Along comes Human Action to quibble about my use of the word ‘forbids’ when the constitution of Ukraine hinders, prevents and makes it impossible’ the separation of Crimea from Ukraine in that actual definition of the word.
I read somewhere that there was done kind if law prohibiting lawmakers or officials from discussing secession in Ukraine. I wonder if anyone has heard of that as I can’t find the source that mentioned that.
Since when has Russia been inhibited by the US in doing whatever the hell it wants? Your logic is pretty crazy, though, since the net effect is to increase, rather than decrease, the amount of international disorder that exists. Surely, you don’t think the US is going to change what it does to suit the Russians.
It’s like having a neighborhood over-run by one gang and cheering on another gang that comes in and “stands up” to the first gang. You say you don’t condone Russia’s actions, but you like the way they stand up to the US-- which is “Russia’s actions”. There are any number of ways they can “stand up” to the US without annexing part of anther country’s territory. And they do that all the time in the UNSC.
How so?
Does the U.S. Constitution forbid legalizing heroin?
Unlikely to be constitutional, see Article 80. Members of the Ukrainian parliament enjoy parliamentary immunity and aren’t liable for statements made in parliament.
You’re “quibbling” because you proved him wrong. You know the drill.
I invite you to look up to look-up the vetos for each nation. Hardly comparable.
That was one example, and I honestly have no idea what you’re getting at. You think the US vetoes too many UNSC resolutions, therefore Russia gets to steal part of another country’s land?
Excuuuuse me? The US does basically what it wants. Period.
CHARTS: The Top 5 Land-Grabbing Countries
Read if you will
Where has HA proven me wrong? The small size of the population of Crimea compared to all of Ukraine, and the number of ‘oblasts’ in Crimea compared to the number of ‘Oblasts’ on the mainland makes it impossible for Crimea to secede from Ukraine.
Human Action has posted the paragraph that gives Crimea no chance of seceding through constitutional means when and if the context of the demographics and societal divisions within Ukraine are considered. Here it is.
{An All-Ukrainian referendum is called on popular initiative on the request of no less than three million citizens of Ukraine who have the right to vote, on the condition that the signatures in favor of designating the referendum have been collected in no less than two-thirds of the oblasts, with no less than 100 000 signatures in each oblast.}
Rep Rohrabacher (R-CA) Is about 99% there. Will this start a revision to the company line in the USA?
This one percent doesn’t make much sense with the rest of it. But up to here it’s quite interesting:
Really what’s the point of finding and quoting people who happen to agree with you? I am sure no one will deny that you aren’t the only person in the world who thinks this. Though at least you and XT are on topic with it unlike a certain scarlet emotion.
I agree. But it also doesn’t make it OK for the country that broke the law to be smugly giving moral lectures about the sanctity of that law. That’s called hypocrisy.
NF: On 01-17-2014 at 07:24 PM Human Action wrote:
NF: In Egypt at least, but apparently not in Kiev?
NF: 01-21-2014 at 09:32 AM Human Action wrote:
NF: In Egypt due process was needed but not in Kiev?
NF: On 01-21-2014 at 09:16 PM Human Action wrote:
NF: I am not sure why in Kiev the protestors and legislators should not have ‘nicely checked’ Yanukovich’s power if ‘they wanted something different’ and wait until ‘his term was up’.
NF: On 01-21-2014 at 09:34 PM I wrote:
NF: To which, on 01-21-2014 at 09:52 PM, Human Action asked:
NF: This appears to be a view that, in Egypt, an unconstitutionally committed act of removing a legitimately elected head of state from office prior to a full term being served, must mean that those actions ‘invalidates the constitution’.
What Crimea did was take advantage of that ‘invalidation’, as Human Action suggests is what had occurred in Egypt, and in that vacuum, Crimea decided to ‘self-determine’ that their territory was no longer part of Ukraine or beholden to Ukraine’s ‘invalid’ Constitution. That, as I posted earlier, is what Churkin explained at the UN:
NF: Cites From January are from the following link:
That is a mysterious complaint. Rohrabacher is a high-ranking Republican Congressman and I find it a ‘rare’ comment’ coming from someone in the U.S. Congress.
Look, let’s all face it: All legalities notwithstanding, Russia’s annexation of Crimea is now a fait accompli. It is supported by sufficient numbers within Crimea to make it stick. Without a major war on the issue, which nobody wants, the peninsula will not return to Ukrainian jurisdiction in your lifetime or mine.
How do we proceed forward from there?
Still waiting on evidence that Ukrainians would never vote for Crimean independence.
Care to elaborate? As far as I can tell, that is private purchase of land, that still is considered governed by the country it lies in. As opposed to removing land from the governing authority.
But it’s up to you to make an argument that consists of more than “read this link”.
His complaint has changed from “it’s constitutionally not allowed” to “it’s really hard”.
Well, no shock Sherlock. It should be “really hard” for a piece of a sovereign nation to break away. Maybe he is not aware of the Civil War our country fought over that very idea.
Anyway, you know the drill. He’s never wrong. Move the goalpost or claim “context”. It all boils down to never admitting he’s wrong.
That isn’t an answer to the question you were asked, which was pretty straightforward, but I’ll rephrase it; why does the U.S. doing bad things to Iraq justify Russia doing bad things to Ukraine?
All your talk about Russia “Standing up to the worldly bully,” which doesn’t mean what you seem to think it means but I think I get your point, is complete nonsense. Russia is not standing up the united States; they’re beating up Ukraine. Is Ukraine a major international bully?
When Russia has the balls to actually fight AMERICANS, you be sure to let me know. Until then they’re just a two-bit bully.
No idea what you’re talking about, rule of law wasn’t followed in Ukraine either, as I wrote, though it came a lot closer than Egypt did. They deserve credit for that, I guess.
No idea what you’re talking about, Marmite Lover posted an article that said “Democracy allows for the removal of an unjust leader through due process; as our founding fathers recognized, when a ruler abuses his power, it is a nation’s duty to depose him and restore a just order.” I asked what “due process” was involved in this case; that’s a question, not a statement.
Weren’t you the guy who was obsessive about context?
Well, the protesters aren’t part of the government, and the Ukrainian military isn’t a massive, self-supporting fiefdom like Egypt’s, so there’s no commonality there.
No, that’s the view that you, in that thread, were arguing that the 2012 Constitution was invalid, and the 2014 one wasn’t. I never argued that the 2012 Constitution had been invalidated, just suspended by the military.
Or, Russia used those as flimsy pretexts to seize Crimea for itself. How are we to know which it was? Russia’s various actions in this matter are certainly consistent with a land grab, wouldn’t you say? Just like the Egyptian military’s removal of Morsi and suppression of his party is consistent with the military seizing power for itself, and not trying to rescue democracy from Islamism?