Author |
Message |
 |
|
 |
Advert
|
Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
- No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
- Times and dates in your local timezone.
- Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
- Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
- Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now. |
|
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/03/03 15:55:18
Subject: Re:Ukraine: Witness the making of a dictatorship, live!
|
 |
Blood Angel Captain Wracked with Visions
|
Ketara wrote:So what you're saying is that if a Government falls apart, and is for all intents and purposes non-existent, nobody who was ruled by that now defunct government is legally allowed to make a new one, even if they're doing it democratically?
By that logic, practically just about every country in existence is illegal if you trace it back far enough.
I am amazed that you managed to get that interpretation from what I said. Please allow me to try again - the Crimea is part of the Ukraine. As such it is bound by the country's constitution, and it also has certain legal powers. The Ukrainian constitution does not allow the Crimea to make international agreements, nor does it permit the local Crimean government to lawfully request foreign military assistance, or invite in a foreign military. Simply because there has been a change in the government caused by a mass protest in the capital of the country that does not mean that the Ukraine has ceased to exist as a sovereign state and that the constitution may be ignored. The revolt in Kiev caused the President to resign. It did not void the Ukraine as a country. It did not render null the constitution.
Furthermore, any country crossing the internationally recognised borders of another nation without the express permission from that country is a hostile act.
Iron_Captain wrote:No, the unelected Ukrainian parliament changed the constitution undemocratically, thereby making it invalid. They took away the equal rights of ethnic minorities in the Ukraine, which is why this whole crisis started in the first place.
I'd like to see a credible source for that claim please.
Furthermore, even in the event that was the case that still does not permit a local government (such as the one in the Crimea) from inviting in foreign troops. They do not, and never did, have the legal standing to do so. The only part of the constitution that could arguably be rendered invalid are those parts that were amended, not the entire document.
Iron_Captain wrote:Never heard of a peacekeeping force?
The current and previous crisis in the Ukraine is something that is coming from the people. On both sides there are extremist radicals that need to be kept in check. As the Ukrainian government has been (partly) taken over by these radicals, the Ukrainian military and government could no longer be trusted to protect its people. That is why the ethnic Russians in Crimea asked Russia to send soldiers to protect them, so they may keep a referendum on independence from Ukraine without being harassed by the Ukrainian government and radicals, who do not want Crimea to secede, and trust me, the Ukrainians would be willing to use violence to keep Crimea part of Ukraine.
I have. Peacekeeping forces are typically internationally recognised, have a clear legal mandate, very specific rules of engagement, and operate under the auspices of a multi-national body. Russia's actions are in stark contrast to the typical behaviour of a peacekeeping deployment. Furthermore, had Russia been acting in good faith then there would be no need to lie and say that they were holding war games as a cover to hide their mobilization.
Ever hear of the Geneva Convention? Especially the part about a country's military force having to wear an identifiable uniform, complete with unit designations and insignia?
You keep claiming that the people of the Crimea were under threat from Kiev, yet you have manged to provide nothing to substantiate this. Not a single shred of evidence. The only force that has been used has been from Russia by invading another country, and marching on Ukrainian military bases and demanding the surrender of firearms and other equipment. If the local government was concerned then it was possible that they could have asked for international observers from the UN to come and monitor the elections to ensure their fairness. That was not done. Instead they went beyond their lawful powers to invite in a foreign military.
And as far as "trust me, the Ukrainians would be willing to use violence to keep Crimea part of Ukraine", well it isn't as though the Russians don't have previous form in that area either.
Amen to that Automatically Appended Next Post: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26424738
Russia demands surrender of Ukraine's Crimea forces
The Russian military has given Ukrainian forces in Crimea until 03:00 GMT to surrender or face an assault, Ukrainian defence sources have said.
The head of Russia's Black Sea Fleet Aleksander Vitko set the deadline and threatened an attack "across Crimea".
Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov earlier said Russia was responding to "ultra-nationalist threats".
Western powers have condemned Moscow's decision to send troops as a "violation of Ukraine's sovereignty".
Russia is now said to be in de facto control of the Crimea region.
Ukraine has ordered full mobilisation to counter the intervention.
No shots have yet been fired in the region, which has a majority of Russian speakers and a largely pro-Russian local government.
The trouble began last month when pro-Russian President Viktor Yanukovych was ousted following months of street protests.
Russia claims its military is protecting human rights in Crimea, but Kiev, the US and Western Europe have condemned the actions.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/03/03 16:26:05
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/03/03 16:28:40
Subject: Re:Ukraine: Witness the making of a dictatorship, live!
|
 |
Pragmatic Primus Commanding Cult Forces
|
Dreadclaw69 wrote: Ketara wrote:So what you're saying is that if a Government falls apart, and is for all intents and purposes non-existent, nobody who was ruled by that now defunct government is legally allowed to make a new one, even if they're doing it democratically?
By that logic, practically just about every country in existence is illegal if you trace it back far enough.
I am amazed that you managed to get that interpretation from what I said. Please allow me to try again - the Crimea is part of the Ukraine. As such it is bound by the country's constitution, and it also has certain legal powers. The Ukrainian constitution does not allow the Crimea to make international agreements, nor does it permit the local Crimean government to lawfully request foreign military assistance, or invite in a foreign military. Simply because there has been a change in the government caused by a mass protest in the capital of the country that does not mean that the Ukraine has ceased to exist as a sovereign state and that the constitution may be ignored. The revolt in Kiev caused the President to resign. It did not void the Ukraine as a country. It did not render null the constitution.
