement in East Ukraine too. Regardless of the roots of some of the people there and their allegiances towards that impotent killer heading Russia, they were on Ukrainian soil. Why not move to their beloved mother Russia if they craved so much for the love of their dictator?




      0



      0
  2. Pedro Marin says

    Just got a chance to look at the comments now – too bad, as some people were so eager to call me a “russian propagandist” for uncovering Netflix’s lies – which are by no means propaganda, right?

    Voice of Reason’s comments are the best:
    First he argues that Ukraine isn’t the result of a complex ethnic formation BECAUSE 78% OF THE PEOPLE IN UKRAINE SAY THEY’RE UKRAINIANS. This sounds just mad to me, as I’m from Brazil. Yes, of course 78% say they’re ukrainian. But what does it mean, for god’s sake? To be a pure specimen of the original people of Ukraine, or to be the result of a historical process that involved Russia, Poland and Lithuania? It’s also good to point out that about 98% of the people living in Brazil, if asked, would say they’re Brazilian – and Brazil is known for being a very mixed country. What does the fact that 12% of those living in Ukraine consider themselves something else tell you?

    Then Voice of Reason says it is “nonsense” to say that such a formation would end up with dividid interpretations and political scenarios, and he uses the U.S – a country that mass-incarcerate black people, where racism is still a problem, and that was build upon indigenous mass graves – as an example. Genius. Also, the RF has such problems – or did you forgot the progoms under the Czar? – the difference is that during the USSR a completely different nationality policy was implemented.

    “what do tribes in the fifth century have to do with modern states like Ukraine?” – That’s way I said “since the fifth century”. But anyway they still have a lot to do with it.




    0



    0
  3. Voice of Reason says

    Facts only:
    – “Ukraine is the result of a complex ethnic formation”
    This is lies. According to the Ukrainian Census, almost 78% citizens of Ukraine are Ukrainians! The others are Russians, Poles, Jews, Crimean Tartars and so on. Even in the East of Ukraine the autochthonous population is largely Ukrainian.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukraine#cite_note-Ethnic_composition_of_the_population_of_Ukraine.2C_2001_Census-2 (I checked the original reports and can confirm the accuracy of these data in Wikipedia.)
    For comparison, about 78% citizens of the Russian Federation (RF) identify themselves as Russians (despite severe oppression of other ethnic groups in the RF and the Kremlin’s habit of playing with “official” numbers).
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_groups_in_Russia
    – “Such a formation would obviously end up with divided historical interpretations and political scenarios.”
    Nonsense. So, is that same percentage ok for the RF but a problem for Ukraine? Bullshit! Also, what does one’s ethnicity have to do with one’s citizenship? Say, if you ask the Americans, what ethnic origin makes a person a “true” contemporary American, they will think you are a fascist.
    – “stemming from numerous conflicts between nations and ethnic groups that have ruled or resided on the territory since the fifth century.”
    Nonsense! What do tribes in the fifth century have to do with modern states like Ukraine, or Great Britain, or France and their right to elect their governments and political systems without asking Moscow at first? Btw, if the author wants to find a really “complex ethnic formation”, he should learn a Russian history with its oppression and / or assimilation of smaller ethnic groups all the way into the 20th century USSR (e.g. Chechens, Crimean Tatars and many others). Also, there were no nations in Europe in the fifth century! The Brazilian author of this article needs a better schooling!
    – “Not coincidentally, the word Ukraine actually means ‘borderland’. “
    This is lies. In what language and in relation to what geographical entity? The word “oukraina” dates back to 1187 (), and back then it was used in reference to several different lands both to the South and to the West of Kyiv. It simply means “a land” or “a country”. Cf. England, Scotland, the Netherlands and so on. The name of the state at that time was Rus’. Rus’ or Kyiv Rus’ should not be confused with the Tsardom of Muscovy (1547-1721) and its successor the Russian Empire (1721-1917). Btw, Moscow was established in 1147, while Kyiv was founded in 482 A.D. [officially] or even earlier than that. Kyiv was officially baptized in 988 A.D. and Moscow has never undergone this ceremony. All in all, the historical connection between Kyiv Rus’ and the Empirial Russia is somewhat comparable to the historical connection between England and the USA, although it is indeed more nuanced than that.
    It makes no sense to analyze this “article”, which contains a standard list of fakes and twists from the Kremlin both about our ancient and modern history. The author is either a useful idiot or a paid troll. My intension is to warn those readers who want to know more about Ukraine and our ongoing fight for independence, democracy, the rule of law, and human rights. Please double-check your sources and do not fall victim to cynical liars backed by the Kremlin!




