I don't think a country like the Ukraine is in any need to import Nationalism from any other countries



plenty of Fascist scoundrel worship as it is.

You completely missed my point, which is that many of these nationalist/fascist parties that claim to oppose Russia are also covertly influenced by (and in some cases the outright creation of) Russian intelligence services. The whole rise of nationalism and antisemitism in Europe we saw in the last decade was not an accident of emergence.

Sooner or later more European governments are going to decide that enough is enough and just start publishing or leaking the details of SVR penetration of the AENM and other right-wing European parties.

I'm gonna ask a bit of a dense question but what exactly does Russia stand to gain by influencing a bunch of right-wing, fascist, and often time nationalistic groups?

In the short-run it is pretty obvious what he gains, particularly in the "near abroad." He just invaded a country on the pretense of protecting ethnic Russians from fascist organizations who are themselves infiltrated by Russian operatives. In the process he advocated a policy of supporting ethnic Russians anywhere they are under threat. You do the math.

Long-term and particularly in western and central Europe, splitting up or otherwise weakening NATO and the EU. Many of the nationalist parties are Euroskeptics.

Haven't heard that conspiracy theory before. Care to post some sources?

You almost have to be willfully blind at this point not to see it, but since you asked:

http://www.riskandforecast.com/useruplo ... ection.pdf

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/21/world ... .html?_r=0
http://budapestbeacon.com/politics/parl ... or-russia/
http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/worl ... -1.1034539


You can do your own homework from there. One last hint: you might be a bit troubled to find how many Russian-friendly media outlets throughout Europe are simultaneously a)funded by Russia and b)administered at the local level by European nationalists.



I also find it hard to believe you truly haven't heard any of this before either. Professors who study political extremism, retired intelligence officers and even former members of some of the parties themselves have been publicly talking about Russian involvement in the far-right for years.

No, seriously. Even though anti-Russian sentiment is obviously rampant right now, I haven't seen anyone make that connection before.

What I find weird about this: If Russia's goal involves antagonizing these groups, why is it promoting pro-Russian sentiments in them?

You should follow the money trail. Maidan is supported by Monsanto, George Soros, and $5 billion from the USA. When this started, Rob Darken of Graveland indicated that both he and his friends in Nokturnal Mortem sided with Maidan. They are neglecting the Soil part of Blood & Soil, because Monsanto can poison and sterilize the Ukraine bread basket. Also, the oil interests linked to VP Biden's son want to frack the Ukraine. http://www.cleanwateraction.org/page/fracking-dangers I believe that Paul Craig Roberts speaks the truth. http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2014/08/28/washington-piles-lie-upon-lie-paul-craig-roberts/

The Ukraine Army, funded by the West, is murdering innocent Eastern Ukrainians and forcing many to flee to Russia.

don't post bullshit like that

+1000000000000000000000000000

shitty propaganda.

Her name was Kristina, she loved her country... what happened next will bring you to tears!!!

Says an Americanized obama supporter.

Putin so far appears to be getting what he wants in eastern Ukraine. Cutting off gas just before winter will serve as an extra incentive for Kiev to grant more concessions, particularly since there will obviously be no significant Western push-back or economic assistance.




Says an American birther Putinbot. Like he said: don't clog up the thread with bullshit. Particularly bullshit with photos of dead bodies that isn't put in spoiler tags.

It is bullshit on so many levels:
1. If Putin wasn't in power, these people would not be dead.
2. As Putin himself has said, his troops will shoot behind Ukrainian women and children (with civilians as human shields). This has even been shown in the Russian press, look how they get in a normal building where people live and shoot: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zv39Lc5oSVs#t=17 (the woman living in that building simply says she is not scared to live there)
3. There is no way to really prove who killed these people. If artillery fire, no one nearby would have even seen anything. Could be either side.
4. The separatists also kill people to blame the other side, like those severed heads they blamed on Pravy Sektor. It is also a very old disinformation technique, almost 100 years old, dates back to the Bolsheviks during the Russian Revolution, also later very popular with Stalin.

