Ukraine crisis

[ASIP]

Early results of the referendum in Donetsk are saying the people have voted 89.7% in favour of independence from Kiev. Should the US/Nato allow that or should they start bombing in order to help the people to get it right?

This number is more or less believable. The problem is that the number of people who voted did not (physically absolutely could not) exceed 15% of the total voters number in these two regions. What I saw from live streams, the number of of votes should measure in tens of thousands at all possible optimism. No way more than 3% of voters (3.5 mln people) did vote. This is how you should take this so called referendum.

That approx. of 20% of population there do want to separate or join Russia is a known fact, but this farce cannot confirm it.

Edited May 12, 2014 by ASIP

[Smallc]

What is the difference.

An interesting question.

So a president being replaced by a PM by parliament is the same as an opportunistic armed rebellion within a democratic state.

[Argus]

I hope you realize I am not an anti-Semite.

I hope you realize I wasn't addressing you.

[Argus]

Early results of the referendum in Donetsk are saying the people have voted 89.7% in favour of independence from Kiev. Should the US/Nato allow that or should they start bombing in order to help the people to get it right?

I just held a referendum and 95% of people believe you should be arrested and evicted from Canada.

You're okay with that, of course, given you respect referendums. It was entirely legitimate, I assure you. Everyone I wanted to vote, got to vote.

[jbg]

I hope you realize I wasn't addressing you.

That was hard to tell. I have many faults but anti-Semitism isn't one of them.

[ASIP]

It looks like the Ukraine will probably be split into two, maybe three sections.

There is no condition for this scenario. A "split" is only possible by Russian invasion. Which is not in Russia's interest.

Both illegal govs. Yanukovich was democratically elected and is still the boss until the people vote in a new gov. US/Nato apologists don't get it yet.

Nonsense. See the Constitution of Ukraine. Yanukovich fled the country and was not able to carry duties of the president. The current government is completely legal. In Ukraine there is no election of government. Only Parliament and President are elected. The presidential election is set for May 25. The current interim president is assigned in accordance with the Constitution. He has limited power.

[Argus]

That was hard to tell.

Why was it hard to tell? I was responding to someone talking about "The Jews' apartheid wall".

[jbg]

Why was it hard to tell? I was responding to someone talking about "The Jews' apartheid wall".

Deleted, personal inult Edited May 12, 2014 by jbg

[Big Guy]

So a president being replaced by a PM by parliament is the same as an opportunistic armed rebellion within a democratic state.

No it is not. My understanding and recollection is that Ukraine has a constitution. The constitution does not allow for power to be transferred because a number of people storm and occupy the parliament buildings. The democratically elected president is still alive and claims to still be the president. He has not resigned.

I may be wrong but a revolution is a revolution when the exchange of power takes place without a vote.

It is not the way a democracy should work but when one group takes power by force and another group takes power by force - I cannot see the difference.

Unless of course if in one case you think the revolutionaries are good guys and its OK where in the second case the revolutionaries are bad guys so its illegal.

What if the government and parliament had been based in Sevastopol in Crimea and the majority anti-Kiev forces there overran the parliament and declared Ukraine to be part of Russia. Then people in Kiev had occupied the government buildings there and declared themselves to be part of Ukraine. Who would be right.

[Smallc]

No it is not. My understanding and recollection is that Ukraine has a constitution. The constitution does not allow for power to be transferred because a number of people storm and occupy the parliament buildings.

How about because of a parliamentary decision?

[Wayward Son]

The democratically elected president is still alive and claims to still be the president. He has not resigned.

Good point. As long as someone is democratically elected that person should be able to steal every speck of wealth in the country, and do what ever they want. The people can then vote for a new leader to govern whatever is left of their country the next election. Shame on the population of Ukraine for thinking they matter in between casting votes at elections.

Edited May 12, 2014 by Wayward Son

[monty16]

Jbg, your post #508. Please stop the personal attacks against me. Not referring to me by name is not fooling anybody. Thanks.

[monty16]

ASIP, Regardless of the number of people voting in the referendum and regardless of whether or not you are right about the per centage, it does set the bar for the US/Nato to prove otherwise. That's important to responsible and peace loving parties who care about the wishes of the people involved. Ya think that includes the US/Nato or is their motive something entirely different.

The Crimea referendum set the bar in the Crimea and the US/Nato has pretty well run out of talking points on that one haven't they.

[jbg]

Jbg, your post #508. Please stop the personal attacks against me. Not referring to me by name is not fooling anybody. Thanks.

You are right. I deleted it.

[monty16]

RT is reporting that both Donetsk and Lugansk regions have voted about 90% in favour of self rule in their referendum. They also report a 75% turnout in both regions.

I haven't been able to find any US or EU reporting on the vote results yet. It could be because they are refusing to recognize the referendum.

Legal or illegal, it is a statement for the world on just what is going on in the Ukraine and with US/Nato expansion plans.

