Current situation in Ukraine

[Anotherkiwi]

Perhaps you can try argumnents insted of propaganda.
the facts speak for them selves.

Lets see
- the goverment in Kiev was not formed according to Ukrainian law, the percentage needed was not reached

Shadow (or is it MrsShadow posting under your name?) - you, like many others, spout this as if it were a fact.  The government in Kyiv HAS NOT CHANGED.  There have been no elections (yet), and the members of the Rada are the same now as they were in January.  Certainly there have been changes in the leadership - there is a new interim President because Yanukovych is no longer there (and let's not bother debating, yet again, whether or not his removal was legitimate, because it has happened and that's an end to it), and certain Cabinet Ministers have changed (again, some because the former holders of those offices have also decamped to Russia).  This happens in any government - not just in Ukraine.

- first action was to try removing Russian as official language, this was turned back for hte time being as some of their own people would get in to trouble.

Yes, it was a stupid idea, which was why it never got passed into law.

- a law was passed forbidding the use of violence against peopl demonstrating

A fat lot of use that was.

- police was ordered to use violence against demonstrators

Do you have proof of this?

- freedom of press was compromised by forbidding Russian TV stations and pro-Russian media

You surely cannot be serious.  People in eastern Ukraine can easily receive direct Russian television broadcasts if they want.  Many (if not all) others can get Russian TV via cable or the internet.  In any case, as has been quoted on this forum on many occasions, the Russian TV channels have broadcast their own unique form of the truth - which sometimes, but apparently not very often, resembles the truth broadcast by foreign channels differing as widely as the BBC and al Jazeera.

- military force is used against citizens

I won't argue with that, but the circumstances are what dictates why and how much force is used.  If citizens are trying to destabilise a country to the extent which is happening in eastern Ukraine, other countries (including Russia) would call it treason.  I think that the Ukrainian government has actually shown restraint in how it has handled the uprising, although the other side of that argument is, of course, that the government is actually too weak to do anything about it.

- cotizens are being cut off from water and food supplies

Which citizens are these?  The ones who supposedly voted almost unanimously to make Crimea part of Russia?  Or the ones in places such as Slavyansk who are being prevented from leaving the city by the pro-Russian militia at roadblocks?  Despite all of what is going on, several members here have posted that their families and friends are saying that, for most people, life is continuing exactly as it did before.  How long that will continue is entirely up to Putin.

These are all undeniable facts.
Have fun finding ways to wriggle out of it.

No, they're not.  Nobody needs to wriggle.

[Shadow]

Shadow (or is it MrsShadow posting under your name?) - you, like many others, spout this as if it were a fact.  The government in Kyiv HAS NOT CHANGED.  There have been no elections (yet), and the members of the Rada are the same now as they were in January.  Certainly there have been changes in the leadership - there is a new interim President because Yanukovych is no longer there (and let's not bother debating, yet again, whether or not his removal was legitimate, because it has happened and that's an end to it), and certain Cabinet Ministers have changed (again, some because the former holders of those offices have also decamped to Russia).  This happens in any government - not just in Ukraine.

Crimea has voted for Russia, no need to debate because it has happened and that's an end to it.

In almost any country an interim government is formed when the government has fallen or is gone for whatever reason.
However in almost every country such government knows that it has lmited powers, and the main concern is to organize elections to re-obtain a chosen representation. Signing treaties and using violence is not a normal mandate.

Yes, it was a stupid idea, which was why it never got passed into law.

So you agree.

A fat lot of use that was.

And sending in Berkut and military is not a fat lot?

Do you have proof of this?

You can read all articles starting from the beginning of February, unless all are edited since there should be more than enough proof.

You surely cannot be serious.  People in eastern Ukraine can easily receive direct Russian television broadcasts if they want.  Many (if not all) others can get Russian TV via cable or the internet.  In any case, as has been quoted on this forum on many occasions, the Russian TV channels have broadcast their own unique form of the truth - which sometimes, but apparently not very often, resembles the truth broadcast by foreign channels differing as widely as the BBC and al Jazeera.

