Official Thread: Videos and Stories on Ukranian Far-right/Neo-Nazis Before Invasion.

mc_brew

#NotMyPresident
Joined
May 19, 2012
Messages
5,462
Reputation
2,425
Daps
18,380
Reppin
the black cat is my crown...
:mjlol: any majority white nation has a far right/nazi problem..... what separates ukraine from any other majority white nation....? russia should be invading the world, including themselves....

headline: Putin Orders Russian Military To Bomb Major Russian Cities To Root Out Neo-Nazis :russ:



i used to think the line 'i can sell water to a whale' was funny, but on the right, they really can sell water to a whale....
 

Dr. Acula

Hail Hydra
Supporter
Joined
Jul 26, 2012
Messages
25,947
Reputation
8,750
Daps
137,753
The CIA May Be Breeding Nazi Terror in Ukraine
BY
BRANKO MARCETIC
01.15.2022
UKRAINE
UNITED STATES
WAR AND IMPERIALISM
BRANKO MARCETIC
The CIA has been secretly training anti-Russian groups in Ukraine since 2015. Everything we know points to the likelihood that includes neo-Nazis inspiring far-right terrorists across the world.

GettyImages-1229073971.jpg

Members of the neo-Nazi Azov Regiment take part in a march to mark the anniversary of the founding of the Ukrainian Insurgent Army in Kyiv in 2020. (STR/NurPhoto via Getty Images)
Subscribe at a special rate and don’t miss our latest edition.


The US government has a well-documented history of backing extremist groups as part of a panoply of foreign policy misadventures, which inevitably end up blowing up in the American public’s face. In the 1960s, the CIA worked with Cuban anti–Fidel Castro radicals who turned Miami into a hub of terrorist violence. In the 1980s, the agency supported and encouraged Islamic radicals converging in Afghanistan, who would go on to orchestrate the September 11 attack. And, in the 2010s, Washington backed Syria’s not-so-“moderate” rebels who ended up cutting a swath of atrocities through civilians and the Kurdish forces that were meant to be US allies.

Based on a new report, it looks like we may soon be able to add another to that list of fatally unlearned lessons: Ukrainian neo-Nazis.

According to a recent Yahoo! News report, since 2015, the CIA has been secretly training forces in Ukraine to serve as “insurgent leaders,” in the words of one former intelligence official, in case Russia ends up invading the country. Current officials are claiming the training is purely for intelligence collection, but the former officials Yahoo! spoke to said the program involved training in firearms, “cover and move,” and camouflage, among other things.

neo-Nazi militia, the Azov Regiment. According to the Nation at the time, the text of the bill passed in the middle of that year featured an amendment explicitly barring “arms, training, and other assistance” to Azov, but the House committee in charge of the bill was pressured by the Pentagon months later to remove the language, falsely telling them it was redundant.

Despite sometimes open acknowledgement of its Nazism — its former commander once said the “historic mission” of Ukraine is to “lead the White Races of the world in a final crusade for their survival” in “a crusade against the Semite-led Untermenschen” — Azov was incorporated into the country’s National Guard in 2014, owing to its effectiveness in fighting Russian separatists. US arms have flowed to the militia, NATO and US military officials have been pictured meeting with them, and members of the militia have talked about their work with US trainers and the lack of background screening to weed out white supremacists.

Given all this, it would be more of a surprise that the neo-Nazis of Azov haven’t been trained in the CIA’s clandestine make-an-insurgency program. And we’re already seeing the early signs of blowback.

“A number of prominent individuals among far-right extremist groups in the United States and Europe have actively sought out relationships with representatives of the far-right in Ukraine, specifically the National Corps and its associated militia, the Azov Regiment,” states a 2020 report from the West Point US Military Academy’s Combating Terrorism Center. “US-based individuals have spoken or written about how the training available in Ukraine might assist them and others in their paramilitary-style activities at home.”

A 2018 FBI affidavit asserted that Azov “is believed to have participated in training and radicalizing United States–based white supremacy organizations,” including members of the white supremacist Rise Above Movement, prosecuted for planned assaults on counterprotesters at far-right events, including the Charlottesville “Unite the Right” rally that Joe Biden later co-opted as a rationale for his presidential campaign. While it seems the perpetrator of the Christchurch mosque massacre didn’t travel to Ukraine as he claimed, he clearly took inspiration from the far-right movement there, and wore a symbol used by Azov members while carrying out the attack.

Since taking office, Biden has launched an incipient domestic “war on terror” on the basis of combating far-right extremism, even though the strategy is quietly aiming to target left-wing protesters and activists, something it has already done. Yet at the same time, three separate administrations, Biden’s included, have been providing training, weapons, and equipment to the very far-right movement that’s inspiring and even training those same white supremacists.

Destroying the Village to Save It
Adding to the absurdity here is that the reason Washington has been giving Ukrainian Nazis its assistance is so they can serve as a bulwark against Russia, which war hawks liken, as they always do, to Adolph Hitler’s regime and its expansion through Europe in the 1930s. While Vladimir Putin’s Russia may be a malevolent actor on a number of fronts, Putin’s recent incursions into neighboring states like Ukraine are driven largely by the expansion of the NATO military alliance up to his borders and the security implications that come with it.

