Posted on 03/19/2014 2:09:45 PM PDT by elhombrelibre
That's what the State Department does - attempt to get people friendly to American interests in power. The Russian Foreign Ministry tries to get its people on top. They lost this round and chose to invade Ukraine. Your sympathy for your co-ethnics is understandable as a purely tribal reflex. The problem is that tribal reflexes and American interests are not necessarily compatible.
Yup and I expect that Isaiah 17 is in that mix somewhere as well.
You act as if Putin is doing something new with Iran; he’s been helping them go nuclear all along. They’re in bed far more than that in ways detrimental to the civilized world. Yet you want to think some small potatoes even in Kiev is what caused Putin to go public with one aspect of the Putin/Mad Mullah alliance.
Color me skeptical, but given the track record, my inclination is to disbelieve that the Obama State Department has “American interests” at heart.
“Great news for Putinistas, Putin cheerleaders, wretches and others too brain dead to understand that Putin is a grave threat to the USA and anyone hoping to sustain really freedom. “
USA is its own worse enemy right now.
Putin wrestles bears. Obama wrestles(snuggles?) the homosexuals. Get the facts straight.
You sound like you’d like to rassle a bit with Putin.
FACT 1: Over night on February 21, 2014, an agreement was reached between the President of Ukraine, Viktor Yanukovych, Vitaliy Klichko of UDAR, Oleh Tyahnibok of Svoboda and Arsenij Yatseniuk of Batkivshchyna, negotiated and witnessed by Radoslaw Sikorski, Frank-Walter Steinmeier, and Laurent Fabius, the Foreign Ministers of Poland, Germany, and France. This agreement restored the Constitution of 2004, caused a special law to be adopted, signed and promulgated within 48 hours, and committed the opposition leaders to form a coalition and 'national unity government' within 10 days.
FACT 2: The Verkhovna Rada approved this agreement 386-0. (Link: About 1/4 down page, sub-headline reads: Parliament votes to revert to 2004 constitution) Please note that the Verkhovna Rada has 450 members and the 'Party of Regions', Viktor Yanukovych's pro-USSR Russia party, won 185 seats in the 2012 election and on 12 December 2012, formed a parliamentary faction of 210 deputies. Assuming that the 64 (450-386) non-voting seats were all 'Party of Regions', the vote suggests that over half of the 'Party of Regions' Deputies voted FOR the resolution!
FACT 3: On February 22, 2014, the Verkhovna Rada voted to impeach Yanukovych 328-0. Link
FACT 4: The 'Party of Regions, Yanukovych's former party, "...condemn the escape and cowardice of Yanukovych" to Russia.
Instead of rhetoric, a response would be appreciated, though not expected, since the facts belie your accusation of a 'violently overthrow' of the government. There is some question of the constitutionality of the agreement because Putin's boy, Yanukovych, failed to sign what he agreed to, instead, running away to Russia, after committing to the deal. Fortunately, Article 111 of the 1996 and 2004 Constitutions gives the Verkhovna Rada the right to initiate a procedure of impeachment "if (the President) commits treason or other crime." Committing to sign an agreement and then reneging on it and fleeing the country, strikes me as a form of fraud. The new President, once elected in the May 2014 election, can sign the agreement, removing the possible constitutional limbo.
The impeachment and (self) removal of Putin's boy is unusual but in no way can be called a violent overthrow!
If all nations were responsible, your logic might make sense. If you think think that Iran, led by its mad mullahs, is responsible, you’re very ill informed at best.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.