Furthermore, any country crossing the internationally recognised borders of another nation without the express permission from that country is a hostile act.
Iron_Captain wrote:No, the unelected Ukrainian parliament changed the constitution undemocratically, thereby making it invalid. They took away the equal rights of ethnic minorities in the Ukraine, which is why this whole crisis started in the first place.
I'd like to see a credible source for that claim please.
Furthermore, even in the event that was the case that still does not permit a local government (such as the one in the Crimea) from inviting in foreign troops. They do not, and never did, have the legal standing to do so. The only part of the constitution that could arguably be rendered invalid are those parts that were amended, not the entire document.
It seems you fail to understand that the Crimean government no longer recognizes the Ukrainian constitution. They are trying to break away from the Ukraine, setting up their own armed forces and are openly rebelling against the Ukraine. I really don't think it matters anymore what the constitution says or not at this point. According to the Syrian constitution, the rebels there are also operating illegaly, yet no one in the West complained about that!
To see any sources, all you have to do is to follow the news, or speak to the people involved in it. It is all over the news, there is plenty of it in Russian media( http://rt.com/news/minority-language-law-ukraine-035/), but Western media has reported on it as well. The Crimean population is not revolting without reasons.
Dreadclaw69 wrote:You keep claiming that the people of the Crimea were under threat from Kiev, yet you have manged to provide nothing to substantiate this. Not a single shred of evidence. The only force that has been used has been from Russia by invading another country, and marching on Ukrainian military bases and demanding the surrender of firearms and other equipment. If the local government was concerned then it was possible that they could have asked for international observers from the UN to come and monitor the elections to ensure their fairness. That was not done. Instead they went beyond their lawful powers to invite in a foreign military.
Again, you fail to see the reasons why the Crimean people are revolting. I have posted plenty of news reports on this already, maybe you should read them.
And really, don't start about 'lawful powers'. There is no law in Ukraine anymore since the opposition went beyond its lawful powers to stage a coup and depose the legal president. Until there have been new, fair elections, Yanukovich is still the only legal president of the Ukraine.
|
Error 404: Interesting signature not found
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/03/03 16:42:47
Subject: Re:Ukraine: Witness the making of a dictatorship, live!
|
 |
Blood Angel Captain Wracked with Visions
|
Iron_Captain wrote:It seems you fail to understand that the Crimean government no longer recognizes the Ukrainian constitution. They are trying to break away from the Ukraine, setting up their own armed forces and are openly rebelling against the Ukraine. I really don't think it matters anymore what the constitution says or not at this point. According to the Syrian constitution, the rebels there are also operating illegaly, yet no one in the West complained about that!
To see any sources, all you have to do is to follow the news, or speak to the people involved in it. It is all over the news, there is plenty of it in Russian media( http://rt.com/news/minority-language-law-ukraine-035/), but Western media has reported on it as well. The Crimean population is not revolting without reasons.
I'm sorry, that same Russian media that is ranked 148 out of 179 countries for freedom of the press?
So no one in the West complained about the rebels? Yeah, that is what is otherwise known as a factually incorrect statement. But, if you would like to insist upon forging a false comparison between unrest in a dictatorship known for it's brutality which takes on a religious dimension, and what happened in the Ukraine then any sensible discussion is going to prove difficult. Unless of course you just want to fall back on the narrative that Russia = good, West = bad.
And you fail to understand that even if they wish to break away that Russian involvement in the region (again, where no threat to people in Crimea has been shown) is an invasion of a sovereign country. There are already mechanisms in place for Crimea to attempt to sever themselves from the rest of the Ukraine. Military occupation by a foreign power is not a legitimate method.
Iron_Captain wrote:Again, you fail to see the reasons why the Crimean people are revolting. I have posted plenty of news reports on this already, maybe you should read them.
And really, don't start about 'lawful powers'. There is no law in Ukraine anymore since the opposition went beyond its lawful powers to stage a coup and depose the legal president. Until there have been new, fair elections, Yanukovich is still the only legal president of the Ukraine.
The rule of law still exists, whether domestic or international, and whether you like it or not. Even in the event that Yanukovich is the president guess what? That still did not give the Crimea the right to invite in a foreign military. Let there be elections held, let there be a referendum for the Crimea to decide which direction it goes. But not under foreign military occupation.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/03/03 16:49:54
Subject: Re:Ukraine: Witness the making of a dictatorship, live!
|
 |
Morphing Obliterator
|
Dreadclaw69 wrote:The rule of law still exists, whether domestic or international, and whether you like it or not. Even in the event that Yanukovich is the president guess what? That still did not give the Crimea the right to invite in a foreign military. Let there be elections held, let there be a referendum for the Crimea to decide which direction it goes. But not under foreign military occupation.
But according to the law, Yanukovich is still the president, and the "government" in Kiev is illegal. Why are you so hung up about this particular point of the law?
|
See, you're trying to use people logic. DM uses Mandelogic, which we've established has 2+2=quack. - Aerethan
Putin.....would make a Vulcan Intelligence officer cry. - Jihadin
AFAIK, there is only one world, and it is the real world. - Iron_Captain
DakkaRank Comment: I sound like a Power Ranger.