[Argus]

No it is not. My understanding and recollection is that Ukraine has a constitution. The constitution does not allow for power to be transferred because a number of people storm and occupy the parliament buildings.

No one stormed or occupied the parliament buildings. Do you a cite to support that idea that doesn't come from Vlad the Impaler?

I may be wrong but a revolution is a revolution when the exchange of power takes place without a vote.

In a parliamentary system, a transfer of power can take place when one party/leader loses the confidence of parliament, which then votes to support someone else.

This is pretty basic stuff you should have learned in grade school.

Edited May 12, 2014 by Argus

[Argus]

Jbg, your post #508. Please stop the personal attacks against me. Not referring to me by name is not fooling anybody. Thanks.

Hey, monty16, please stop talking about Jew walls.

[Argus]

RT is reporting that both Donetsk and Lugansk regions have voted about 90% in favour of self rule in their referendum. They also report a 75% turnout in both regions.

I haven't been able to find any US or EU reporting on the vote results yet. It could be because they are refusing to recognize the referendum.

Legal or illegal, it is a statement for the world on just what is going on in the Ukraine and with US/Nato expansion plans.

I'm still waiting for you to leave Canada. My referendum vote was even higher than theirs, and every bit as legitimate.

[Wayward Son]

RT is reporting that both Donetsk and Lugansk regions have voted about 90% in favour of self rule in their referendum. They also report a 75% turnout in both regions.

I haven't been able to find any US or EU reporting on the vote results yet. It could be because they are refusing to recognize the referendum.

Legal or illegal, it is a statement for the world on just what is going on in the Ukraine and with US/Nato expansion plans.

Any person with a modicum of sense would refuse to recognize the referendums in those areas for several legitimate reasons.

However, it is a strong statement on the effectiveness of Putin's attempt to destabilize the area, and how easily his propaganda can dupe many people in the west.

[monty16]

Any person with a modicum of sense would refuse to recognize the referendums in those areas for several legitimate reasons.

However, it is a strong statement on the effectiveness of Putin's attempt to destabilize the area, and how easily his propaganda can dupe many people in the west.

Putin asked them to not hold the referendum. RT could be lying about the results. Let us know when the West posts something on it to refute RT.

[monty16]

I'm still waiting for you to leave Canada. My referendum vote was even higher than theirs, and every bit as legitimate.

I think you need to stay on the topic and stop the personal attack against me. NOW!

[jbg]

Putin asked them to not hold the referendum.

For good reason. For one thing he wants the sanctions eased, especially if his own overseas wealth is frozen. For another these are apparently areas that would be logistically difficult to rule, and quite poor. I think he wants a bigger slice of Ukraine rather than these two alleged "People's Republics."

[Wayward Son]

Putin asked them to not hold the referendum. RT could be lying about the results. Let us know when the West posts something on it to refute RT.

1) If only Putin was a Western leader, then you would realize that it is possible for him to say one thing publicly with his words, while supporting the opposite with his actions and the actions of his supporters on the ground.

2) RT does not need to be lying about the results, because there is no reason to suspect the results are legitimate. The same pro-russian activists came up with the referendum question and counted the results. Ballot boxes were decorated with independence flags. There was no independent monitoring allowed. There were no quality controls. Reporters from the BBC and CNN witnessed open ballot stuffing. Complete farce, but good enough for you.

3) The Western media has no more requirement to refute RT propaganda than it has a requirement to refute nonsense from Alex Jones or David Icke.

Edited May 12, 2014 by Wayward Son

[monty16]

1) If only Putin was a Western leader, then you would realize that it is possible for him to say one thing publicly with his words, while supporting the opposite with his actions and the actions of his supporters on the ground.

2) RT does not need to be lying about the results, because there is no reason to suspect the results are legitimate. The same pro-russian activists came up with the referendum question and counted the results. Ballot boxes were decorated with independence flags. There was no independent monitoring allowed. There were no quality controls. Reporters from the BBC and CNN witnessed open ballot stuffing. Complete farce, but good enough for you.

3) The Western media has no more requirement to refute RT propaganda than it has a requirement to refute nonsense from Alex Jones or David Icke.

You wouldn't lie about independent monitors so that only leaves being uninformed.

http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/ukraine-crisis/referendum-monitor-criticizes-u-s-involvement-crimea-n53646

No, the Western media doesn't have to recognize it and apparently hasn't. But their silence doesn't play well for them while it does play well for the other side as it's indicative of the people's preference.

[Wayward Son]

You wouldn't lie about independent monitors so that only leaves being uninformed.

http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/ukraine-crisis/referendum-monitor-criticizes-u-s-involvement-crimea-n53646

No, the Western media doesn't have to recognize it and apparently hasn't. But their silence doesn't play well for them while it does play well for the other side as it's indicative of the people's preference.

You do realize that these two referendums were not in Crimea, right? And they did not happen two months ago...when your piece is dated...

Edited May 12, 2014 by Wayward Son