They just mention that there is no conflict between Russia and Ukraine, although Russia send unofficial armed troups to Ukrain :p, because they didn't allowed the coupe of "obama's" administration.
The problem is, America didn't send any troops to Ukrain, Russia did:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/russia/1165...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2y0y-JUsPTU#t=448
IMO that is evidence of past U.S. interference in Ukraine's political affairs.
Next time you pay for a Uber ride - remember the government has spent at least that much for every person in the U.S. to interfere in Ukraine politics, a country all the way up to the border of Russia.
Last time the reverse happened to the U.S, they tried to assassinate Fidel Castro, blockaded Cuba into poverty and invaded the country with 1500 soldiers and 8 B-26 bombers.
It's funny how the US is damned if it does and damned if it doesn't in these cases. "Big oil" might or might not be even interested in how Ukraine/Russia works out, beyond the usual "can we do business there?" concerns. Isn't it simply that competitors to Russian control over Ukraine need partners offshore for oil operations?
I know people who have had to travel to Cote Ivorie to do work, and it's an uncomfortable thing to have to do. They have a number that can call if they need to be evacuated. Not that this has been executed, but it has come up in discussions with the customer there.
After all, we could just turn our backs and let Putin have whatever he wants.
When we look back historically at the 1953 Iran coup, that sure as heck was oil oriented, but it was the British government ultimately that requested CIA involvement. Nationalizing other people's oil assets has certain ... risks associated with it. This is at very least much more subtle than that.
Now, if we want to have an honest and open intellectual discussion about the return to a tripolar world in which resource wars are around the corner and this is simply IMF/US/Nato setting up strategic position in the region, and Russia's response is a rational strategic one, let's have that conversation and debate, and we can get into whether we think it's the right move on our part or not, but lets not pretend like the propaganda is true (that is if the truth is truly what you are interested in. Your comment doesn't indicate it is, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and just consider you misinformed.)
Ukraine is a perfect modern example of the economic hitmen sending in the jackals, as described by John Perkins.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_portrayal_of_the_Ukraini...
http://www.globalresearch.ca/natos-perilous-gambit/5463315
http://newcoldwar.org/the-policy-of-the-u-s-and-eu-in-the-uk...
Bonus for anyone who has gotten this far: Operation Gladio (B)
edit: downvoted without discussion, why am I not surprised.
Counter question: Why are armed US soldiers flying to Ukraine? Dear Hunting?
http://www.krone.at/Oesterreich/Bewaffnete_US-Soldaten_in_Wi...
A common variation of this in the USA is with check fraud. They trick unsuspecting people into mobile depositing a check and then transferring a % of the funds back to them. I suspect in the Russian scam they are using the botnet to imitate victims as a sock5. They have all the information they need so they just initiate a trade and then block their access to email+banking+??.
