@kevcvs57 saidAn elected President 's refusal to sign an agreement with foreign powers does not justify an armed rebellion against him. The proper remedy is to vote against him in the next election, which was scheduled in less than a year.
You clearly only believe in people power when your the people.
Are you claiming that the sitting president wasn’t a Russian puppet.
Wiki
“ In November 2013 a wave of large scale protests (known as Euromaidan) erupted in response to president Yanukovych's refusal to sign a political association and free trade agreement with the European Union at a meeting of the Eastern Pa ...[text shortened]... a’s 450 members).[31”
Yeah let’s stick with the facts
You’ll never guess where Yanukovych fled to.
@no1marauder saidYou don’t watch YouTubes you liar
Really? You have a YouTube of Joe Biden at a press conference bragging that he "threaten[ed] to withhold a billion dollars in aid unless they stop investigating his son"?
See I'd love to see that since the US, EU, IMF and others were pushing for Shokin's removal because he wasn't investigating corruption in the Ukraine. But it would sure be a bombshell if Joe Biden pu ...[text shortened]... thhold loans (which he had no power to do) IF a non-existent investigation of his son wasn't halted.
@athousandyoung saidI'd make an exception and watch that one, if it existed (which it doesn't).
You don’t watch YouTubes you liar
2 edits
@kevcvs57 saidhttps://writingasiplease.wordpress.com/2013/02/28/1984-geography/amp/
You know this how?
They’ve already demanded a return to the Warsaw Pact ‘sphere of influence’ that includes Poland and East Germany. They want to be the dominant power in Europe and this is how they will achieve it. They are banking on the west not having the gonads to have a hot war with them.
Or possibly naive people underestimating their ambitions.
@kevcvs57 saidSome of the people. The Russian-Ukrainians are people too
And you know that analogy is false so why make it.
The PEOPLE of Ukraine rose up against a corrupt neo fascist Kremlin puppet regime and overthrew it at great danger to themselves, and now the neo fascist Kremlin is about to crush those people under its tank tracks so they can reinstall a neo nazi puppet regime.
When they’ve succeeded at that the Baltic states will be next ...[text shortened]... l head west. Kremlin trolls cannot lie your way out of this one, Putin’s game is simply too obvious.
@kevcvs57 saidRussia won’t attack NATO countries
And you know that analogy is false so why make it.
The PEOPLE of Ukraine rose up against a corrupt neo fascist Kremlin puppet regime and overthrew it at great danger to themselves, and now the neo fascist Kremlin is about to crush those people under its tank tracks so they can reinstall a neo nazi puppet regime.
When they’ve succeeded at that the Baltic states will be next ...[text shortened]... l head west. Kremlin trolls cannot lie your way out of this one, Putin’s game is simply too obvious.
1 edit
@no1marauder saidBut it is said the Russians assassinated his opponents
That "corrupt neo Fascist Kremlin puppet" was the elected President who still had months to go in his term. The coup against him was illegal under the Ukranian Constitution.
Let's get the facts straight.
Also their Parliament voted him out. That counts for something
@athousandyoung saidIt didn't until the Parliament building was under armed control of rebels and a good portion of the deputies weren't present. Nor did it follow the required procedure:
But it is said the Russians assassinated his opponents
Also their Parliament voted him out. That counts for something
"The decision on the removal of the President of Ukraine from office by the procedure of impeachment is adopted by the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine by no less than three-quarters of its constitutional composition, after the review of the case by the Constitutional Court of Ukraine as well as the Supreme Court of Ukraine[1] and the receipt of its opinion on the observance of the constitutional procedure of investigation and consideration of the case of impeachment, and the receipt of the opinion of the Supreme Court of Ukraine to the effect that the acts, of which the President of Ukraine is accused, contain elements of state treason or other crime."