So that people can see things through underground sources makes that freedom of press is not harmed. In that case North Korea has freedom of press.
Further more, if you feel that BBC and Al Jazeera are unbiased you should stop drinking koolaid.

I won't argue with that, but the circumstances are what dictates why and how much force is used.  If citizens are trying to destabilise a country to the extent which is happening in eastern Ukraine, other countries (including Russia) would call it treason.  I think that the Ukrainian government has actually shown restraint in how it has handled the uprising, although the other side of that argument is, of course, that the government is actually too weak to do anything about it.

Treason is using military force against your own people and calling demonstrators terrorists.
There has not been a single attempt to reason with the leaders of the uprising, they have not even been invited to 'peace talks'.

Which citizens are these?  The ones who supposedly voted almost unanimously to make Crimea part of Russia?  Or the ones in places such as Slavyansk who are being prevented from leaving the city by the pro-Russian militia at roadblocks?  Despite all of what is going on, several members here have posted that their families and friends are saying that, for most people, life is continuing exactly as it did before.  How long that will continue is entirely up to Putin.

Are you serious? The "pro-Russian militia" are the people of Slavyansk, they will not have any issue with supplies reaching the city.
It is the military and paramilitary fascists groups that disallow and try to form a war-like siege because to their surprise people are not cheering their presence.
If it us up to Putin how long to let it continue, he will simply place Russian forces there. Is that what you wish? If not, then it is up to the government in Kiev to stop forceful demands and start talking.

No, they're not.  Nobody needs to wriggle.

Yet you defend this behaviour. If your government would behave like this when you request a fair referendum, would you accept it?

[ghost of moon goddess]

http://www.sbu.gov.ua/sbu/control/uk/publish/article?art_id=124786&cat_id=39574
The Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) has released an intercepted call between 2 men speaking on faking the results of a referendum on succession from Ukraine and creation of the sovereign state of the People's Republic of Donetsk
The men on the line: from Donetsk - D. Boytsov, the leader of the unregistered organization ''Orthodox Donbass'',
from Russia - A.Barkashov.


More on Barkashov and the party he is the founder of find out here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Barkashov
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_National_Unity

[Gator]

The Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) has released an intercepted call between 2 men speaking on faking the results of a referendum on succession from Ukraine and creation of the sovereign state of the People's Republic of Donetsk

Very insightful and damning.  Thanks for providing it.

A few questions.   

-  What connection does Barkashov have with Putin?  What role does Barkashov play in the separatist movement in east Ukraine?

-  Boytsov and Barkashov talk about two other individuals at the end, particularly Zhirik and "President." I have some idea who they are, but I could be mistaken.  Please elaborate.

[BillyB]

- the goverment in Kiev was not formed according to Ukrainian law, the percentage needed was not reached

These are all undeniable facts.

Shadow, we talked about that earlier but you weren't around. According to Ukraine's constitution, Parliament needed 3/4 of a vote to impeach Yanukovych. An impeachment bill was introduced by ONE lawmaker but it was never entertained and voted on by Parliament. The next day Yanukovych was ousted because he failed to perform his duties but the media mistakenly wrote that he was impeached and Putin ran with the story. Nowhere in the constitution says 3/4 of a vote is needed for ousting a president if he fails to show up for work. Ukrainian courts reviewed parliaments actions and it's a legal ousting. Even Putin stopped calling Yanukovych president after reviewing the legalities.

Crimea has voted for Russia, no need to debate because it has happened and that's an end to it.

Ukraine's constitution in Article 73 states any changes to Ukraine's borders have to be decided by ALL Ukrainians. Nowhere in the constitution does it say changes in borders are to be decided by Crimea and Russia. Most of the world's nations recognize Crimea still belonging to Ukraine.

Very insightful and damning. 

