I don’t. If I’m overthrowing governments, what difference does it make whether I overthrow the one in Wisconsin or the federal government in DC?
I am sure glad you are on Terr’s side. Going by governor Wisconsin is red state but in Federal elections it is a blue state. Wisconsin is one fiftieth of the entire union. If you overthrow the Federal Goverment you overthrow them all. Other red state publics would certainly not be hapoy with your turning the entire country blue by violent means.
No. That’s a distinction you made up in order to support an unsupportable position. Sorry, but you need to accept the logical conclusions of the positions you are espousing. Or, just admit you were wrong in the first place. It’s really not that hard to do.
What unsupportable position is it that you think I’m supporting and what distinction referred to by me is ‘made up’?
Are you arguing that there is no distinction between overthrowing a local government versus overthrowing a central government?
Yes the Maidan rioting rebels did succeed in overthrowing the constitutionally elected Yanukovich government that was given the ‘power of force’ by consenting voters in Crimea, Donetsk and Slavyansk and the necessary politically aligned voters in the rest of Ukraine. The Maidan rioters took Yanukovich’s power of force away through violence. The Maidan rioter legitimacy was not a constitutional seizing of the ‘power of force’ for all of Ukraine. The Maidan rioters took control of the police and national
Army by the force of violence against an elected government. But the Maidain rioter replacement givernment did not sieze with their coup the ‘power of force’ over Crimea Donetsk and Slavyansk. No voters in those Regions dominated by Russian speakers gave their consent to be governed by the Maudan rioter government.
So the legitimacy of the Maidan rioter government only carried constitutional legality in those areas where a majority of pro-Maidan protest and violence prevailed.
Think about the reality when you declare the maidan rioter’s legitimacy and their right to govern and exercise the power of force of Ukrainians who dominate the regions that oppose the Maidan riots and never wanted to see them sieze power by the use of violence and ignoring the constitutional means as the only way to seize power.
Is it what you are saying then that actually the acting police in the Russian speaking parts of Ukraine did the right thing to let the anti-Maudan rebels take over dozens of police stations and government buildings last April without firing a shot to stop them?
Is that what you would have expected the riot police in Kiev to do last February?
I have no idea what you’re on about, and have the cheeky feeling that you don’t either.
Nope. There are many options beyond “swift capitulation” and “firing at protesters with sniper rifles”. The police forces of every developed country know it quite well
Perhaps its an American thing. Learn about “Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed…” here:
http://democracyweb.org/consent/principles.php
Pay particular attention to the concept of ‘the consent of the governed’ and then hopefully you can understand my point and an undeniable reality about the events in Ukraine that transpired over the past six months or so.
The Russian speaking population did not ever and have not yet to this day give their consent to be governed by the Maidan Riot Government that replace the government that they in fact did give their constitutional consent to be government.
When you are able to grasp the concept of ‘consent to be governed’ will direct you to what is meant by the ‘power of force’.
What if all those options are used for months but the rioting and violence thrown against government authority continues to threaten the duly elected government which was constitutionally given the power of force by the consent of the governed? The self-defense principle means that an elected government has the right to defend itself when less violent means fail to secure the lives of the security forces and property and operation of the government. And specifically when violence had been directed at police for over two months before lethal force was allegedly ordered to be used by the governing authorities.
http://uk.mobile.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUKBREA3M0U520140423?i=2
You are basing your argument on an unresolved murder with no withesses that I can find and giving credence to the version laid out by Ukrainuan politicians who want to use the murder for justification to step up military attacks on the separatist rebels as if the ordered and condoned committing murder and torture as part of their rebellion.
What nonsensical reasoning. You think Wisconsin is uniform in political leanings? Every state has conservative and liberal districts, including Wisconsin.
Yes of course. The man was pro-Ukrainian, was “mobbed” by pro-Russian crowd and was seen being forced into a car by masked men later. Then his body is found. But “no witnesses”. Pathetic.
And did you see the other links? Like murder in cold blood of two policemen who were taken as hostages? Again, your excuses just keep piling on and on.