    0



    0
    • To deny the complex ethnic make-up of Ukraine is to fall into madness – there are Russians, Ukrainians, Romanians, Poles and Hungarians. To declare it non-diverse by comparing it to Russia is ludicrous. Russia is one of the most culturally and ethnically diverse countries in the world, with over 30 different official languages.

      As for what ones ethnicity has to do with citizenship – I suggest you take that up with the Kiev government, who tried to revoke citizenship to ethnic Russians, and tried to remove Russian from the official language list of their country.

      If your perception of your country’s recent history is a “fight for the right to choose our leaders”, then I don’t know what to say. Your country DID choose a leader – Yanukovych, who received 60% of the vote in a fair election. Your current President, Poroshenko, received less than half that (including the 12 million people who were not allowed to vote because your army was shooting at them).

      Please do not disparage this website, or insult our motives. Bring facts and reason to the debate and you wll be welcomed, no matter your opinion, but there is no place for this kind of insulting language.




      0



      0
      • Voice of Reason says

        More lies from you:

        “over 30 different official languages” in Russia

        There is only one de-facto official language in Russia, i.e. Russian. The other 68 languages (your sources are inaccurate as I can see – Wikipedia data need to be douple-checked!) are regional co-official languages tied to some specific territories. I suggest you go to Moscow or St. Petersburg and try to appeal to any state institution in any of those languages. I wouldn’t bet on either your health or freedom after that. And if your race is other than Causacian (I mean white), you are likely to become a victim of numerous neo-Nazi groups over there. The statistics is horrifying: http://pravorf.org/index.php/publications

        “the Kiev government, who tried to revoke citizenship to ethnic Russians, and tried to remove Russian from the official language list of their country”

        Can you name that official(s) in the Ukrainian government? No, because it is counterfactual. Russian is one of regional languages in Ukraine. In fact, at least half of our government officials are Russian speaking or speak Ukrainian with a heavy Russian accent. Most younger educated Ukrainians are bilingual to one degree or another (Ukrainian + Russian), and many have also a good ear for Polish (language competence is more a matter of education, age and urban / rural lifestyle rather than a particular region in Ukraine, although one can talk about some natural areal tendencies). However, in Russia ethnic Russians do not speak any native languages other than Russian and harass those who do!
        Cf. 12% of schoolchildren in Ukraine take all school courses in Russian and many more take a course in the Russian language and literature for credit; in Russia, out of 2 mln Ukrainians who reside there, only 160 schoolchildren (160 persons!) and 0 university students can take Ukrainian for credit! Ukrainians are continuously oppressed in Russia. Recently the only Ukrainian library in Moscow was closed by the Russian authorities and its director (an aging lady) was arrested. Isn’t it an example of national hatred? http://www.stopfake.org/en/tag/ukrainian-literature-library-in-moscow/

        ” Yanukovych, who received 60% of the vote in a fair election.” “Your current President, Poroshenko, received less than half that”

        2010: Viktor Yanukovych – 48.95%; Yulia Tymoshenko – 45.47% ; 25.5 million Ukrainians voted in the second round http://www.cvk.gov.ua/info/protokol_cvk_07022010.pdf
        2014: Petro Poroshenko – 54.70%; over 18 million Ukrainians voted in the first round despite the Russian war against Ukraine.
        http://www.cvk.gov.ua/info/protokol_cvk_25052014.pdf

        Why do you spread even those fakes that can be easily knocked down?

        “12 million people who were not allowed to vote because your army was shooting at them”

        Linguistic preferences or political sympathies have nothong to do with Russia going crazy over our European choice and hence the total collapse of the Russian Empire. Russia occupies parts of our country (Crimea + 1/3 of Donbas) and forces at least about 2 million people (Internally Displaced Persons http://unhcr.org.ua/en/who-we-help/internally-displaced-people) out of their houses to other regions of Ukraine, away from the Russian regular army and Russia-backed terrorists killing our citizens.