What this and any future evidence going to do to change Putin? Most Russian citizens and a good portion of people in other countries already believe that Ukraine is Russia's business and Russia is entitled to handle Ukraine the way they see fit. Regardless of what us little people on the internet think, our government and the EU are already handling current and past actions of Russia as if they are breaking international law but the few sanctions may not be enough to discourage Russia from doing more.

[Shadow]

http://www.sbu.gov.ua/sbu/control/uk/publish/article?art_id=124786&cat_id=39574
The Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) has released an intercepted call between 2 men speaking on faking the results of a referendum on succession from Ukraine and creation of the sovereign state of the People's Republic of Donetsk
The men on the line: from Donetsk - D. Boytsov, the leader of the unregistered organization ''Orthodox Donbass'',
from Russia - A.Barkashov.


More on Barkashov and the party he is the founder of find out here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Barkashov
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_National_Unity

It seems they are afraid for the results of the referendum already before it happens.
But as they refuse to hold one, what is the problem?

[Shadow]

Shadow, we talked about that earlier but you weren't around. According to Ukraine's constitution, Parliament needed 3/4 of a vote to impeach Yanukovych. An impeachment bill was introduced by ONE lawmaker but it was never entertained and voted on by Parliament. The next day Yanukovych was ousted because he failed to perform his duties but the media mistakenly wrote that he was impeached and Putin ran with the story. Nowhere in the constitution says 3/4 of a vote is needed for ousting a president if he fails to show up for work. Ukrainian courts reviewed parliaments actions and it's a legal ousting. Even Putin stopped calling Yanukovych president after reviewing the legalities.

So technically Yanukovich is still president, as not being present in a country does not mean he can be replaced.
As for Ukrainian courts, I guess we can trust them as much as Russian ones.

Ukraine's constitution in Article 73 states any changes to Ukraine's borders have to be decided by ALL Ukrainians. Nowhere in the constitution does it say changes in borders are to be decided by Crimea and Russia. Most of the world's nations recognize Crimea still belonging to Ukraine.

However Crimea had autonomy which included the right to stop recognizing the constitution of Ukraine. This is why the Donetsk area is unable to do the same, they do not have this possibility.

What this and any future evidence going to do to change Putin? Most Russian citizens and a good portion of people in other countries already believe that Ukraine is Russia's business and Russia is entitled to handle Ukraine the way they see fit. Regardless of what us little people on the internet think, our government and the EU are already handling current and past actions of Russia as if they are breaking international law but the few sanctions may not be enough to discourage Russia from doing more.

Ukraine is the business of the Ukrainian people, and by ignoring them and pointing at Russia people are making a huge mistake. At this time Russia has no more power over the people as the EU.
As for the sanctions, they are having very little impact and are agreed within the strategy that Obama and Putin discuss in their phone calls. The main issue is to control the people, and as that was ignored it gets out of control.

Crimea is considered Russian by all parties, recognized or not. At this point nobody is even considering the return to Ukraine, and the presidential elections will not be organized there as proof of that.

For a country where people once believed in democracy and fairly electing a government, Ukraine has been treated extremely bad.
By ignoring the wish of the people, a civil war is developing. There is no use in pointing at Russia for that. It is simply a failue of the Ukrainian government to negotiate with people they considered beaten.

[Gator]

If your government would behave like this when you request a fair referendum, would you accept it?

Good one!   What do you think would happen if  armed Hispanic insurgents seeking secession took control of Miami's admin buildings and set up armed roadblocks around Miami, impeding Interstate commerce?

The world has experienced instances of secession being debated with a referendum  (e. g., Quebec and Canada).  In civilized, democratic countries the issue of whether to hold a binding referendum is first decided at the national level.  This was not done in Ukraine. 

Bloodshed has almost always been avoided when the issue has ben handled democratically.  In the former French Indochina, the RVN did not hold a scheduled referendum as promised by treaty, and this led to armed insurgency and a bloody civil war for years and years, protracted by the US playing an active role in supporting a corrupt regime all because of the Domino Theory. 

