Ukraine

  • Thread starter Thread starter Seamus_L
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
PLUS: President Putin says that what happened in Ukraine was “an unconstitutional overthrow and armed seizure of power” that went unchallenged.

"Why was this done? President Yanukovych, before Poland Germany and France, and before my representative, ombudsmen Lukin, signed an agreement with the opposition, by which, I want to note, Yanukovych basically gave up his power, he aggreed to all demands of opposition, early elections, to return to the constitution of 2004, … he didn’t give one illegal command to shoot unfortunate protestors.
Code: 
They immediately seized his residence rather than giving him a chance to fulfil the agreement. .. He didn’t have any chance of being reelected. … Why did they need to take unconstitutional steps and bring the country into the chaos that now reigns there? … It was a stupid act. "
Putin (Through the guardian THANKS to GraceSofia)

I post this in responce to a previous post which states Russia wishes to reinstate the ousted president.
 
GraceSofia said:
I’m glad someone else said this first. 😃 I just read through the partial transcript on the Guardian, and that was my reaction. He sounds so reasonable; boy, he’s good, that’s what I thought.

theguardian.com/world/2014/mar/04/ukraine-crisis-shots-fired-crimea-airbase
Click to expand...
I like the Q and A format, but will look for the whole transcript. Some things bother me, but I don’t have to to enumerate them here.

"The Russian president denied that Putin that the Russian-speaking soldiers occupying key Crimean military sites were Russian troops, describing them as “local self-defence forces” "

They were flown in and destroyed the radios of the commo towers at the airport. Those aren’t locals.

" He said the west had acted without UN approval or distorted UN security council resolutions when taking action in Libya, Afghanistan and Iraq."

This is where I reserve judgment on the media translation. Putin would obviously be talking about the US, not the UN.

Yeah…i want to read the whole thing, translated by at least two different sources. But I highly doubt I’ll find it soon to discuss it intelligently as yet.

I do have a couple other points, but it’ll have to wait. 😦

Much thanks to GraceSophia for the link!
 
danrooke said:
PLUS: President Putin says that what happened in Ukraine was “an unconstitutional overthrow and armed seizure of power” that went unchallenged.

"Why was this done? President Yanukovych, before Poland Germany and France, and before my representative, ombudsmen Lukin, signed an agreement with the opposition, by which, I want to note, Yanukovych basically gave up his power, he aggreed to all demands of opposition, early elections, to return to the constitution of 2004, … he didn’t give one illegal command to shoot unfortunate protestors.

They immediately seized his residence rather than giving him a chance to fulfil the agreement. … He didn’t have any chance of being reelected. … Why did they need to take unconstitutional steps and bring the country into the chaos that now reigns there? … It was a stupid act. "

Putin (Through the guardian THANKS to GraceSofia)

I post this in responce to a previous post which states Russia wishes to reinstate the ousted president.
Click to expand...
Nov. 21: President Viktor Yanukovych’s government announces it is abandoning an agreement that would strengthen ties with the European Union and instead seeks closer cooperation with Moscow. Protesters take to the streets.

Feb. 21: Under a European-mediated plan, protest leaders and Yanukovych agree to form a new government and hold an early election. Parliament slashes his powers and votes to free his rival, former Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko, from prison. Yanukovych flees Kiev after protesters take control of the capital.

Feb. 22 Parliament votes to remove Yanukovych and hold new elections. Tymoshenko is freed from prison and speaks to tens of thousands who gather on the Maidan.

abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/key-events-ukraines-political-crisis-22748638
 
GaryTaylor said:
Nov. 21: President Viktor Yanukovych’s government announces it is abandoning an agreement that would strengthen ties with the European Union and instead seeks closer cooperation with Moscow. Protesters take to the streets.

Feb. 21: Under a European-mediated plan, protest leaders and Yanukovych agree to form a new government and hold an early election. Parliament slashes his powers and votes to free his rival, former Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko, from prison. Yanukovych flees Kiev after protesters take control of the capital.

Feb. 22 Parliament votes to remove Yanukovych and hold new elections. Tymoshenko is freed from prison and speaks to tens of thousands who gather on the Maidan.

abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/key-events-ukraines-political-crisis-22748638
Click to expand...
are you agreeing with putin…?
 
Russia insists on the implementation of a Western-sponsored peace deal that Yanukovych signed with the opposition that set presidential elections for December. Russian envoy at those talks did not sign the deal. Yanukovych fled the capital hours after the deal was signed and ended up in Russia, and the Ukrainian parliament set the presidential vote for May 25.

Nov. 21: President Viktor Yanukovych’s government announces it is abandoning an agreement that would strengthen ties with the European Union and instead seeks closer cooperation with Moscow. Protesters take to the streets.

Aside from the media mess and propaganda, and protesting about elections basically Putin stated he would use force if his "peoples’ rights aren’t acknowledged… “If they continue to see a threat”-Putin

The US categorically rejects all this, Churchs burned? Vast evidence of corruption after Yanukovych freely abandoned his office.
 