Your ‘was seen’ is according to a pro-Maidan riot government official. There is nothing tying the murder to the anti-Maidan riot government movement at all.
The brick and petrol bomb throwing at police by Maidan rioters is witnessed by all of us who bother to view the dozens of News Reports and photos showing it being done. I argue that the anti-Maidan rebels did not attack the police in such open and criminal defiance of the law in the currently rebel held regions.
Whoever killed Rybak is a murderer and that is for sure. But I see insufficient evidence for the Maidan riot government to justify a large scale military campaign in the rebel held region because of that.
What on earth could make you believe that I wrote that Wisconsin is uniform in political leanings? I wrote it has a red state governor. It also has voted Blue in the last six Presidential elections. Cheeseheads went for Reagan in 1984.
The governor is Republican. The Last six Presidential elections they voted Democrat. Those are just facts. If you can’t deal with those facts then try extinguishing your going after other posters with your ‘nonsensical reasoning’ tag and join in the actual discussion that is going on.
Question for John Mace again:
So was the brick-throwing ‘provocateur’ driven right-wing mob in Kiev on December 1, 2013 the legitimate democratic agency to solely determine that they were acting in the interest of the entire ‘population’ ? And as a follow up to that is it your contention that the Constitution of Ukraine did not protect President Yanukovuch from bring overthrown by mobs such as the violent mob that seized control of Ukraine’s central government at the end of February 2014?
[QUOTE=NotfooledbyW]
So was the brick-throwing ‘provocateur’ driven right-wing mob in Kiev on December 1, 2013 the legitimate democratic agency to solely determine that they were acting in the interest of the entire ‘population’ ?
[/QUOTE]
Well, taking out all of your horseshit spin and hyperbole…yeah, the protesters were the ‘legitimate democratic agency’, while the government that did a 180 degree shift in the policies that they were elected under, then tried to stifle protest using draconian measures, killed several people (and imprisoned and tortured many more), before bringing the entire cluster fuck to the flash point and eventually had to flee lost that legitimacy. And, of course, the new government (composed of many of the remaining parliament as well as the various coalitions that were against what the old government, a.k.a. your good buddy and his merry minions) CALLED FOR ELECTIONS, WHERE THE PEOPLE COULD VOTE ON WHAT THEY ACTUALLY WANTED AND WHAT DIRECTION THEY WANTED THINGS TO GO IN.
Good grief. I really just quoted this to underscore how you spin everything the way you do. The ‘Maidan riot government’? 
Seriously, there is no reason to bother with engaging you since your posts are so ridiculously over the top, with spin, propaganda and horseshit in every line.
Stopping the advance on December 1, 2013 of provacateurs using a bulldozer and throwing bricks at police to thraten the HQ of the President of Ukraine is not ‘stifling protest’. What you are arguing is not true. It is not factual. Attacking police with bricks for defending the live’s of public officials and the property and business of the government is not protest. It is assault and it is against the law. If you can present a case that the assault by provocateurs on December 1, 2013 as I have described is legal and legitimate conduct in a democratic system, please provide something besides your shouting that it is true. I would be glad to see it and respond accordingly.
Substitute “district” for state. Same thing.
You say 'yeah, the protesters were the ‘legitimate democratic agency’ in response to my question regarding whether ‘they were acting in the interest of the entire ‘population’.’
How did XT ever formulate a conclusion that on December 1 2013 perhaps a couple thousand who decided to throw bricks at police to express their desire to bring down an elected government were acting in the interest of the entire population?
The brick-throwers were certainly not acting in the interest of the majority in Crimea or all the Russian speakers living in the eastern parts of Ukraine.
Ninety days after 'the worst threat to international peace in a long, long time’, Putin and Poroshenko shook hands in Normandy France, and talk about resolving the conflict in Donetsk and Slavyansk peacefully as most Crimeans are quite happy that Crimea is now joined as a member state of the Russian Federation.
Is Putin really a double dangerous man as the mood was so dominant a few months back?