[GQBlues]

...Shadow, we talked about that earlier but you weren't around. According to Ukraine's constitution, Parliament needed 3/4 of a vote to impeach Yanukovych. An impeachment bill was introduced by ONE lawmaker but it was never entertained and voted on by Parliament. The next day Yanukovych was ousted because he failed to perform his duties but the media mistakenly wrote that he was impeached and Putin ran with the story. Nowhere in the constitution says 3/4 of a vote is needed for ousting a president if he fails to show up for work. Ukrainian courts reviewed parliaments actions and it's a legal ousting. Even Putin stopped calling Yanukovych president after reviewing the legalities....

I wasn't going to post about this ka-ka anymore but I just can't have an idiotic statement be presented as some sort of *fact* when obviously what they cite is ridiculously erroneous. Just because moving dirt is slow in Washington, doesn't mean they can infest the 'net with their silly cloddish remark.

So to continue with my mission in saving the world one fact at a time, here it is again:

Article 111:
The President of Ukraine may be removed from the office by the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine in compliance with a procedure
of impeachment if he commits treason or other crime. The issue of the removal of the President of Ukraine from the office in compliance with a procedure of impeachment shall be initiated by the majority of the constitutional membership of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine. The Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine shall establish a special ad hoc investigating commission, composed of special prosecutor and special investigators to conduct an investigation. The conclusions and proposals of the ad hoc investigating commission shall be considered at the meeting of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine.
 
On the ground of evidence, the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine shall, by at least two-thirds of its constitutional membership, adopt a decision to bring charges against the President of Ukraine. ::::: (They did so by the vote count of 328 - alleged crime: ordering shootings of demonstrators)) ::::::

The decision on the removal of the President of Ukraine from the office in compliance with the procedure of impeachment shall be adopted by the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine by at least three-quarters of its constitutional membership upon a review of the case by the Constitutional Court of Ukraine, and receipt of its opinion on the observance of the constitutional procedure of investigation and consideration of the case of impeachment, and upon a 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 treason or other crime."

The rest of the impeachment process was never exercised AFTER the adoption to bring charges against Yanukovych. Instead, they cited his removal by stating *Yanukovych *withdrew*. The removal of the duly and legally elected president of Ukraine was illegal, making the government takeover a bonafide coup. They knew any deeper investigation of his alleged crime (sniper in Kiev) would open a can of worm they likely would not like to venture further on.

lawrdee, I hope this makes it CLEAR with the densest of the gathering of clods and rocks in this place. I took a peek at the other board and read mostly the same laborious acts of ridding itself of the same *clod* pestering their site.

Anyone with an inch of sense can easily search and read the political platform of the presiding *strong arm* segment (Svoboda) of this present/interim (illegitimate) body of government of Ukraine (thanks USA), in it you'll find doozy things like...

Impeachment of Yanukovych, Abolition of Crimea's autonomy....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Svoboda_%28political_party%29

Is there any wonder why the ethnic-Russians of Ukraine have concerns about their country today?

WTF do any of guys think will happen in USA if a coup took place and the temp. presiding government have a political platform that vilified anything *Hispanic* or *Black* or all *minorities*? The last riot we witnessed in California was mainly because of the Rodney King trial - imagine what type of riot it'll be if it was a result of a national referendum to vilify all its minorities as their prime objective..

[stilllooking]

Scotland will have their referendum soon on Independence. It was decided by the UK Parliament in a moment of madness, but, it will go ahead without all the violence, pressure of troops in the street etc etc etc

Except for the violence and the meddling by another country, the situations between Crimea and Scotland not that different.

Both ruled by a government they did not directly vote for (ok, in Scotland's case not due to a revolution but simply because almost no one up north voted for the current clowns in Government), both already enjoy(ed) great levels of autonomy before the referndum, both entirely dependent of the country they are trying to get away from, both being subjected to propaganda before the voting.

Of course, the main differences are that Scotland has not been overrun by another country, I doubt there will be masked men holding guns in Scotland when the referendum takes place, and, am pretty sure the vote will be run in a proper way whereby the international community will en masse support the result of the referendum. The referendum was also agreed to by the parliament of the United Kingdom, and not just by the parliament of Scotland.

