The Constitution that tied Crinea to the central authority of Ukraine was unfairly and undemocratically dropped when Yanukivuch was violently deposed and forced to flee.
All states in the US joined the union voluntarily. That was not the case for Crimea to Ukraine.
Most well established democracies do not allow mob rule to over turn the president and government.
I speak of fairness for the majority of Crimeans in the context of the chaos and unconstitutional conduct of Ukraine’s majority population and their elected leaders.
I don’t compare what happened in Kiev prior to the referendum to what haoiens in modern and relatively stable democracies. My views are significantly more reality based than that ever could be.
To use your lingo - most countries are not perfect, but most countries don’t have mob rule and violence replace the constitutional law as Kiev did. The coup in Kiev did change the direction of the country without one wit of regard for what the anti-Maidan minority thought about it.
Now that the valuable real estate wherr most of that minority population resides has rebelled and rejected that coup in varying degrees - the pro-Maidans request constitutional compliance.
But the central government is too unstable to enforce their demands. So as of yesterday the interim pro/Maidan government is withdrawing troops. I have not heard today’s news if there is any. Hopefully the withdrawal is proceeding as announced.
It was never fair to the prople of Crimea that the Ukraine constitution would not allow a ‘local only’ referendum because the people of Crimea were never given a fair democratic vote to commit themselves to adherence to the Ukrainian constitution.
My how you’ve softened your stance now that it seems clear even “Russian speaking Ukrainians” aren’t in favour of this independence drive. “In varying degrees” is it? These anti-maidan people are clearly a minority. What would it take for you to not support their occupation of government buildings?
[QUOTE=NotfooledbyW]
The Constitution that tied Crinea to the central authority of Ukraine was unfairly and undemocratically dropped when Yanukivuch was violently deposed and forced to flee.
[/QUOTE]
What do you base this on, besides your opinion (and your buddy Yanukivuch and Putin of course)?
What has this got to do with anything? Regardless of how the Crimea was joined to the Ukraine, it was part of it. There were mechanisms put in place at the time of that joining AND when the Ukraine became a fully independent sovereign state when the old Soviet Union went tits up to allow for the Crimea and the Ukraine to re-evaluate the association. They weren’t used. Instead, the Crimea arbitrarily and unilaterally, with the assistance of Russia, decided to declare independence by fiat (so that they could join Russia, curiously enough…well, I’m sure it seemed like a massive coincidence to you anyway).
Which, as has been pointed out to you, isn’t what happened. I know you love to spin these little discussions to your own warped view point, but you’ve been told several times why this little fantasy of yours isn’t reality.
No, you attempt to spin things in a way as to justify the actions both of Russia and of the ridiculous vote that allowed the Crimea to become part of Russia. As you’ve been doing for 10’s of pages now.
Gods, that’s funny.
So, because they aren’t strong enough to crush all opposition you take this to mean that they aren’t valid and that basically anything goes. Well, hell, why didn’t you say this to begin with. Obviously, brutal power to enforce central will is what matters to you.
The Pro-Maidan central government in Kiev is withdrawing it’s troops from the restive regions in eastern Ukraine. This is good news. Hopefully the withdrawal is proceeding as announced. The fact of the matter is that **brutal power to enforce central will ** would be wrong and counterproductive. It is good that the Kiev interim pro-Maidan government has finally figured this out. They will achieve more validity by not using brutal power to enforce central will. This is the word that has been coming from Moscow for over a month.
Not sure what you are driving at with regard to my ‘softened stance’. I have not rejected the entirety of the latest PEW Poll at all. In fact I cited it ten days ago when it came out:
On 05-11-2014 at 07:23 PM I wrote:
You cannot pay much attention to what others say my position is. Regardless of the low PEW poll numbers for the anti-Maidan rebels my position is that the central interim government should not use military force on the two restive regions (densely populated Cities) to restore central government control of those buildings. And those regions should be granted autonomy which is not necessarily complete separation from Ukraine or annexation with Russia.
As of yesterday that pull back of central government troops has been passed in the legislature and I hope they do in fact actually pull back and stop all attacks against anti-Maidan regions.