In other words, to stop what US hawks classify as the next Hitler and Nazi Germany, Washington has been backing literal neo-Nazi militias in Ukraine, who are in turn communicating with and training homegrown white supremacists, which Washington in turn is ramping up a menacing repressive bureaucracy at home to counter. It’s what some have called the “self-licking ice cream cone” in action — the US national security establishment creating the very threats that justify itself. Instead of defusing the tensions by simply agreeing to long-standing Russian demands to set a hard limit on NATO’s eastward expansion, Washington has apparently decided that unlimited planetary military dominion is so important that it would rather just get into bed with actual fascists.

The US alliance with Nazi-infected Ukraine has already proven awkward for a president who is both trying to strike a contrast with his far-right predecessor and establish the United States as the leader of a global effort to strengthen democracy. Late last year, in a vote that went completely unreported in the press, the United States was one of just two countries (the other being Ukraine) to vote against a UN draft resolution “combating glorification of Nazism, neo-Nazism and other practices that contribute to fueling contemporary forms of racism.” Both countries have consistently voted against this resolution every single year since 2014.

deployed a nearly identical, boilerplate explanation for its no vote that Donald Trump had used, citing the constitutional right to free speech even for those with repugnant views. But this concern is hard to square with the text, which simply expresses concern about public memorials, demonstrations, and rehabilitation of the Nazis, condemns Holocaust denial and hate violence, and calls on governments to eliminate racism through education and addressing far-right terrorist threats — all roughly the same as Biden’s own rhetoric and policies.

Washington’s real concern here lies in its description of the resolution as “thinly veiled attempts to legitimize Russian disinformation campaigns denigrating neighboring nations” — meaning Ukraine. But Ukraine’s connections to modern Nazism are far from Russian fake news, and are in fact extensive and well-documented: from Azov’s official incorporation into the ranks of Ukrainian law enforcement and government officials with far-right ties to state-sponsored tributes to Nazi collaborators and promotion of Holocaust denial.

It’s no small irony that the US president, elected in large part to halt the perceived march of fascism at home, is continuing long-standing US support for literal Nazis in what might well be the nexus of international fascism. And if these Ukrainian Nazis really are among the insurgents being trained by the CIA, it will be no small tragedy if they one day take the same career trajectory as Osama bin Laden.
 
Last edited:

Liu Kang

KING KILLAYAN MBRRRAPPÉ
Supporter
Joined
May 3, 2012
Messages
13,752
Reputation
5,513
Daps
29,907
I don't get the point of this thread.

All those videos are about the Azov movement and it is known that some of them are neo-nazis as it was funded by far right hooligans. As a matter of fact, in all western countries there are far right extremists in law enforcement/military because they crave for order and ultra nationalism and that includes Russia as well.

And even if Russia had 0 far right groups on their soil (:mjlol:), that still wouldnt give them any legitimacy in its attempt to "denazify" Ukraine. The Azov Battalion is 5k deep max and it is said that there may be up to 40% of neo nazis there. That's at most two thousand people in the whole Ukraine :stopitslime:
 

Dr. Acula

Hail Hydra
Supporter
Joined
Jul 26, 2012
Messages
25,947
Reputation
8,750
Daps
137,753
I don't get the point of this thread.

All those videos are about the Azov movement and it is known that some of them are neo-nazis as it was funded by far right hooligans. As a matter of fact, in all western countries there are far right extremists in law enforcement/military because they crave for order and ultra nationalism and that includes Russia as well.

And even if Russia had 0 far right groups on their soil (:mjlol:), that still wouldnt give them any legitimacy in its attempt to "denazify" Ukraine. The Azov Battalion is 5k deep max and it is said that there may be up to 40% of neo nazis there. That's at most two thousand people in the whole Ukraine :stopitslime:
I'm not in support of the actions of Russia I feel I should iterate again like I did in my original post.

However, I would read the last bolded part of the article I posted above. It is worth some pause and thought in possibly giving our arms and weapons to an extremely militant group. Post-war Ukraine if they aren't fully taken over by Russia will be incredibly unstable for a while and in those environments, typically the people who can wield violence the best tend to rise to the top. Violent far-right militias tend to fit that bill.

The US used these Far-right groups in the Ukraine as a way to inspire a militant and nationalistic force that will put up a stiff enough resistance against a Russian invasion and based on some of the reporting, these far right groups are doing a great job in fighting Russian troops and are successfully fulfilling their roles. The problem is and question worth asking is what role would they play in a post war Ukraine? This event will definitely inspire more nationalism in Ukrainians and that will translate in these groups numbers and power growing in the Ukraine. Should they have the most advanced weaponry and US backed military training to go along with that? How is this any different than what happened with the Mujahideen? It's not outside the realm of imagination that in a post war Ukraine where they stave off the Russian Invasion where newly empowered neo nazi groups gain more power and influence.