[LiveFromUkraine]

So technically Yanukovich is still president, as not being present in a country does not mean he can be replaced.
As for Ukrainian courts, I guess we can trust them as much as Russian ones.

Some of us have already been down that rabbit hole with Billy.  For some reason he thinks Yanu has to show up in Kiev everyday to perform his duties.  I say we should agree with Billy and use it against Obama when he leaves the US for "Talks".


These are the types of arguments you will be having with guys like Billy.


All Pro Russians are Russian military that Putin hand picked to cause chaos in Ukraine.   They couldn't possibly be Ukraine citizens that are pissed off at what happened in Kiev.


Yanukovych was illegally elected even though third party monitors deemed the election fair.  Besides, Yanukovych must be Pro Russian and no Pro Russian could ever be elected and thus a scam election.


All Pro Coup are revolutionaries that want a better life and only do so through peaceful means. 


All Pro Russians are terrorists and use violence to beat down the good people.

Even though military was mandatory, every person in Ukraine that served in the military is middle aged or more and fat.  The guys you see on the ground has been recently trained by Putin himself because they work as a well oiled fighting machine.


All automatic weapons were hand delivered by Putin himself.  There are no automatic weapons within the country of Ukraine so it must be Putin.

Putin gave all Pro Russians uniforms so Putin can blend in and walk around Ukraine causing a ruckus. 


Recordings of the US talking about who should run Ukraine never happened and will never be talked about.  They are the good guys wanting Democracy even if they have to overthrow the currently elected government to get it.

To believe otherwise means you are a Putanist and sheep that only watches Putin Propaganda. 

[BillyB]

So technically Yanukovich is still president, as not being present in a country does not mean he can be replaced.

Going on a scheduled business trip or vacation outside of the country is very different that taking an unscheduled leave of absence for the rest of one's life. Ukraine can't stop functioning just because the president refuses to show up for work. Yanukovych knows if he comes back, he will be found guilty of crimes so don't expect him to come back as your legal president.

Crimea had autonomy which included the right to stop recognizing the constitution of Ukraine..

That is not true. On the ballot, Crimeans had two choices to vote for. Join Russia or go back to an old Ukrainian constitution which then gave them greater autonomy to split from Ukraine. There was no choice to accept the current Ukrainian government or even Yanukovych as their president. They didn't have enough automony to split from Ukraine based off it's current constitution prior to the referendum. Any changes in borders have to be decided by all Ukrainians.


Shadow, you seem to accept any law or votes that violate Ukraine's sovereignty but when laws support Ukrainian sovereignty, you dismiss them as weak or claim they are applied by a corrupt government. If you don't like corruption, you should not accept Crimea's referendum or Russia's annexation either.
 

By ignoring the wish of the people, a civil war is developing.

Exactly and the wish of the people is reflected by the majority so why can't Russia encourage east Ukrainians to participate in a violent free election?


America is only a few miles from Russia's borders almost as close as Russia is to Ukraine. We can say we have an interest in Russian affairs because of our proximity. There are groups of people there that want to split from Russia. We can encourage unrest and rig elections for them to obtain greater autonomy from Russia and eventually split or join America but not accept Russia's current government and then we can annex them. Would you say those actions would be legal or illegal? Does Russia's laws and Constitution any more valid than Ukraine's or is the wish of the minority people who want to split from Russia more important?

If your government would behave like this when you request a fair referendum, would you accept it?

I can't speak for anotherKiwi but I wouldn't accept any group wanting to split America up. Like most countries we have so many groups with different interests and to secede every time something doesn't go their way, we'd have no country left broken into  thousands of pieces with everyone self ruling.


People are free to stand in front of the White House and protest Obama or Bush all they want or move out of the country but to steal land from America is a no no to me.