I have always believed that there were varying degrees of anti-Maidan sentiment in Eastern Ukraine even among Russian Speakers. That is not new. Some want to join Russia, some want more autonomy for their regions, some want federalization. This is not new, since that has been Russia’s position all along.
But I also believe that autonomy or federalization for that region is right and appropriate even by keeping borders intact. So regardless of what PEW says and no reason to dismiss any of it, the reality on the ground is that the ‘rebellion’ at this point in time appears to be accomplishing its objective for more autonomy.
If, “New Russia” could manage to set up its own government and establish its own army and police as the Kurds did in Iraq, in my view that would establish a will of the people for complete separation. IF they cannot do what the Kurds did in Iraq - then I expect they will accept the autonomy granted by the central government and remain as Ukraine. Constitutional changes are coming with a more federalized Ukraine in my view as things look right now.
I have no reason or need to justify the vote on the referendum in Crimea or the actions of Russia. They had a ridiculous vote in Donetsk but that did not allow Donetsk to become part of Russia. There must be something else that allowed Crimea to become part of Russia.
Just unbelievable. So while you accept the polling results that indicate most people in the region back staying united, you simultaneously think that if the autonomy/separatist people are able to round up an army that proves they have a mandate from the people to separate. Meanwhile it’s quite improper for the Kiev government to resort to “brutish violence” to stop the build up of said police/government/military. How can you expect anyone to accept this as a realistic path?
Remember, he’s the guy who claims that he was passionate about the Vietnam War yet apparently thought the US was at war with the South Vietnamese Army(AKA ARVN) and that the South Vietnamese Army was the army of the North Vietnamese government.
Perhaps he refers to the Kurds, he has a different understanding of who “the Kurds” were than do most Americans or people familiar with the MENA have.
If, “New Russia” could manage to set up its own government and establish its own army and police as the Kurds did in Iraq, in my view that would establish a will of the people for complete separation.
Your re-write of my first “if”:
“So while you accept the polling results that indicate most people in the region back staying united, you simultaneously think that if the autonomy/separatist people are able to round up an army that proves they have a mandate from the people to separate.”
Here’s your version of my first “if” starting at the “if”:
“…if the autonomy/separatist people are able to round up an army that proves they have a mandate from the people to separate.”
Was your removal of my other two elements deliberate or a typo?
No, in my view ‘rounding up an army’ without democratically establishing a real government’ would not establish a ‘will of the people’ for complete separation. That is because ‘establishing a government’ would be based upon majority consent, but ‘rounding up an army’ alone would not establish majority consent. A minority group could hire mercenaries to establish authority rather than a government established by the genuine will of the majority.
And accepting the PEW poll in April does not deny my view and I believe the reality that the opinion of Russuan-speakers could change over time about complete separation. And that is more potentially possible as perceptions about security and economic stability IF an established ‘New Russia’ government could demonstrate the ability to deliver on those concerns.
Do you insist that opinions in a Poll such as the PEW poll being referenced could change or are April’s numbers fixed for ever in stone?
My second ‘if’ is based upon current PEW polling in that regard that change is possible.
“IF they cannot do what the Kurds did in Iraq - then I expect they will accept the autonomy granted by the central government and remain as Ukraine. Constitutional changes are coming with a more federalized Ukraine in my view as things look right now.”
So your point was that “if” a separatist government is democratically elected at the oblast level they will then be democratically legitimate? Quite a powerful statement. I predict that if Hillary Clinton wins the election in 2016, she will be president. I doubt she’ll be allowed to set up her own personal army and police force though.
Pure BS that you just made up. 99.9% of the people in the US never agreed to join the US. The only “chaos” is in your mind, or it was created by Russia and the separatists trying to split Ukraine apart.
She won’t have any reason to set up her own personal army and police force. She will be Commander in Chief if all branches of the US military. Her administration will oversee the operations of the FBI, ATF etc as the US Constitution should still be intact and uninterrupted.
I see that the Western threats to totally isolate Putin in the world community and financially hurt him by halting European imports of Russian gas are going well.