These are my thoughts. But I started the thread because I was more focused on the tone difference of the media before and after the Invasion. There was a lot of alarmist reporting on the rise of the far right in the ukraine contrary to the position of the US government who supported them because they are anti Russian. After the invasion, the media has fallen 100 percent in line with the official government stance. The news has stopped at least to some degree acting as a critique to the positions of the government.
 
Last edited:

Liu Kang

KING KILLAYAN MBRRRAPPÉ
Supporter
Joined
May 3, 2012
Messages
13,752
Reputation
5,513
Daps
29,907
I'm not in support of the actions of Russia I feel I should iterate again like I did in my original post.

However, I would read the last bolded part of the article I posted above. It is worth some pause and thought in possibly giving our arms and weapons to an extremely militant group. Post-war Ukraine if they aren't fully taken over by Russia will be incredibly unstable for a while and in those environments, typically the people who can wield violence the best tend to rise to the top. Violent far-right militias tend to fit that bill.

The US used these Far-right groups in the Ukraine as a way to inspire a militant and nationalistic force that will put up a stiff enough resistance against a Russian invasion and based on some of the reporting, these far right groups are doing a great job in fighting Russian troops and are successfully fulfilling their roles. The problem is and question worth asking is what role would they play in a post war Ukraine? This event will definitely inspire more nationalism in Ukrainians and that will translate in these groups numbers and power growing in the Ukraine. Should they have the most advanced weaponry and US backed military training to go along with that? How is this any different than what happened with the Mujahideen? It's not outside the realm of imagination that in a post war Ukraine where they stave off the Russian Invasion where newly empowered neo nazi groups gain more power and influence.


These are my thoughts. But I started the thread because I was more focused on the tone difference of the media before and after the Invasion. There was a lot of alarmist reporting on the rise of the far right in the ukraine contrary to the position of the US government who supported them because they are anti Russian. After the invasion, the media has fallen 100 percent in line with the official government stance. The news has stopped at least to some degree acting as a critique to the positions of the government.
Alright, I get your point, it makes sense indeed.

I wouldnt be worried about them myself to be honest and this for several reasons :
- those militias are insignificant in the grand scheme of things. The Azov regiment is like 2% of the whole Ukrainian army and not everybody in it is a neo nazi
- Afghanistan and Syria were failed states and the insurgents filled a vacuum against the weak government they were fighting
- Ukraine might end up as a failed state too but it has 2 main advantages : 1. it has the backing of Europe and the US and 2. The "insurgents" are not fighting the government but the invader
- the far right in Ukraine has less weight in elections than most European countries

I feel that the Jacobin article makes Azov appear far bigger than their influence are. Now, they are definitely an issue, it's undeniable that some of them are nazis, but there are not that many to matter IMO.
 

King Sun

Big Boss
Supporter
Joined
May 11, 2012
Messages
31,332
Reputation
3,404
Daps
75,421
Reppin
323,904,480,817,614
Alright, I get your point, it makes sense indeed.

I wouldnt be worried about them myself to be honest and this for several reasons :
- those militias are insignificant in the grand scheme of things. The Azov regiment is like 2% of the whole Ukrainian army and not everybody in it is a neo nazi
- Afghanistan and Syria were failed states and the insurgents filled a vacuum against the weak government they were fighting
- Ukraine might end up as a failed state too but it has 2 main advantages : 1. it has the backing of Europe and the US and 2. The "insurgents" are not fighting the government but the invader
- the far right in Ukraine has less weight in elections than most European countries

I feel that the Jacobin article makes Azov appear far bigger than their influence are. Now, they are definitely an issue, it's undeniable that some of them are nazis, but there are not that many to matter IMO.

The fact that they are a recognized wing of the military is a big deal.
 

Liu Kang

KING KILLAYAN MBRRRAPPÉ
Supporter
Joined
May 3, 2012
Messages
13,752
Reputation
5,513
Daps
29,907
The fact that they are a recognized wing of the military is a big deal.
There are ultranationalists in every army/police of the West :yeshrug:

Once again, the perceived threat of Azov doesn't match the actual numbers : most estimates put their numbers at 2k max. The Ukrainian army is 250k deep and Ukraine has 40M+ inhabitants. In the last presidential elections, the total tally of the ultranationalist bloc barely crossed 2% and Zelenskyy is jewish ffs.

The Azov Battalion itself isn't a neo nazi group per se any more in the sense that it is not needed to be a nazi to be part of it (it definitely was in 2014 though, there's no denying that). As a matter of fact, neo nazis dont even make most of it. Most estimates put their numbers between 10 to 20%. The highest ones at 40%.

Now I'm not saying neo nazis are fine or whatever, what I'm saying is that the numbers don't add up to how big Azov is being portrayed by some.

Here's an Al Jazeera article about Azov, I believe they should be neutral in this conflict : Profile: Who are Ukraine’s far-right Azov regiment?
 

Mike Nasty

Superstar
Joined
Nov 19, 2016
Messages
12,352
Reputation
2,192
Daps
60,176
Maybe if the Russian Oligarchs weren't spending their money on the world's most luxurious yachts and private jetliner, their comrades wouldn't be getting worked over by a bunch of nazi farmers.
:francis:
 
Top