Putin understands the only way the world will accept Ukraine splitting it's borders is through a bloody civil war. The international community accepted the split in Yugoslavia because people there couldn't get along. Putin is not encouraging calm in east Ukraine and promoting national elections. He's encouraging violence because his interest is owning Ukraine. He could care less about the wish of the Ukrainian people.

[BillyB]

Article 111:
The President of Ukraine may be removed from the office by the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine in compliance with a procedure
of impeachment if he commits treason or other crime.

Yanu was never oust because of impeachment. The 3/4 vote rule doesn't apply. Even if parliament got a 3/4 vote, who are you fooling? You are not happy Ukraine is choosing to distance itself from Russia so you'd find another thing to complain about.

[GQBlues]

Yanu was never oust because of impeachment. The 3/4 vote rule doesn't apply. Even if parliament got a 3/4 vote, who are you fooling? You are not happy Ukraine is choosing to distance itself from Russia so you'd find another thing to complain about.

Ay lawrdee...

Get a friend. Connect with LT. He's looking for one, too. Like you, he doesn't have one.

edit to add:

Google him.

[Gator]

To settle the issue of Yanukovych's removal - I suggest his name be added to the list of candidates on Ukraine's May 25 national election.

How many votes would he receive?  None from the pro-western Ukrainians.  And none from the pro-Russians either who think Yanu a wimp for leaving under duress.
 

[Gator]

The latest news suggest that Putin is more accommodating, and very important, plans to withdraw troops from Ukraine's border.  I hope such is true and is verified in the next few days.

[ghost of moon goddess]

-  What connection does Barkashov have with Putin?  What role does Barkashov play in the separatist movement in east Ukraine?

-  Boytsov and Barkashov talk about two other individuals at the end, particularly Zhirik and "President." I have some idea who they are, but I could be mistaken.  Please elaborate.

IMO, Russian National-Patriotic movements like Barkashov's as well as other like-minded organizations are convenient Kremlin's stooges --- instruments for hunting (without going into politics) for a 'desperate bunch of national traitors', as 'xenophobic chill descends on Moscow', crawling with the perceived 'enemies of Russia.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/13/world/europe/xenophobic-chill-descends-on-moscow.html?_r=0

Having run through Barkashov's VK feed, it's not difficult to note the striking similarities between Barkashov's articulating the territorial ambitions and that of Putin's in his address on March 18, 2014
http://vk.com/barkashov1953?w=wall-53097842_1496

and here is a role Barkashov plays in the separatist movement in east Ukraine
http://vk.com/barkashov1953?w=wall-53097842_1513


Zhirik is the diminutive form of the political jester named Zhirinovsky
Concerning the individual referred to as President, I quess it's a nickname of a self-appointed historian 

[JayH]

The latest news suggest that Putin is more accommodating, and very important, plans to withdraw troops from Ukraine's border.  I hope such is true and is verified in the next few days.

Putin is already a proven LIAR.So nothing he says is to be believed.
Even relatively close associates do not know what he will do next--so add unpredictable.
It has always been a possibility that the border posturing was  about deterring any action on Crimea.It may also be possible that his aims have been achieved to destabilise the Kiev government in the hope that Russia could gain from it-- it may also be the case that the "uprising" was nothing like as widespread as he thought he could achieve. All possible. If the "green men" start disappearing and the local thugs are left to face the force of Ukrainian law then it will be progress towards a "free" Ukraine.
There are crucial days coming up-- then the picture may be a little clearer.

[BillyB]

To settle the issue of Yanukovych's removal - I suggest his name be added to the list of candidates on Ukraine's May 25 national election.

Good idea so it'll please the "Yanukovych is still the legal president" fans. Once he's re-elected, how do we compensated Yanukovych for losing 3 months of work and for pain and suffering? Allow him to steal another 27 billion?

How many votes would he receive?  None from the pro-western Ukrainians.  And none from the pro-Russians either who think Yanu a wimp for leaving under duress.
 

Pro Russians are very unhappy with the temporary President of Ukraine who doesn't seem intent to remain in power after May 25 but they aren't calling for Yanukovych back.