TFOL and proud. Also a Forge World Fan.
I should really paint some of my models instead of browsing forums. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/03/03 16:50:50
Subject: Re:Ukraine: Witness the making of a dictatorship, live!
|
 |
Last Remaining Whole C'Tan
|
Dreadclaw69 wrote:I'm sorry, that same Russian media that is ranked 148 out of 179 countries for freedom of the press?
.... how is North Korea not 179, as a brief tangent?
|
lord_blackfang wrote:Respect to the guy who subscribed just to post a massive ASCII dong in the chat and immediately get banned.
Flinty wrote:The benefit of slate is that its.actually a.rock with rock like properties. The downside is that it's a rock |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/03/03 16:51:34
Subject: Re:Ukraine: Witness the making of a dictatorship, live!
|
 |
Morphing Obliterator
|
Ouze wrote: Dreadclaw69 wrote:I'm sorry, that same Russian media that is ranked 148 out of 179 countries for freedom of the press?
.... how is North Korea not 179, as a brief tangent?
Where can I find this list?
|
See, you're trying to use people logic. DM uses Mandelogic, which we've established has 2+2=quack. - Aerethan
Putin.....would make a Vulcan Intelligence officer cry. - Jihadin
AFAIK, there is only one world, and it is the real world. - Iron_Captain
DakkaRank Comment: I sound like a Power Ranger.
TFOL and proud. Also a Forge World Fan.
I should really paint some of my models instead of browsing forums. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/03/03 16:56:13
Subject: Re:Ukraine: Witness the making of a dictatorship, live!
|
 |
Blood Angel Captain Wracked with Visions
|
-Shrike- wrote: Dreadclaw69 wrote:The rule of law still exists, whether domestic or international, and whether you like it or not. Even in the event that Yanukovich is the president guess what? That still did not give the Crimea the right to invite in a foreign military. Let there be elections held, let there be a referendum for the Crimea to decide which direction it goes. But not under foreign military occupation.
But according to the law, Yanukovich is still the president, and the "government" in Kiev is illegal. Why are you so hung up about this particular point of the law?
Which particular point? Regardless of who the current government is Russia cannot be invited in by Crimea. No matter how you cut it Russia has invaded a foreign country
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/03/03 16:56:56
Subject: Re:Ukraine: Witness the making of a dictatorship, live!
|
 |
[SWAP SHOP MOD]
Killer Klaivex
|
Dreadclaw69 wrote: Ketara wrote:So what you're saying is that if a Government falls apart, and is for all intents and purposes non-existent, nobody who was ruled by that now defunct government is legally allowed to make a new one, even if they're doing it democratically?
By that logic, practically just about every country in existence is illegal if you trace it back far enough.
I am amazed that you managed to get that interpretation from what I said. Please allow me to try again - the Crimea is part of the Ukraine.
Okay.
As such it is bound by the country's constitution, and it also has certain legal powers.
With you so far.
The Ukrainian constitution does not allow the Crimea to make international agreements, nor does it permit the local Crimean government to lawfully request foreign military assistance, or invite in a foreign military.
Yup, we're still in line with my initial interpretation of your statement above. You claim that the Crimean Government does not legally have the right to make agreements with anyone at any time, because that's not within the framework of the constitution. Fair enough, but then we must apply that logic consistently across the board. Let's see where it goes.
Simply because there has been a change in the government caused by a mass protest in the capital of the country that does not mean that the Ukraine has ceased to exist as a sovereign state and that the constitution may be ignored. The revolt in Kiev caused the President to resign. It did not void the Ukraine as a country. It did not render null the constitution.
See, now this is where you became inaccurate. There hasn't been a 'change in Government'. The previous Government has been overthrown. The President has not resigned. The President is still legally the President. But he's now a President in absentia, having fled in fear of his life. The President in question was democratically elected for a term of years. He has not been democratically un-elected in any way, shape or form within the framework of the Constitution. And likewise, the current administration in Kiev is not the Government within the Constitution either, having not been elected or brought to power in the process outlined within the Constitution.
In other words, the Government which was legally elected according to the constitution is fled, or dead for the majority part. The current Ukrainian administration is itself illegal under the constitution.
So to reiterate my initial point in chunks:- 'So what you're saying is if a Government falls apart and is for all intents and purposes non-existent',
This is established. The legitimate Ukrainian Government has fallen apart, and no replacement has occurred according to the Ukrainian Constitution. Likewise, any changes made by the new Ukrainian administration to amend the Constitution to legitimise themselves are automatically illegal under the Constitution, because they are not the democratically elected Ukrainian Government. Therefore they do not have the legal power to amend the Constitution, anymore so than the Crimean Government does, or to declare war, or to do many things.
nobody who was ruled by that now defunct government is legally allowed to make a new one, even if they're doing it democratically?
This was your initial point and is technically correct. The Crimean Government does not legally have the right to make their own independent administration, democratically elected or otherwise. Nobody under the previous Constitution has that right except the legitimate elected Government of Ukraine, who as we have already seen, are dead and fled.
But this logic also excludes the new Kiev administration from
a) Being the Ukrainian Government,
b) Modifying the Constitution to make themselves into the Ukrainian Government, or
c) having any legal authority or control over any kind of Crimean Government, be it the legal autonomous body, or the illegal independent variety.
