If you want to be on this right wing, monarchy, paleolibertarianism and nationalism ping list, but are not, please let me know. If you are on it and want to be off, also let me know. This ping list is not used for Catholic-Protestant debates.
While this explains the glaring and obvious illegality of Russia’s theft of Crimea, it won’t stop the bootlickers on this forum from praising it
Putin memo to Commission: Go...pound...sand.
Poor NWO. The march of progress falters, and Occupy Terra gets a tiny eviction notice.
Is the Venice Commission another Soros funded Globalist front group that promotes “democracy” and “human rights”? If they are they can take their report and stick in their ear.
I can have my own Commission and or Council and can issue my own conclusion.
Can’t see why anyone would pay any attention to it...
Whoa, stop right there... What reason could there be to think that the constitution of the Ukraine means anything after the elected government of the Ukraine has been overthrown by a gang of Nazis??
Pooty-poots army of ass-kissers took 10 minutes and 12 seconds to arrive. I guess the FSB monitors for FR were between 2nd and 3rd shift-change at 10:30 PM local time.
As Con Clausewitz says, war is an extention of politics. Dirty political tactica and thug mentality always follows with a barrel to the head at the poll booth.
A mob overthrew the Ukraine’s government which meant Crimea was no longer part of an existing national government.
And Putin will care about some EU commission’s opinion, why?
Would the EU have stepped up and admitted that they considered themselves to be "stakeholders"?
I seriously doubt you can find a loophole in the Ukrainian Constitution that would permit the referendum, I'd be very surprised if you could. OTHO, I seriously doubt the Crimea considered themselves to be limited by the Ukrainian Constitution as opposed to their own definition of "autonomy". A definition they obviously think includes the right to break away from the Ukraine.
It's a case of theory vs. "Facts on the Ground" as the saying now goes. Back in my day, it was theory vs. who actually controlled the countryside when there wasn't a US grunt standing on it and in spite of the briefings in Saigon, we all knew the SVN government rarely controlled the ground a US grunt wasn't at least within sight of.
The Ukraine wasn't prepared to deal with even a minor guerrilla war in the Crimea even if Russia were only matching the EU small arms supplies to the Ukraine bullet for bullet. Given that obvious weakness, once nationalists in the Ukraine got vocal, IMHO, it was inevitable the crowd who want to be part of Russia rather than the Ukraine were going to become very active. Anything, and I mean anything, that Russia felt would threaten security around their bases in the Crimea was going to trigger exactly what we've seen.
If the EU had tried to stop the mass demonstrations and get the groups "to the table" to negotiate it wouldn't have been so painfully obvious that the EU was going to do whatever they had to do in order to keep the Ukraine from not doing what the EU wanted done. That may not have changed a thing but it at least wouldn't have been rubbing Russia's nose in the fact that the EU didn't mind supporting an overthrow of the government if that's what it took to put the Ukraine under the thumb of the EU.
As far as I can tell, Russia had no reason to believe that if the EU backed new government took charge that they wouldn't be faced with all sorts of "re-negotiations" related to their bases. Why people think Russia would believe that the same people who so recently have overthrown a number of governments would play fair with them once they installed a new government, I don't know. I do know that all my Russian friends were convinced that if the EU backed government took charge and the Crimea remained part of the Ukraine that the new government would want Russia out of the bases.
Is that paranoia on their part? Dunno, but it's how they were looking at things and everyone in the West seems to have not cared how Russia would see the changes as a threat. It was a, "Screw Russia" attitude from the start that I think led to Russia deciding they should move and do whatever it takes to regain control of the Crimea.
Would they have done so no matter what? I'm not so sure they would have if the the EU hadn't made it crystal clear Russia couldn't make any kind of deal with the Ukraine that the EU wasn't going to undermine by hook or by crook.
And what all those academics think is of no value whatsoever.....They have no army to change what happened
Bert, March 23,2014
Possession is .9 of the law
Don’t they have any standards about a tire-burning violent mob instigating a coup?
The more we hide behind phony “international law” concepts, the more it will come back to haunt us.
The Russians don’t care.
As for legality, the vox populi have spoken and as far as Moscow is concerned, the subject is closed.
If Europe wants to sue, it can go ahead.
Lawyers vs tanks... I could go grab some popcorn and let that run for a while...
Kosovo was stolen from Serbia by NATO and the attempt to legalize the theft is ongoing since 2008.
It was in violation of UN Charter, UN Sec Resolution 1244, OSCE charter.
Serbia is UN member.
Serbia is member of OSCE.
Yet, The United States of America opted to steal it.
And U.S. client states jumped to recognize stolen Serbian territory as a "independent state".
It is worth noting that South Vietnam was also once recognized by U.S. as "independent state".
For some reason U.S.A. love to support decisions of Communist strongmen. Now, it's cry me a river when Ruskies got what is historically theirs.
Show me a country who recognized Kosovo as an independent state and I will show you the country contributing to this mess.