The latest news suggest that Putin is more accommodating, and very important, plans to withdraw troops from Ukraine's border.  I hope such is true and is verified in the next few days.

Putin put those troops on the border to protect ethnic Russians living in Ukraine. Due to recent Ukrainian military operations, ethnic Russians are hurting and dying in more numbers than they did in Crimea. Pulling troops back as Ukraine increases military operations shows protecting ethnic Russians was never Putin's intent.


My guess is Putin is trying to look like the nice guy pulling troops back first and then expecting Ukraine to pull back it's troops. If Ukraine pulls back it's troops, unrest in East Ukraine will grow and ruin the elections. If Ukraine continues it's operations, Russia will accuse Ukraine of not providing a safe environment for pro Russians to vote. Doesn't look good either way? Anybody got news if international monitors are going to supervise Ukraine's elections or do they feel it's unsafe to enter the country? After the abductions of international observers and journalists recently, I don't think too many people will volunteer to monitor Ukraine's elections in a few weeks unless international troops are present at voting stations.

[JayH]

=================JayH YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED ABOUT FLOODING THE BOARDS WITH SUCH POSTS. YOUR NEXT WARNING WILL INCLUDE A MUCH LONGER VACATION THAN THE LAST ONE==================

[BillyB]

Poll: Most Ukrainians Want a Unified Country[/b]

Here's a chart of one poll from Pew Research. No matter what the majority thinks, If the pro Russians hold an election this weekend, it'll be rigged and Putin will most likely begin the process of annexation.

[fathertime]

Here's a chart of one poll from Pew Research. No matter what the majority thinks, If the pro Russians hold an election this weekend, it'll be rigged and Putin will most likely begin the process of annexation.

Hey Billyb,


That is a pretty bold prediction....I think if they hold the bogus election it will be deemed such a sham that Russia won't even recognize it as valid....I can't see Russia attempting to annex...it would be a disaster and a huge escalation.  We shall see in a few days.


Fathertime!   

[BillyB]

I think if they hold the bogus election it will be deemed such a sham that Russia won't even recognize it as valid

There are usually two kinds of people, those who believe Russian held elections are illegitimate and those who believe the elections are legit. Putin knows most countries will view the referendum elections as illegitimate and will not recognize annexation but he also knows most Russian citizens will view the referendum elections as legit and will recognize annexation. Who does Putin want to please the most?

I can't see Russia attempting to annex...it would be a disaster and a huge escalation.  We shall see in a few days.

I'm sure Putin has weighed the costs of owning East Ukraine. Sure there will be more harsher sanctions applied by the West but east Ukraine is much more valuable than Crimea.


Putin will not suffer. He will always be rich and live the good life but his people will suffer if the economy worsens but it won't hurt Putin's popularity because most Russians are willing to have their economy take a hit in exchange for expanding it's borders.


We would like to believe Putin may regret his decisions of today because we Westerners value a good economy but my guess if Putin walks away with Crimea and possibly east Ukraine, in less than 10 years everybody will forget about what Russia done just like we forgot what Putin did in Georgia and get back to business with them as if nothing happened...... because we Westerners value a good economy.

[stilllooking]

I seem to remember Putin saying a few things just before Crimea was Annexed as well. Not sure if it was the withdrawal of troops, but it almost feels like a deja-vu.

If Putin is planning a move I do not think he will wait until after the elections, I do not think he can afford to unless he is planning to stuff the ballot boxes in Eastern Ukraine. Neither do I think he can keep control of the pro-russian forces in Eastern Ukraine for such a long period.

[Muzh]

I seem to remember Putin saying a few things just before Crimea was Annexed as well. Not sure if it was the withdrawal of troops, but it almost feels like a deja-vu.

If Putin is planning a move I do not think he will wait until after the elections, I do not think he can afford to unless he is planning to stuff the ballot boxes in Eastern Ukraine. Neither do I think he can keep control of the pro-russian forces in Eastern Ukraine for such a long period.

And then you will see someone insert his massive head up his rectum.