So In whole, you are saying that:- if a Government falls apart, and is for all intents and purposes non-existent, nobody who was ruled by that now defunct government is legally allowed to make a new one, even if they're doing it democratically?
I don't have a problem with the logic applied to declare the Crimean independent administration illegal, but it must then be correspondingly logically concluded using the exact same methods that neither the Kiev administration, or more or less any Government which had its roots in a coup or civil war is ever legal, and neither are it's descendants. Which is more or less every country in existence, because rarely are regime changes 'legal'.
|
This message was edited 7 times. Last update was at 2014/03/03 17:04:00
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/03/03 16:59:27
Subject: Re:Ukraine: Witness the making of a dictatorship, live!
|
 |
Pragmatic Primus Commanding Cult Forces
|
Dreadclaw69 wrote: Iron_Captain wrote:It seems you fail to understand that the Crimean government no longer recognizes the Ukrainian constitution. They are trying to break away from the Ukraine, setting up their own armed forces and are openly rebelling against the Ukraine. I really don't think it matters anymore what the constitution says or not at this point. According to the Syrian constitution, the rebels there are also operating illegaly, yet no one in the West complained about that!
To see any sources, all you have to do is to follow the news, or speak to the people involved in it. It is all over the news, there is plenty of it in Russian media( http://rt.com/news/minority-language-law-ukraine-035/), but Western media has reported on it as well. The Crimean population is not revolting without reasons.
I'm sorry, that same Russian media that is ranked 148 out of 179 countries for freedom of the press?
So that automatically makes everything they say invalid? Your reasoning seems very biased. Do you think the Western media is unbiased in this? You should read both before making up your opinion.
Dreadclaw69 wrote: Iron_Captain wrote:Again, you fail to see the reasons why the Crimean people are revolting. I have posted plenty of news reports on this already, maybe you should read them.
And really, don't start about 'lawful powers'. There is no law in Ukraine anymore since the opposition went beyond its lawful powers to stage a coup and depose the legal president. Until there have been new, fair elections, Yanukovich is still the only legal president of the Ukraine.
The rule of law still exists, whether domestic or international, and whether you like it or not. Even in the event that Yanukovich is the president guess what? That still did not give the Crimea the right to invite in a foreign military. Let there be elections held, let there be a referendum for the Crimea to decide which direction it goes. But not under foreign military occupation.
There will be a referendum, and the only way that is possible is with Russian soldiers protecting the Crimea. Haven't you heard the government of Kiev? They have already stated multiple times that they will never allow Crimea to become independent. Do you really think they would've just let the Crimeans hold a referendum? Do you actually understand what kind of people are in power in Kiev now? Do you know anything about the centuries of history behind this conflict? Your statements really make it sound like you don't, and they do sound rather hypocritical coming from an American.
In the eyes of Russia and the majority of Crimeans, there is no Ukrainian government anymore.
So the Crimean government, which is at the moment the only legal government in the Crimea has called for Russian assistance to protect them from the radicals in Kiev, and they were in their full right to do so.
Again, there is no need for war or agressive actions here, the Russians are only deployed to give the Crimeans a chance to hold their referendum.
|
Error 404: Interesting signature not found
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/03/03 17:07:16
Subject: Ukraine: Witness the making of a dictatorship, live!
|
 |
Fixture of Dakka
|
Are the following two points true?
1. The Ukrainian parliament did not follow the constitutional procedure for impeachment of the president.
2. The interim government had announced an abolition of the existing minority language law. Fortunately, those plans are now scrapped, but the damage is already done in the eyes of the portion of the population that prefers to speak Russian.
These may seem like minor things but both are another splash of gasoline on this growing fire.
|
The secret to painting a really big army is to keep at it. You can't reach your destination if you never take any steps.
I build IG...lots and lots of IG. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/03/03 17:11:46
Subject: Re:Ukraine: Witness the making of a dictatorship, live!
|
 |
[SWAP SHOP MOD]
Killer Klaivex
|
Putin's played a very canny game here. Crimea is his, to absorb or set up independently as a puppet satellite state as he likes. That's more or less a foregone conclusion now.
What's interesting, is that he's clearly waiting to see the international and Ukrainian response before taking it any further. He's taking extremely cautious steps, never moving until he's certain that it's the right one. He's already laid the groundwork to absorb Eastern Ukraine if he wants to. He's had the Russian Parliament make a blanket statement about his ability to interfere in Ukraine in general, and all of the comments about Russian intimidation/suppression have always included the phrase 'Eastern Ukraine' as well as Crimea.
He's clearly consolidating in Crimea, and waiting to see if the new Ukrainian administration can muster any kind of meaningful response. If so, he'll simply stay where he is, and be content with his gains.
From the BBC:-
Russian PM Dmitry Medvedev has signed off a project to build a bridge linking the Ukrainian town of Kerch in Crimea to Russia. The bridge would cross the Strait of Kerch, and give Russia's southern Krasnodar region a direct link to Crimea, bypassing the rest of Ukraine. Kiev says the Russian military is currently amassing armoured vehicles across the strait. The bridge has been under discussion for a decade, and was agreed by the deposed President, Viktor Yanukovych.