On the 24 of September in the Lugansk region they also executed 40 people they claimed were cooperating with the Ukrainian army. Stalinism is really popular again.

It's really bizarre to me that so many people cannot see Putin as the chekist neo-Stalinist he is. I mean granted, his paranoia isn't on the same level and it's a little more understandable than Stalin's was, but still.

iirc the nationalists in like austria recently had some thing or other come about how they were russian backed I think? i wouldn't assume that all the ukrainian nationalists are though, because there are two separate flavours of far right in ukraine, one favoring reunion with russia and the other favoring independent ukraine depending on where theyre from. but both groups are basically nazis so if youre not invested in the conflict then theyre pretty similar. theres some paper i read a while back from a few years ago that gives a good overview of both flavours

cool story bro* (citation needed).

I'll immediately be accused of being a Putin supporter (in one forum I was even referred to as a 'paid Russian agent!'), but I'll say it anyway. What happened in Ukraine was the result of a coup backed by the U.S. State Department. Victoria (Nudleman) Nulan's leaked phone conversation basically proves that. There were many agents of influence and agents provocateur on the ground, some funded directly by George Soros. This happened after Obama's disappointment at not being able to invade Syria. Ultimately, the Assad gas attack scenario (the one where Assad, an Alawite, gassed a village of 1400 Alawites) was so preposterous nobody could possibly believe it, and Putin offered to broker the chemical weapons thing. Then came the follow-up, the Ukraine coup, which I'm not convinced was Obama's doing so much as the neocons in his State Department, another attempt to install a permanent US foothold on the Eurasian landmass. But, that failed, too. The wicked people that set this revolution in motion couldn't possibly have wanted Crimea to fall back into Russian hands. All the talk of a 'forced' vote is rubbish. If there had not been military checkpoints around the region, it would have been immediately destabilized and no vote would have ever taken place. Anyway, both efforts failed, which meant that sooner or later there would have been renewed interest in Syria. So, prompt as a Swiss timepiece, we have this ISIS threat. ISIS are the 'Syrian Rebels'. They got beat up in Syria, hopped back over the border, and changed their name. They did not emerge from the arid desert driving matching Toyota trucks on account of their prayers to Allah. They are a creation of Western Intelligence, funded by the Saudis (our allies), with significant support from the Emirates, Jordan (which is effectively Israel's agent), and Qatar (whose intel has basically taken over Al Qaeda). Their militants all practice Takfiri ideology, which amounts to the slaughtering of 'apostates', and are comprised significantly by Muslims who have been radicalized in the West. They kill Sunnis and Shiites and Christians. They are destabilization agents. Those were used on the ground in Ukraine, as well.

I'm going to disagree with this statement. I think Obama has shown a reluctance for invasion in this scenario, despite the ghouls surrounding him. If you had a Romney or McCain in this position, bet your greasy dollar the USA would be embroiled in a full scale invasion(s) right now.

Not dick riding Obama or anything, just giving a little sliver of credit where it may be due.

I have been torn over just how eager Obama has been for a Syria invasion. At first, I thought he was reluctant, but then it seemed to me not so much that he was reluctant as other parties were just more eager. He paraded that silly Assad gas attack line all over the place. I doubt he had a crafting hand in Ukraine. I actually think he has rogue elements in his State Department that he can't rein in, that he's weak. But, especially now, he seems like a straight AIPAC shill on Syria.

Russia will fuck other countries up, it's in their history that they kill their own. I was watching a documentary last night showing their ''special forces''. It basically consisted of assault courses, pack marching, orientation, driving these massive trucks and at the end, putting boxing gloves on and having kickboxing fights with the lads wanting to get in, and the guys that already had the red beret.

Fucking cool stuff

So factually speaking this should be a crushing day for those still wedded to their fantasy of fascists running Kiev. The combined votes for Svoboda, Right Sector and the Radical Party appear to be less than 15%. Right Sector might not meet the threshold for entry to parliament.

Good news, as far as I know even Russia has accepted the results of these elections which is always positive.

Anyway is this result going to change the current situation? I dont think so.

hope not starting the second cold war! Romania very near from Ukraine wee are first, well hope not!