liwott

Strong interaction is really designed as a baryonic thing, leptons have no color charge (which is another way to say that they transform as SU(3) singlets). Leptons do not interact with gluons.
Not at tree-level anyway. See for example this list of vertices.

At loop levels, it’s possible to imagine an electron decaying into neutrino+W, then W into two quarks who can then interact with gluons, but as it’s down a couple of orders in perturbation theory so probably much too weak to hold a nucleus together. Not an expert in particle physics so I do not know with certainty whether a couple-of-loops interaction can have a measurable effect.

Electrons are not subject to the strong nuclear force that glues the protons neutrons together. This means that no attractive force would prevent electric repulsion to scatter a “electron nucleus”.

From a field theory perspective, the strong nuclear force is a SU(3) gauge interaction and the electron field transforms as a singlet under that SU(3)

Call them whatever you want, but please not \verse. They do not form a separate universe, they talk as much with the rest of the fediverse as with each other

Indeed you did repeat it a couple of times.

You never highlighted a source for that single claim though. Nor for the one that the Maidan government had plans to join NATO.

On the other hand you provided a source that explicitly denies those statements that you claim it contributes proving.

What is particularly ridiculous is that to a comment sourcing the claim that the Maidan revolts were caused by the aborted EU deal, you replied by citing the above article that agrees with @Ninmi 's point that you thought it disproved.

Please, help me understanding what I poorly comprehend in

US officials, unhappy with the scuttled EU deal, saw a similar chance in the Maidan protests.

It’s an overstatement to say, as some critics have charged, that Washington orchestrated the Maidan uprising. But there’s no doubt US officials backed and exploited it for their own ends.

You did link a ton of documents, and I have not found yet the ones supporting that claim (does not help that you did not single them out). In fact, the article that we are discussing here, who as I highlighted explicitly states the opposite, was part of that ton of documents.

It is the second time that you use this document to support what it denies.

“participating” means “actively working”, how is this wordplay contradicting my comment?

Not my point, I never said the US did not participate.

US officials, unhappy with the scuttled EU deal, saw a similar chance in the Maidan protests.

,

It’s an overstatement to say, as some critics have charged, that Washington orchestrated the Maidan uprising. But there’s no doubt US officials backed and exploited it for their own ends.

Your source states very clearly that the US did not orchestrate the Maidan protests, and that its involvement was due to the aborted EU-deal.

Nothing in there about the Maidan government wanting to join NATO, aside from one reference to Putin’s paranoia about it :

After Putin moved to secure the Crimean naval base from NATO control

Indeed, the article referenced in this sentence says:

“Our decision on Crimea was partly due to … considerations that if we do nothing, then at some point, guided by the same principles, NATO will drag Ukraine in and they will say: ‘It doesn’t have anything to do with you.’”

So, according to your source, Crimea was not annexed in reaction to Ukraine giving up its neutrality, but in prevision of it.

I find it a bit strong to basically equate a liberal defending their liberal opinions using mainstream media sources with impersonators poblicly spamming defecation pictures …