If, on the other hand, the Ukrainian Administration fails to be able to mobilise any kind of meaningful military response, he'll disperse fake rioters across Eastern Ukraine again, begin negotiations with the most Pro-Russian groups, and simply stroll across the border to occupy Donetsk and Kharkiv. And conveniently enough, the most industrial and productive part of Ukraine.
Bravo Mr Putin. Quite the master stroke. *claps slowly*
JB wrote:Are the following two points true?
1. The Ukrainian parliament did not follow the constitutional procedure for impeachment of the president.
2. The interim government had announced an abolition of the existing minority language law. Fortunately, those plans are now scrapped, but the damage is already done in the eyes of the portion of the population that prefers to speak Russian.
These may seem like minor things but both are another splash of gasoline on this growing fire.
The current administration voted to impeach him, but not being the legally elected Government/Parliament of Ukraine, do not technically have that power any more than I do. To head off the protests, yes, some of the current Parliament were legally elected to the previous Parliament, but that doesn't give them the numbers or right to depose the President, anymore than taking thirty MP's here in the UK and having them vote gives them the legal right to remove the Prime Minister. A majority and due procedure is required under both constitutions.
And yes, the new Kiev administration did also announce the abolition of the use of Russian as an official language very quickly after rising to their current position.
|
This message was edited 5 times. Last update was at 2014/03/03 17:17:31
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/03/03 17:15:05
Subject: Ukraine: Witness the making of a dictatorship, live!
|
 |
Morphing Obliterator
|
JB wrote:Are the following two points true?
1. The Ukrainian parliament did not follow the constitutional procedure for impeachment of the president.
2. The interim government had announced an abolition of the existing minority language law. Fortunately, those plans are now scrapped, but the damage is already done in the eyes of the portion of the population that prefers to speak Russian.
These may seem like minor things but both are another splash of gasoline on this growing fire.
To the best of my knowledge, both of these points are correct, which as you note, causes a slight problem. Especially No. 2, as that gave the impression of quelling the (ethnic) Russians who opposed the new regime.
|
See, you're trying to use people logic. DM uses Mandelogic, which we've established has 2+2=quack. - Aerethan
Putin.....would make a Vulcan Intelligence officer cry. - Jihadin
AFAIK, there is only one world, and it is the real world. - Iron_Captain
DakkaRank Comment: I sound like a Power Ranger.
TFOL and proud. Also a Forge World Fan.
I should really paint some of my models instead of browsing forums. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/03/03 17:16:53
Subject: Re:Ukraine: Witness the making of a dictatorship, live!
|
 |
Blood Angel Captain Wracked with Visions
|
Ketara wrote:See, now this is where you became inaccurate. There hasn't been a 'change in Government'. The previous Government has been overthrown. The President has not resigned. The President is still legally the President. But he's now a President in absentia, having fled in fear of his life. The President in question was democratically elected for a term of years. He has not been democratically un-elected in any way, shape or form within the framework of the Constitution. And likewise, the current administration in Kiev is not the Government within the Constitution either, having not been elected or brought to power in the process outlined within the Constitution.
In other words, the Government which was legally elected according to the constitution is fled, or dead for the majority part. The current Ukrainian administration is itself illegal under the constitution.
So to reiterate my initial point in chunks:- 'So what you're saying is if a Government falls apart and is for all intents and purposes non-existent',
This is established. The legitimate Ukrainian Government has fallen apart, and no replacement has occurred according to the Ukrainian Constitution. Likewise, any changes made by the new Ukrainian administration to amend the Constitution to legitimise themselves are automatically illegal under the Constitution, because they are not the democratically elected Ukrainian Government. Therefore they do not have the legal power to amend the Constitution, anymore so than the Crimean Government does, or to declare war, or to do many things.
So you're objecting to my phrasing "change in government"? Even though it does not speak to the legality or otherwise of those claiming to be in power in Kiev?
Ketara wrote:This was your initial point and is technically correct. The Crimean Government does not legally have the right to make their own independent administration, democratically elected or otherwise. Nobody under the previous Constitution has that right except the legitimate elected Government of Ukraine, who as we have already seen, are dead and fled.
But this logic also excludes the new Kiev administration from
a) Being the Ukrainian Government,
b) Modifying the Constitution to make themselves into the Ukrainian Government, or
c) having any legal authority or control over any kind of Crimean Government, be it the legal autonomous body, or the illegal independent variety.
I'll take things that I never claimed for $1000 Alex.
Ketara wrote:I don't have a problem with the logic applied to declare the Crimean independent administration illegal, but it must then be correspondingly logically concluded using the exact same methods that neither the Kiev administration, or more or less any Government which had its roots in a coup or civil war is ever legal, and neither are it's descendants. Which is more or less every country in existence, because rarely are regime changes 'legal'.
That is a wonderful leap of logic that in no way bears any relation to my argument.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/03/03 17:17:32
Subject: Ukraine: Witness the making of a dictatorship, live!
|
 |
Lord Commander in a Plush Chair
|
Iron_Captain wrote:Again, there is no need for war or agressive actions here, the Russians are only deployed to give the Crimeans a chance to hold their referendum.