        Just how much does the Kremlin pay you for producing fakes? If it suits you, we can continue this “discussion” in Russian. Next time bother to provide at least one fact and support it with reliable reference.




        0



        0
        • You’re quite right about the 2010 election results, I was going from memory and obviously got confused. However, the greater point – that the previous president Yanukovych had a greater democratic mandate than the current regime – still stands. Yanukovych got 49% of 25 million votes, 12.5 million people voted for him. That is a much larger number than the 9 million votes Poroshenko got in 2014, especially when you consider that the majority of the East of the country – Yanukovych’s voter base – were unable to vote. You also have to consider that some presidential candidates were beaten on the streets and knocked out of the election.

          The 2010 election was obviously more democratic than the 2014, to suggest the Maidan was about bringing “freedom and democracy” is to ignore basic facts about the increased corruption (see recent resignation of finance minister) and decreased freedom (see banning of communist party) in the 2 years since.

          You can’t compare Ukraine and Russian languages tit-for-tat, because Russia is a federation where as Ukraine is simply a republic. The Russian Federation has one official language, Russian – but each of the republics that make make up that federation have their own autonomous government, and their own constitutions. They can pick their official languages, and each one has between 2 and 32 official languages. My claim about Ukraine trying to remove Russian as a language was not “counterfactual”, two days after Yanukovych was removed the Rada tried to pass a bill revoking the special status of Russian in Ukrainian law.

          The majority of the displaced people of Eatern Ukraine are fleeing TO Russia FROM the Nationalist militias that your government let loose – to frame the Donetsk and Lugansk rebels as the agressors, when your army shot first, firing on civilian protestors, is to attempt to rewrite history. That you are talking about a “Russian invasion” and the collapse of the “Russian empire” betrays an emotional and uninformed bias. The separatists have not been killing your citizens – the separatists ARE your citizens, and the vast majority of the casualties were caused by your military shelling civilian settlements and infrastruture.

          Please do not resort to the level of a troll by talking about us being paid by the Kremlin, it is childish, and this is your final warning on the matter. We welcome any and all opinions, but we will not stand for being abused. Thank you.




          0



          0
  4. This article is purely a Russian lying propaganda ordered and payed by Kremlin.




    0



    0
  5. vicky says

    alex krypnik and his famely alex must wach bronya sadomskaya and her son evgeniy the ploiting attack on alex money and even kill him never trust sadomskiys famely




    0



    0
  6. I’m in Eastern Ukraine as we speak. About 300 km from Donbass. Most of the people here aren’t Putin fan’s although I did have a shopkeeper asked if I wanted my change in rubles? She seemed upset when I didn’t. I wonder what kind of a cut she is getting for assistance to supplant Ukraines currency?

    Do I believe the situation is complex, with complicated ethnic and financial issues? Yes. Do I believe the extremists or politicians on either side will manipulate the situation to increase their authority? Yes

    As for as the US needing to export natural gas or oil. … that’s just not truthful. The US is now self sustaining and will produce what they need. Oil and gas is just a small portion of the US economy, and they like $2 gallons of petrol. Natural gas will reach new highs of usage soon. Coal plants are being converted to cleaner fuel. They already have a market.

    Would the US like to be able to take a few of Putin’s customers away? SURE. The west doesn’t like him and since the majority of the Russian economy is based on oil (how dumb is that?)….each gallon bought elsewhere reduces his influence.

    I’m not really taking sides here. … just pointing out that Putin’s boy “OffG” is off the mark.

    Ukraine needs to solve its own problems.




    0



    0
  7. Andri75 says

    Russian propagand full of false information, statistics and details. Not even worth to comment.




    0



    0
  8. Bob Sarbane says

    This is obviously Russian propaganda/disinformation. Putin, as a former KGB officer, is good at planting stories with Useful Idiots.




