Originally posted by RetinoidReceptor
Maloy how do you know that the US is doing all this? Such as supporting coups?
It is a fairly obvious that US was involved from the onstart of these colored revolutions. Ask any Russian, or anyone exposed to these events, and
they will tell you the same thing.
Both Yuschenko and Saakashvilli had major supporters and funding sources in the West, particularly in the US, prior to their coming to power. In both
"colored revolutions" unexpectedly thousands of protestors appeared on the streets. Banners, advertisements, extensive and well prepared campaign
crews, extensive coverage in the Western media all characterised the opposition parties in these cases (Yuschenko and Saakashvilli). Both rose to
fame in a matter of months, with unlimited funds, coming from seemingly nowhere. They seemed to be well prepared for starting protests after they
lost. Yanukovich and Shevarnadze both were attacked in an eirily similar way (sort of political blackmail). Both opposition groups voiced the same
accusations. It was as if both "revolutions" were rehersed and planned according to the same guide book. The only source that could have enabled
Yuschenko and Saakashvilli to rise to the top so fast was the US and to a lesser extent other Western countries.
US all of the sudden became interested in Ukraine and Georgia, covering the events there on a daily basis on all of its news channels. This also came
out of nowhere. US never cared much about either Ukraine and Georgia and never paid attention to whats going on there. Suddenly it was as if Ukraine
is the 51st state. It was obvious US was very interested in seeing the opposition win. Why? Because the opposition was funded by them.
Immediately after coming to power, both Yuschenko and Saakashvilli started receiving tens of millions of dollars of aid from the US, and business
contracts from the West. Both started cutting all ties to Russia, and Saakashvilli even met with Bush.
At about the same point in time, they announced interest in joining NATO. In 2005 and 2006 both held military training exercises with the NATO. At
about the same time monetary aid (and military aid to Georgia) from the US increased by a huge margin. Now tell me- what remote reason do either
Ukraine or Georgia have for joining NATO, besides a puppet regime in power? Heck Georgia has always been enemies with Turkey (a NATO member)
throughout history, and now they are in the same boat. The NATO request was a surprise for citizens of Ukraine and Georgia. Nobody even remotely
expected this to happen.
And why does NATO even exist anymore? Its sole purpose for existance is long gone. No one can even remotely be considered a threat to Western
Europe. The only thing NATO has done in the last 20 years, is invade Serbia of all countries. Hell, US didn't even receive the needed help from its
ally Turkey when invading Iraq. UN is left to deal with the "unwanted affairs" like Sudan and Lebanon. So what is the use of NATO? Why not
include all US allies in NATO is we are at it- Australia, Japan. China can be seen more of a threat than Russia anyway.
Add to all that, the War on Terror, and a more aggressive foreign policy by the US worldwide, and it all fits together perfectly. Before the War On
Terror, nobody in the US even knew what Georgia is, or where in the world Ukraine is. But 9/11 gave US a great exuse to expand its "borders". But
why limit yourself only to a few Arab countries? US is the sole world superpower- might as well grab a learger slice, or maybe even the whole pie.
No one is there to stop you so why not?
Ukraine, Georgia, Baltics, Tajikistan, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan- all of these countries had absolutely nothing to do with NATO or US, and no
significant relations with US before 9/11. In a matter of 5 years, they became America's best friends, while all of the opposition (old pro-Russian
politicians) suddenly fell off the face of the earth. In just 5 years, US accomplished more than it could remotely hope to accomplish throughout the
Cold War. Russia, 5 years ago surrounded by friendly neighbors and allies, is now surrounded by alienated ex-partners, and possible future enemies.
In 5 more years, Russia could share as much as 1/2 of its land borders with NATO. It would be virtually isolated from Europe, and US could have
radars, and military bases positioned within a short striking range of over a half of Russia's population- virtually eliminating the possibility of a
future Cold War.
Add to that a multi-billion dollar oil deal by the US in Azerbaijan and potentially an even bigger deal in Turkmenistan and Kazakhstan. A brand new
multi-billion dollar oil pipeline, which will take at least 3 years to realize its value in oil exports. The CIS coutries (especially Asian CIS) are
the hottest parcel up for grabs in the world right now- as far as US is concerned. Oil and resource rich, currently politically unstable (easy to
topple over to America's side), within striking distance of Russia's major cities and military bases, and hungry for some burgers and American
weaponry- what more could US hope for?
Now is this all a coincidence, or a well orchestrated tactical positioning by the US? It might not be clear to the West, concerned more with Muslim
extremism and Iran, but it is painfully clear to Russia. Suddenly Russia feels as if it is the target of the ubiquitous War On Terror. And to add
insult to injury, it is the one being accused of meddling on the affairs of others, and helping Muslim countries acquire means to defend themselves.
So who sponsored the "revolutions" in Ukraine and Georgia? Maybe the same power who stood to gain the most from them...
[edit on 17-10-2006 by maloy]