That'll be why Russia has told Ukraine forces in Crimea to surrender or face attack then. The Ukraine forces being the ones in their own country don't forget. Russia are clearly taking aggressive action here in someone else's country. Whether part of that country sympathises with Russia or not, the Ukrainian troops there are still on their own soil.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/03/03 17:18:32
Subject: Re:Ukraine: Witness the making of a dictatorship, live!
|
 |
5th God of Chaos! (Ho-hum)
Curb stomping in the Eye of Terror!
|
Ruh oh...
http://news.sky.com/story/1220272/ukraine-russia-delivers-assault-storm-deadline
The ultimatum, from the commander of Russia’s Black Sea Fleet Alexander Vitko, has a base in Crimea where Russian forces are now in control.
According to the agency, it reads: “If they do not surrender before 5am (3am GMT) tomorrow, a real assault will be started against units and divisions of the armed forces across Crimea.”
It’s difficult to see how this ends well.
|
Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/03/03 17:19:17
Subject: Re:Ukraine: Witness the making of a dictatorship, live!
|
 |
[SWAP SHOP MOD]
Killer Klaivex
|
The inaccurate statement I actually took issue with.
Dreadclaw69 wrote:
That is a wonderful leap of logic that in no way bears any relation to my argument.
Then quite frankly, you need to lay out your 'argument' better. All I did was take your exact statements and logic with regards to the potential legality of an independent Crimean Government, and applied them across the spectrum.
|
This message was edited 6 times. Last update was at 2014/03/03 17:24:47
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/03/03 17:24:48
Subject: Ukraine: Witness the making of a dictatorship, live!
|
 |
Fixture of Dakka
|
If Russian military personnel or Crimean Russian speaking "militia" attack Ukranian military personnel, Putin loses his legal advantage and cover for this operation.
I really hope there is no escalation from rhetoric and chessboard moves towards bloodshed.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/03/03 17:25:02
The secret to painting a really big army is to keep at it. You can't reach your destination if you never take any steps.
I build IG...lots and lots of IG. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/03/03 17:28:29
Subject: Re:Ukraine: Witness the making of a dictatorship, live!
|
 |
Blood Angel Captain Wracked with Visions
|
Iron_Captain wrote:So that automatically makes everything they say invalid? Your reasoning seems very biased. Do you think the Western media is unbiased in this? You should read both before making up your opinion.
Please point out where I claimed that Western media is unbiased, and that everything from the Russian media is "invalid". When you find that I actually didn't say those things maybe you can stop tilting at strawmen and address what I actually said
Iron_Captain wrote:There will be a referendum, and the only way that is possible is with Russian soldiers protecting the Crimea. Haven't you heard the government of Kiev? They have already stated multiple times that they will never allow Crimea to become independent. Do you really think they would've just let the Crimeans hold a referendum? Do you actually understand what kind of people are in power in Kiev now? Do you know anything about the centuries of history behind this conflict? Your statements really make it sound like you don't, and they do sound rather hypocritical coming from an American.
In the eyes of Russia and the majority of Crimeans, there is no Ukrainian government anymore.
So the Crimean government, which is at the moment the only legal government in the Crimea has called for Russian assistance to protect them from the radicals in Kiev, and they were in their full right to do so.
Again, there is no need for war or agressive actions here, the Russians are only deployed to give the Crimeans a chance to hold their referendum.
There is so much spin in that post I'm surprised that you are not dizzy  By the way, I'm Irish, not American. I grew up in the North. I lived through the Troubles, I have see terrorism, and foreign soldiers on the streets of my country.
You keep claiming that the Russians are peacekeepers. I have already addressed this point in my last post. Simply because you choose to ignore it and not address it does not negate it. The Russians have absolutely no legitimate mandate to be in the Ukraine. They have no right to breach the Geneva Convention regarding clearly designated military personnel. Given their obvious bias and strategic interests in the region the Russians are perhaps the last military who should be deployed solo in this area for any supposed "peacekeeping" operation.
You keep claiming that the Crimea has the right to invite in the Russians. Again, I'll make this simple. They do not. Regardless who is in power in the Ukraine they are not able to invite in a foreign occupier.
Even in the event that there is no Ukrainian government guess what? The Crimea still cannot invite the Russians in.
You claim that there is no need for aggressive actions, it is too late. The second that Russian military boots entered another country that was an aggressive action. Invading another country is typically not a friendly gesture.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/03/03 17:29:28
Subject: Re:Ukraine: Witness the making of a dictatorship, live!
|
 |
5th God of Chaos! (Yea'rly!)
The Great State of Texas
|
-Shrike- wrote: Dreadclaw69 wrote:The rule of law still exists, whether domestic or international, and whether you like it or not. Even in the event that Yanukovich is the president guess what? That still did not give the Crimea the right to invite in a foreign military. Let there be elections held, let there be a referendum for the Crimea to decide which direction it goes. But not under foreign military occupation.
But according to the law, Yanukovich is still the president, and the "government" in Kiev is illegal. Why are you so hung up about this particular point of the law?
Wait, Wierd Al Yankovich is President. That makes so much sense... Automatically Appended Next Post: JB wrote:If Russian military personnel or Crimean Russian speaking "militia" attack Ukranian military personnel, Putin loses his legal advantage and cover for this operation.
I really hope there is no escalation from rhetoric and chessboard moves towards bloodshed.