"The action did not follow the impeachment process as specified by the Constitution of Ukraine (which would have involved formally charging the president with a crime, a review of the charge by the Constitutional Court of Ukraine, and a three-fourths majority vote – i.e. at least 338 votes in favor – by the Rada); instead, the Verkhovna Rada declared that Yanukovych "withdrew from his duties in an unconstitutional manner" and cited "circumstances of extreme urgency" as the reason for early elections."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeachment_in_Ukraine
There are only four ways a President of Ukraine can relinquish his office during his term:
1. resignation;
2. inability to exercise his or her powers for reasons of health;
3. removal from office by the procedure of impeachment;
4. death.
https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Constitution_of_Ukraine,_2004#Chapter_V:_President_of_Ukraine Article 108
Obviously he hadn't died nor was he removed for an inability to do his job because of health reasons.
The procedure for impeachment wasn't followed as already pointed out.
As for resignation, it is effective only when "he or she personally announces the statement of resignation at a meeting of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine." Article 109
This never happened either.
@athousandyoung saidRight, it is said Putin is a dictator, yet he has to assassinated his political opponents. If he is a dictator, why does he have to worry about how people vote? I always thought that was contradictory. 🤔
But it is said the Russians assassinated his opponents
Also their Parliament voted him out. That counts for something
2 edits
@no1marauder saidHis forces shot dead 112 demonstrators and then he legged it to Russia before he could be impeached by the vast majority of the elected Parliament. He abandoned his country and run to his master to avoid the legal consequences of his illegal actions in office, Mmmmm hard to imagine a president behaving in such a way.
An elected President 's refusal to sign an agreement with foreign powers does not justify an armed rebellion against him. The proper remedy is to vote against him in the next election, which was scheduled in less than a year.
Your interpretation of these events as an armed coup is verging on the ridiculous.
The people chose the EU and a western future and the Kremlins puppet couldn’t stop them but you seem to think that excuses invasion by Russia, it’s a very odd rationale your employing here.
One last thought: if the people of Belarus had managed to oust their Kremlin backed leader after the corrupt election would that have been a coup?
@metal-brain saidJesus your stupid.
Right, it is said Putin is a dictator, yet he has to assassinated his political opponents. If he is a dictator, why does he have to worry about how people vote? I always thought that was contradictory. 🤔
That’s what dictators do dummy, they assassinate their political opponents, how can you not know this?
So your saying that if a leader of a country allows polling stations to open but bars any potential electoral threats a murders the ones he cannot bar then he’s a democratic leader rather than a dictator?
Stop lying and stop being stupid.
1 edit
@kevcvs57 saidThere's no evidence the election was "corrupt": "Yanukovych was elected President in 2010, defeating Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko. The election was judged free and fair by international observers.[7][8]" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viktor_Yanukovych
His forces shot dead 112 demonstrators and then he legged it to Russia before he could be impeached by the vast majority of the elected Parliament. He abandoned his country and run to his master to avoid the legal consequences of his illegal actions in office, Mmmmm hard to imagine a president behaving in such a way.
Your interpretation of these events as an armed coup is v ...[text shortened]... managed to oust their Kremlin backed leader after the corrupt election would that have been a coup?
Parliament did not follow the legal impeachment procedures.
