I get it now! This was in the works for years! Western business interests installed Putin as a sleeper agent in Russia and then forced him to invade Ukraine!
I’m pretty sure Yeltsin is the reason Russia has Putin.
Yeltsin oversaw the dissolution of the ussr and brought capitalism to Russia, of course the west wanted him to be president of Russia. All he did was ask Bill for favors on the world stage (and got most of what he asked for).
Got it. Clinton interfered with the Russian elections in the 1990s knowing that one day, Putin would become dictator-for-life and invade Ukraine on a spurious pretext in order to create new business interests for Western companies.
Clinton is to blame for the entire Putin ordeal. Had the US not interfered, Yeltsin would have never been reelected and Putin would have never risen to where he is now.
Why start at Clinton? If it hadn’t been for the Vikings, there would be no Russia.
So maybe we should blame the Vikings for Putin invading Ukraine.
Or, and maybe this is going way out on a limb- we blame Putin for doing what he could have just not done and could still stop doing rather than blame a guy who hasn’t been president in a quarter century?
You are trying really hard to not connect the knife sticking in the stab wound with the murder.
This started way before the Ukrainian invasion.
I get it now! This was in the works for years! Western business interests installed Putin as a sleeper agent in Russia and then forced him to invade Ukraine!
If it werent for US interference in Russian elections under Clinton we wouldnt have Putin. But no, the US started this process years before.
I’m pretty sure Yeltsin is the reason Russia has Putin.
Yeltsin oversaw the dissolution of the ussr and brought capitalism to Russia, of course the west wanted him to be president of Russia. All he did was ask Bill for favors on the world stage (and got most of what he asked for).
Before the election Yeltsin had a 6% approval rating, and somehow won the election by a landslide.
“Yanks to the rescue” was the headline by Time Magazine
Yestsin won with 58 and 54 percent of the vote in his two elections, hardly a ‘landslide’:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1991_Russian_presidential_election
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1996_Russian_presidential_election
Putin’s lowest was 53, in his first election. The latest was 88%, with most of the others being in the 70% range.
Historically though, Russians, have a way of guaranteeing results like that. Yeltsin is kind of a low percentage outlier by comparison:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1937_Soviet_Union_legislative_electionr
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Purge
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1950_Soviet_Union_legislative_election
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1954_Soviet_Union_legislative_election
https://www.npr.org/2024/03/18/1196979929/in-unsurprising-result-putin-is-reelected
Got it. Clinton interfered with the Russian elections in the 1990s knowing that one day, Putin would become dictator-for-life and invade Ukraine on a spurious pretext in order to create new business interests for Western companies.
Sounds very plausible.
Clinton is to blame for the entire Putin ordeal. Had the US not interfered, Yeltsin would have never been reelected and Putin would have never risen to where he is now.
Why start at Clinton? If it hadn’t been for the Vikings, there would be no Russia.
So maybe we should blame the Vikings for Putin invading Ukraine.
Or, and maybe this is going way out on a limb- we blame Putin for doing what he could have just not done and could still stop doing rather than blame a guy who hasn’t been president in a quarter century?
You are trying really hard to not connect the knife sticking in the stab wound with the murder.