I don't think they're concerned about that.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/03/03 17:30:27
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/03/03 17:30:52
Subject: Re:Ukraine: Witness the making of a dictatorship, live!
|
 |
[SWAP SHOP MOD]
Killer Klaivex
|
Dreadclaw69 wrote:The Russians have absolutely no legitimate mandate to be in the Ukraine. They have no right to breach the Geneva Convention regarding clearly designated military personnel.
Actually, under the previous agreement with the Ukrainian Government with regards to their bases on the Black Sea, they are legally permitted to move military personnel around the Crimean region. They simply have to notify the legally elected Government of their actions, and give them the opportunity to deny them the right to do so.
Therefore technically, as long as they send Yanukovych a text message outlining what they're doing when they do it, they're actually within the letter of the law.
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/03/03 17:32:02
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/03/03 17:32:48
Subject: Ukraine: Witness the making of a dictatorship, live!
|
 |
Lieutenant Colonel
|
what russia is doing in crimea is no different then the states in iraq, afghanistan, or any of the multitudes of countries they have invaded/liberated/whatever you want to call it, over the past 60 years or so...
the only real difference is that crimea actually asked the ruskies to come over,
it is the height of hypocrisy to see the states condemning russia for putting boots on foreign soil for less then legitimate reasons.
not to mention, ukraine is basically being run by a group of rebels, of which ~ half are neo nazis, so for them to call crimea's call for russias help "illegitimate" is the kettle calling the pot black.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/03/03 17:33:01
Subject: Re:Ukraine: Witness the making of a dictatorship, live!
|
 |
Blood Angel Captain Wracked with Visions
|
Ketara wrote:Then quite frankly, you need to lay out your 'argument' better. All I did was take your exact statements and logic with regards to the potential legality of an independent Crimean Government, and applied them across the spectrum.
I am responsible for what I say. You are responsible for what you understand. You took my statements on a very specific situation, and tried to extrapolate them on a much wider and unintended scale thus distorting what was being said.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/03/03 17:34:39
Subject: Re:Ukraine: Witness the making of a dictatorship, live!
|
 |
[SWAP SHOP MOD]
Killer Klaivex
|
Dreadclaw69 wrote:
I am responsible for what I say. You are responsible for what you understand. You took my statements on a very specific situation, and tried to extrapolate them on a much wider and unintended scale thus distorting what was being said.
I didn't try, I succeeded. If you state that 1+1=2, don't get upset when people then take that logic and say that if 1+1=2, then 2+2=4.
Regardless, my point was to illustrate how daft that set of logical principles must be. Using your logic, it can easily be asserted that the Crimean Government cannot do many things, in that you were correct. But that same logic leads to the point of absurdity when applied elsewhere and on a larger scale. Therefore it is clearly not a particularly good set of logical principles to apply to these sorts of situations.
|
This message was edited 5 times. Last update was at 2014/03/03 17:38:48
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/03/03 17:38:03
Subject: Re:Ukraine: Witness the making of a dictatorship, live!
|
 |
Blood Angel Captain Wracked with Visions
|
Ketara wrote:Actually, under the previous agreement with the Ukrainian Government with regards to their bases on the Black Sea, they are legally permitted to move military personnel around the Crimean region. They simply have to notify the legally elected Government of their actions, and give them the opportunity to deny them the right to do so.
Therefore technically, as long as they send Yanukovych a text message outlining what they're doing when they do it, they're actually within the letter of the law.
Your only strategy here seems to be reducing everything to absurdity. If you are trying to make some correlation with the movement of military personnel around the Crimea (perfectly reasonable given the need to transfer troops between military bases) and an actual military invasion, and deployment of troops then your logic needs significant work.
It would be like claiming that the United States is at liberty to occupy Germany and Britain to facilitate the transfer of military personnel between their military installations in each country.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/03/03 17:41:09
Subject: Re:Ukraine: Witness the making of a dictatorship, live!
|
 |
[SWAP SHOP MOD]
Killer Klaivex
|
Dreadclaw69 wrote: Ketara wrote:Actually, under the previous agreement with the Ukrainian Government with regards to their bases on the Black Sea, they are legally permitted to move military personnel around the Crimean region. They simply have to notify the legally elected Government of their actions, and give them the opportunity to deny them the right to do so.
Therefore technically, as long as they send Yanukovych a text message outlining what they're doing when they do it, they're actually within the letter of the law.
Your only strategy here seems to be reducing everything to absurdity. If you are trying to make some correlation with the movement of military personnel around the Crimea (perfectly reasonable given the need to transfer troops between military bases) and an actual military invasion, and deployment of troops then your logic needs significant work.
You might not like the logic, but feel free to disprove it. Considering that:-
a) Russian Personnel are permitted to transfer between institutions under an agreement with the Ukrainian Government with a specific clause on notifications, and
b) no time limit or route is included within that statement.
Russia can technically move as many troops around the streets of the Crimea as they like, where they like, when they like. All they need to do is tell Yanukovych each time, give him the opportunity to object, and cease troop movements if he does so.
The funny thing is that I'm professionally admiring Putin's actions here. I don't agree with what he's doing. I'm just correcting all the inaccurate statements being made.
