So you are saying that Russia could have invaded Ukraine a month or so after it became independent, and that would be okay?
Am I to understand that you mean Independence is only a right if you have it for some particular amount of time?
No, these items are the misapplication of the 14th Amendment, and if the 14th didn't exist, they would have be created by some other judicial fiat.
Have you read the 14th amendment? The first part is mostly okay, though it does have some serious problems too, but the remaining portion is utterly mucked up. It pretty much establishes the "incorporation doctrine" and leaves it up to the courts to define anything any which way they wish to define it.
It transfers far too much power to the Federal courts, and it creates the legal underpinnings for their abuse of original intent.
The intent of the 14th may be laudable, but the way it is written just begs for abuse by the all powerful Federal authorities.
To common sense people, the 14th never meant to create any of that crap, but unfortunately the Federal courts disagree.
No, I am saying that the situation is different. Ukraine and breakaway republics are more comparable to Northern and Southern states than Russia and Ukraine. You didn’t even address that point.
Given that Russia wants to prevent Ukraine from entering NATO, the situation is more analogous to the US invading Cuba under the Monroe Doctrine.
The 14th amendment, like the 2nd amendment, has been perverted to mean something different than what the authors intended. You can argue if it is poorly written, but it doesn’t change the original intent.