    0



    0
    • I love the way “former KGB officer” is one of those talking points to check. Years of spy movies conjured up. Karla in Tinker Tailor, Soldier Spy. We probably need to realise not all KGB officers were brilliant spymasters or ruthless assassins. Didn’t Putin spend most of his time working in a two-man office in Dresden, filing paperwork and staring out the window? 🙂




      0



      0
      • B. Sarbane says

        I don’t know (and am not sure you do either) what, exactly, Putin did as a young KGB officer, but I do know what he is today – leader, with the Russian oligarchs, of the Russian government which is attempting to control Ukraine and other Former Soviet States for their own purposes. Using murder, mayhem, special forces troops, and corrupt economic means – all covered with disinformation efforts – Putin is disrupting regional states to achieve his ends. Euromaidan was the citizens of Ukraine finally saying “enough is enough” and pushing back against his stooge Yanukovich.




        0



        0
        • Your analysis, which is basically a restatement of the “official” western narrative, takes its rationale from entirely omitting one side of the story. It portrays Russian actions as proactive, because it neglects to include the actions of others to which Russia was reacting. It tries to sell the idea that Crimea happened in some sort of political void where one day Putin, the movie bad guy, says “let’s cause mayhem in Ukraine!” Your “analysis” of the Maidan is simply a lie, easily demonstrated by the most cursory examination of the facts. Yes there were grassroots activists in the Maidan, but they did not get what they were looking for. What they got for their trouble was to be used as the unwitting aiders and abetters in a coup to supplant an elected government with a western-backed junta that proceeded to shred Ukraine’s economy, sell off its assets for the benefit of the IMF and its cronies, and use unwilling conscripts as the frontline in a dangerous, stupid proxy war between the West and Russia.

          The Langley/GCHQ guys need a new script, and new script writers who understand the limits of narrative manipulation in the age of the internet.




          0



          0
          • B Sarbane says

            Well, maybe those CIA guys are just really, really good at disinformation, but from what I saw after having spent several days traveling throughout Ukraine recently they’d have to be mis-informing the entire country for your version of reality to be accurate. Invading another country with your special forces troops is NOT reactive, unless you regard Hitler’s invasion of Poland, or France, as reactive. Or Argentina’s invasion of the Falklands. Or…well…you get the point. There is nothing defensive or reactive about Putin’s invasion of Ukraine. There was nothing reactive about his using Yanukovich as his puppet to prevent a closer affiliation with the West. The people of Ukraine rose up — call it a coup if you want — and got rid of a guy who was selling their country to Putin. Works for me — come to think of it a mass resistance is how America was formed a few years ago.




            0



            0
            • Forgive me but I rather doubt you’ve been to Ukraine recently, if ever. It’s the kind of claim often made by people on forums striving to bring legitimacy to an otherwise bald and unconvincing narrative.

              You don’t mention the Maidan snipers, the Nuland phone calls, the insane plan to take the Maidan to Crimea and drive Russia out of Sebastopol, the “Anti-Terror Operation”, the planned genocide and/or deportation of ethnic Russians from Donbass, the Odessa massacre, the use of white phosphorous on a civilian population. While you studiously ignore such things your narrative is nothing more than simplistic propaganda for those who choose not to be informed.




              0



              0
              • B Sarbane says

                Trolling for Putin, I see. The Russian Bear is overextended, its economy a shambles (unless you are Putin or one of his oligarchs), Crimea a mess, the eastern cities have not risen up to embrace you as you had hoped. And those darned Americans keep drilling for natural gas, keeping prices low which reduces your foreign currency balances (despite your disinformation campaign to stop fracking, the Americans love their low gas prices and just won’t stop). Not a good time to be a Russian internet troll. Enough of this thread — good luck.




                0



                0
                • If “trolling for Putin” = reminding you of truths you prefer to ignore then maybe you need to re-evaluate your current position.




                  0



                  0
                • Crimea is not a mess, that proves you haven’t traveled there. Interesting you mention Americans drilling for natural gas, they have a glut and need a nice export market. And funnily they are builing LNG export terminals along the Atlantic coast – who are they going to export to? Europe, who already gets gas so cheap from Russia there is no way US can compete. So Russian supplies to Europe need to be cut off. Disrupt Ukraine, disrupt the competition.




                  0



                  0
        • Eric_B says

          and euromaidan has achieved what exactly?

          Ukraine is in a far worse state now, and corruption continues unabated.

          Ukraine needs to stop blaming Russia for Ukrainian problems.




          0



          0

Please note the opinions expressed in the comments do not necessarily reflect those of the editors or of OffG as a whole