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/03/03 17:42:53
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/03/03 17:41:46
Subject: Re:Ukraine: Witness the making of a dictatorship, live!
|
 |
Blood Angel Captain Wracked with Visions
|
Ketara wrote:I didn't try, I succeeded. If you state that 1+1=2, don't get upset when people then take that logic and say that is 1+1=2, then 2+2=4.
Regardless, my point was to illustrate how daft that set of logical principles must be. Using your logic, it can easily be asserted that the Crimean Government cannot do many things, in that you were correct. But that same logic leads to the point of absurdity when applied elsewhere and on a larger scale. Therefore it is clearly not a particularly good set of logical principles to apply to these sorts of situations.
Good thing that I was talking specifically about the situation in the Ukraine then, and not the wider scale.
So your contribution to this discussion is to acknowledge the point being made is accurate in the circumstances being discussed, then taking that point and stretching it long past what was clearly intended (which you yourself acknowledge). Logic would tell you that what you are doing is clearly running contrary to what was intended. Unless your intention is to distract from the discussion.
If that was the case then I think I can safely ignore anything else you have to say on the matter.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/03/03 17:44:17
Subject: Re:Ukraine: Witness the making of a dictatorship, live!
|
 |
[SWAP SHOP MOD]
Killer Klaivex
|
Dreadclaw69 wrote: Ketara wrote:I didn't try, I succeeded. If you state that 1+1=2, don't get upset when people then take that logic and say that is 1+1=2, then 2+2=4.
Regardless, my point was to illustrate how daft that set of logical principles must be. Using your logic, it can easily be asserted that the Crimean Government cannot do many things, in that you were correct. But that same logic leads to the point of absurdity when applied elsewhere and on a larger scale. Therefore it is clearly not a particularly good set of logical principles to apply to these sorts of situations.
Good thing that I was talking specifically about the situation in the Ukraine then, and not the wider scale.
.
Indeed. And you'll note that except for one very small clause right at the end, I specifically only talked about the Ukraine. Feel free to disregard the comment about all Government's more or less in existence being illegal, that was simply applying the brush as broad as it goes. But the validity of my applying that same logic to the Kiev administration still stands, and is highly relevant.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/03/03 17:44:48
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/03/03 17:44:26
Subject: Re:Ukraine: Witness the making of a dictatorship, live!
|
 |
Blood Angel Captain Wracked with Visions
|
I'll be quite blunt here, your efforts at being contrary for the sake of being contrary are growing pretty tiresome.
Ketara wrote:You might not like the logic, but feel free to disprove it. Considering that:-
a) Russian Personnel are permitted to transfer between institutions under an agreement with the Ukrainian Government with a specific clause on notifications, and
b) no time limit or route is included within that statement.
Russia can technically move as many troops around the streets of the Crimea as they like, where they like, when they like. All they need to do is tell Yanukovych each time, give him the opportunity to object, and cease troop movementsif he does so.
I'd say that this is farcical but that does not do it justice in any manner, especially not of your idea of logic is to willingly conflate legitimate movement of troops between military bases and marching troops across a border.
Could you please post the specific text of this status of force agreement that exists between the Ukraine and Russia?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ketara wrote:Indeed. And you'll note that except for one very small clause right at the end, I specifically only talked about the Ukraine. Feel free to disregard the comment about all Government's more or less in existence being illegal, that was simply applying the brush as broad as it goes. But the validity of my applying that same logic to the Kiev administration still stands, and is highly relevant.
You mean that one clause where you attempted to expand my specific comments to Ukraine across the globe?
I'll make this simple. Ignoring your stretching of the status of force agreement past breaking point does the Crimea (not Ukraine, I am being very specific here) have the legal right to invite in a foreign military power? Yes or no.
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/03/03 17:50:34
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/03/03 17:48:40
Subject: Ukraine: Witness the making of a dictatorship, live!
|
 |
Pragmatic Primus Commanding Cult Forces
|
Howard A Treesong wrote: Iron_Captain wrote:Again, there is no need for war or agressive actions here, the Russians are only deployed to give the Crimeans a chance to hold their referendum.
That'll be why Russia has told Ukraine forces in Crimea to surrender or face attack then. The Ukraine forces being the ones in their own country don't forget. Russia are clearly taking aggressive action here in someone else's country. Whether part of that country sympathises with Russia or not, the Ukrainian troops there are still on their own soil.
According to the Russians, they never presented an ultimatum: http://rt.com/news/russia-dismiss-ultimatum-ukraine-644/
|
Error 404: Interesting signature not found
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/03/03 17:49:44
Subject: Ukraine: Witness the making of a dictatorship, live!
|
 |
5th God of Chaos! (Ho-hum)
Curb stomping in the Eye of Terror!
|
easysauce wrote:
what russia is doing in crimea is no different then the states in iraq, afghanistan, or any of the multitudes of countries they have invaded/liberated/whatever you want to call it, over the past 60 years or so...
the only real difference is that crimea actually asked the ruskies to come over,
it is the height of hypocrisy to see the states condemning russia for putting boots on foreign soil for less then legitimate reasons.
not to mention, ukraine is basically being run by a group of rebels, of which ~ half are neo nazis, so for them to call crimea's call for russias help "illegitimate" is the kettle calling the pot black.
Huh?
So... did Russia get UN approval yet?
BTW: UN authorized Iraq war. Afganistan war was due to 9/11.
|
Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!
|
|
 |
 |
|
|