“Putin says he considers Viktor Yanukovych to still be Ukraine’s leader, hopes Russia will not need to use force”

“It was Mr Putin’s first comments since Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych fled Kiev last month and landed in Russia… Ukraine’s new government wants to put him on trial for the deaths of over 80 people during protests in Kiev.”

todayonline.com/world/europe/russia-has-right-use-force-ukraine-putin

There was no need to enter Crimea with issues in Kiev. All strategic moves, and now in Kiev. Its a Russian Nationalist agenda, that’s what it is. The question is DO YOU want to live as such.

Not me…you!
 
GaryTaylor said:
“Putin says he considers Viktor Yanukovych to still be Ukraine’s leader, hopes Russia will not need to use force”

“It was Mr Putin’s first comments since Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych fled Kiev last month and landed in Russia… Ukraine’s new government wants to put him on trial for the deaths of over 80 people during protests in Kiev.”

todayonline.com/world/europe/russia-has-right-use-force-ukraine-putin
Click to expand...
Putin said in his press conference that Yanukovych has no political future and he would like to see new faces coming into government in Ukraine. The present government are made up of oligarchs and bankers.

theguardian.com/world/2014/mar/04/who-governing-ukraine-olexander-turchynov

theguardian.com/world/2014/mar/04/crimea-crisis-putin-rule-out-war-use-force-last-resort

During his impromptu and occasionally rambling remarks, Putin said he had advised Yanukovych not to dismiss the feared Ukrainian riot police from Kiev, warning the ousted leader that “chaos, anarchy” would ensue if he did. "Yanukovych has no political future now, I have told him that," Putin said.
*
 
pepipop said:
Putin said in his press conference that Yanukovych has no political future and he would like to see new faces coming into government in Ukraine. **The present government are made up of oligarchs **
Click to expand...
As was the last ousted government and so is Putin’s government also. Pot calling the kettle black? :rolleyes:
 
Ukrainian troops in Crimea who fear political reprisals based on what they do or don’t do should be offered transit out of Crimea by sea to NATO territory. It could all be billed as a humanitarian intervention.

There, perhaps they could be re-armed and made into a ready-made paramilitary reserve, similar to the way anti-Castro Cubans were in the early sixties. And make Europe foot part of the bill for this one.

This stops well-short of anything truly aggressive, yet lets Putin know there WILL be a price to be paid for further Russian meddling on behalf of local tyrants.
 
pepipop said:
GaryTaylor;11766134 said:
“Putin says he considers Viktor Yanukovych to still be Ukraine’s leader, hopes Russia will not need to use force”

“It was Mr Putin’s first comments since Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych fled Kiev last month and landed in Russia… Ukraine’s new government wants to put him on trial for the deaths of over 80 people during protests in Kiev.”

todayonline.com/world/europe/russia-has-right-use-force-ukraine-putin
Click to expand...
Putin said in his press conference that Yanukovych has no political future and he would like to see new faces coming into government in Ukraine. The present government are made up of oligarchs and bankers.

theguardian.com/world/2014/mar/04/who-governing-ukraine-olexander-turchynov

theguardian.com/world/2014/mar/04/crimea-crisis-putin-rule-out-war-use-force-last-resort

During his impromptu and occasionally rambling remarks, Putin said he had advised Yanukovych not to dismiss the feared Ukrainian riot police from Kiev, warning the ousted leader that “chaos, anarchy” would ensue if he did. "Yanukovych has no political future now, I have told him that," Putin said.

Putin considers Viktor Yanukovych to still be Ukraine’s leader, in that Yanukovych has no political future and Putin would “like” to see new faces coming into government in Ukraine is a rather irrelevant point.
Click to expand...
 
Gary Taylor:

It’s more likely that we don’t have an aggressive Putin and Russia. He could be a warmonger, but then Kiev could have also been overrun by nationalists. For me it is far more likely that Kiev is being overrun. Most of the cabinet is right-wing, former prisoners and were protester “activists” in Kiev at the time. Some politicians even refuse to participate in that new government. Also, protests happen in Kiev, and the government changes, what about the Ukrainians who weren’t in Kiev? Do they not have a say? Right now in the Ukraine the loudest and most violent rule the government. Did the Crimean’s travel to Kiev to help kill the president? no. The “revolution” appears to be a sham. Earlier legitimate protests have been hijacked, which I think is quite patently obvious. But then thats my position currently, there is also a lot of misinformation flying around, like the “ultimatum for surrender” - which came from Kiev.