Armed men took over the Parliament building after they had rejected an agreement between the President and opposition leaders:
"Right Sector leader Dmytro Yarosh rejected the agreement, saying, "We have to state the obvious fact that the criminal regime had not yet realised either the gravity of its evil doing." He noted that the agreement did not include provisions for the arrest of Interior Minister Zakharchenko; the punishing of Berkut commanders alleged to have been involved in the murder of civilians; the removal of the general prosecutor and defence minister; a ban on the Party of Regions and Communist Party; and guarantees of safety for those involved in the opposition. He called for the "people's revolution" to continue until power had been completely removed from the governing authorities.[193] Euromaidan leader Andriy Parubiy insisted that elections be held as soon as possible and reiterated that one of the main demands of protesters had been the resignation of President Yanukovych.[211] Automaidan also announced that it would not accept anything short of Yanukovych's resignation.[212]
Vitali Klitschko apologised to the crowd on Independence Square after shaking hands with Yanukovych.[213] Protesters there responded to the deal by booing opposition leaders. Activist Volodymyr Parasiuk warned from the stage that if Yanukovych did not resign by 10:00 the next day, an armed coup would be staged.[214] Oleh Lyashko echoed the demand, saying, "Either he resigns, or we take him away." Outside of Kyiv, it was later discovered that the summer home of pro-Russian politician Viktor Medvedchuk had been set on fire.[215]
By late afternoon, hundreds of riot police officers guarding the presidential compound and nearby government buildings had vanished.[84] Radosław Sikorski, the Polish foreign minister, described the withdrawal of forces as "astonishing", noting that it was not part of the agreement.[216] The riot police had begun withdrawing early in the morning because they feared that Yanukovych's government would pin the responsibility for the violence on them, and because they feared being attacked after protesters stole around 1,200 pistols and Kalashnikov rifles from the police on 18 February during the occupation of government buildings in Lviv.[84] The Ukrainian Interior Ministry was left without leadership. Deputy Interior Minister Viktor Dubovik ordered the riot police to leave the city, but it is unclear where this order originated.[84] Opposition member Serhiy Pashynsky arranged escorts out of the city for more than 5,000 officers, Interior Ministry forces, and other special forces.[84] After the riot police vanished, Andriy Parubiy reported that Euromaidan self-defence had peacefully gained control over Kyiv and its government buildings,[217] and that the military was standing with the opposition.[218]"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolution_of_Dignity#Agreement_aftermath
So it was a violent illegal coup.
I never claimed or suggested that would justify a Russian invasion, but facts remain facts and your version is a fairy tale.
1 edit
@no1marauder saidThat’s right the people of the Ukraine wanted the Kremlin out of their body politic and there is no nice way of getting that done.
There's no evidence the election was "corrupt": "Yanukovych was elected President in 2010, defeating Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko. The election was judged free and fair by international observers.[7][8]" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viktor_Yanukovych
Parliament did not follow the legal impeachment procedures.
Armed men took over the Parliament building af ...[text shortened]... sted that would justify a Russian invasion, but facts remain facts and your version is a fairy tale.
You seem to forget the history of Russia in the Ukraine, like how they let the people starve whilst Moscow feasted.
Are you seriously claiming that the regime that got ousted was somehow more representative of the Ukrainian people than the subsequent one?
At Ukraines last election they were free enough elect a stand up comedian what do you think his chances would be if he was standing against Putin or say Lukashenko the idea that there is nothing to separate the current regime in Kyiv and the ones in Belarus and Russia is a nonsense, how they got there is an irrelevance it’s got nothing to do with Moscow and certainly does not excuse the ongoing occupation of Ukraine and threats of further invasion.
You are still to explain why you think Putin will content himself with stopping at Ukraine’s western border given that he has categorically stated that he believes the only just arrangement is Russia recapturing it’s soviet era sphere of influence in Europe.
The implication that NATO does not have a dog in this fight is strategically naive to say the least.
If it is your stance that you do not think NATO has a purpose any longer and the European continent should be left to its own devices then I don’t completely disagree but that means getting out of Europe completely lock stock and barrel.
What you should not do is hang around threatening Russia just enough to make them want an Eastern European buffer between the pair of you!
@kevcvs57 saidChange in democratic countries should be done by Constitutional processes and/or elections not violent coups.
That’s right the people of the Ukraine wanted the Kremlin out of their body politic and there is no nice way of getting that done.
You seem to forget the history of Russia in the Ukraine, like how they let the people starve whilst Moscow feasted.
Are you seriously claiming that the regime that got ousted was somehow more representative of the Ukrainian people than the subs ...[text shortened]... threatening Russia just enough to make them want an Eastern European buffer between the pair of you!
I thought NATO should have been disbanded after the fall of the Soviet Union. It's aggressive forays into multiple nations since then leaves me even more convinced of that.