God Bless!
 
danrooke said:
Gary Taylor:

It’s more likely that we don’t have an aggressive Putin and Russia. He could be a warmonger, but then Kiev could have also been overrun by nationalists. For me it is far more likely that Kiev is being overrun. Most of the cabinet is right-wing, former prisoners and were protester “activists” in Kiev at the time. Some politicians even refuse to participate in that new government. Also, protests happen in Kiev, and the government changes, what about the Ukrainians who weren’t in Kiev? Do they not have a say? Right now in the Ukraine the loudest and most violent rule the government. Did the Crimean’s travel to Kiev to help kill the president? no. The “revolution” appears to be a sham. Earlier legitimate protests have been hijacked, which I think is quite patently obvious. But then thats my position currently, there is also a lot of misinformation flying around, like the “ultimatum for surrender” - which came from Kiev.

God Bless!
Click to expand...
Who, the Russian Nationalist refuse to participate? Of course change is “uncomfortable” and that’s what the reaction was to.

Most of the cabinet is right-wing, former prisoners and were protester “activists” in Kiev at the time." Who…

Feb. 22 Parliament votes to remove Yanukovych and hold new elections. Tymoshenko is freed from prison and speaks to tens of thousands who gather on the Maidan.

Putin refuse’s to acknowledge all this. The fact that eastern residents side with Putin only indicates its alliance.
 
Miserissima said:
"The Russian president denied that Putin that the Russian-speaking soldiers occupying key Crimean military sites were Russian troops, describing them as “local self-defence forces” "
Click to expand...
This is obviously a lie, which makes me doubt everything else he’s said.
We’ve all seen photos. Dad’s army doesn’t have personnel carriers and tanks and all the stuff these guys have. :rolleyes:

This is an amazing event, unarmed Ukrainians approaching armed Russian military. More photos at the link.

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/03/04/ukraine-russia-belbek-pictures_n_4894919.html#slide=3491233Colonel Yuli Mamchor, commander of the Ukrainian military garrison at the Belbek airbase, salutes before leading over 100 of his unarmed troops to retake the Belbek airfield from soldiers under Russian command in Crimea on March 4, 2014 in Lubimovka, Ukraine. After spending a tense night anticipating a Russian attack following the expiration of a Russian deadline to surrender, in which family members of troops spent the night at the garrison gate in support of the soldiers, Mamchor announced his bold plan to his soldiers early this morning. The Russian-lead troops fired their weapons into the air but then granted Mamchor the beginning of negotiations with their commander. Russian-lead troops have blockaded a number of Ukrainian military bases across Crimea. (Photo by Sean Gallup/Getty Images)
 
GraceSofia said:
This is obviously a lie, which makes me doubt everything else he’s said.
We’ve all seen photos. Dad’s army doesn’t have personnel carriers and tanks and all the stuff these guys have. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Yes, but those photos of Russian soldiers with tanks, etc., were taken during military operations in Russia, not the Ukraine. Same old, same old MSM spinning.*
 
danrooke said:
Why can’t THE WHOLE OF THE UKRAINE decide on new government?

Why can only the west of Ukraine force it’s ideas on Ukraine? surely niether side should enforce/impose their political views- there should only be free a fair elections for all the people in Ukraine.

On who is governing the country now:

theguardian.com/world/2014/mar/04/who-governing-ukraine-olexander-turchynov
Click to expand...
On this point Putin seems in agreement. I think everyone is. Point being this be the case Crimea returns to Ukraine.
 
I find it most peculiar that Putin decries the unconstitutional nature of Yanukovych’s fall. His own party and parliament impeached him and formed a new government, which they are perfectly entitled to do under law, when against the terms of the Budapest Memorandum of 1994 Putin has allowed his troops based there to occupy the main administrative buildings of Crimea. In what way was this action a “legal” route? All Putin has been able to come up with is the idea that ethnic Russians are at threat from a minority of Nationalists in the north who do not form part of the majority of protestors and are, as far as everyone can tell, nowhere near the Crimea.

There is this talk of mistreatment of Russians in the Crimea. I’ve been watching RT and its been constant. Yet, AP reporters on the ground have not discerned any evidence of violence against Russians. In fact, Chanel One - a Russian state-run media station - broadcast footage of shots being fired at the Polish border, not the Ukranian one. This leads me to believe that they are struggling to find “footage” to back up these claims. The Polish border crossing was unrelated to the crisis. Why was it broadcast? Because they couldn’t find anything else to show viewers!

The Kiev revolution was not in Putin’s plan for Ukraine. He wanted a customs union and closer integration with Moscow, the protestors wanted to move away from Moscow’s sphere of influence and into closer integration with the EU. This is the bare fact that cannot be changed.

There is no justification for Russia’s de facto occupation of Crimea that I can see. Why is he meddling in Ukraine’s internal affairs? If Crimeans have a problem with the new authorities, then surely they could have worked it out with them and asked the international community to send in UN inspectors to asses their situation?

A whole load of measures could have been taken other than a Russian occupation of part of the Ukraine.
 
At this point, I hope Russia will go no further than Crimea, but this is what comes of NATO expansion, Color Coded revolutions, an attempted invasion of South Ossetia, the destabilization of Syria, and a Western backed anti-Russian coup in Kiev.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top