Posted on 01/30/2015 12:35:40 PM PST by UMCRevMom@aol.com
"Eight former U.S. national security practitioners — the two of us, plus former U.S. representative to NATO Ivo Daalder, former undersecretary of defense Michèle Flournoy, former U.S. ambassador to Ukraine John Herbst, former deputy undersecretary of defense Jan Lodal, former NATO European commander James Stavridis and former U.S. European Command deputy commander Charles Wald — come together issuing following recommendations for immediate action. (releasing Monday report: “Preserving Ukraine’s Independence, Resisting Russian Aggression: What the United States and NATO Must Do.”)
First, White House and Congress must commit serious money to Ukraine’s defense: $1 billion in military assistance this fiscal year, followed by additional $1 billion each in fiscal year 2016 and 2017. Congress should not only authorize assistance, as it did in the Ukraine Freedom Support Act last year, but also appropriate funds.
Second, U.S. government should alter its policy and begin providing lethal assistance to Ukraine. Most of the above funds would go to nonlethal assistance. For example, the Ukrainian army desperately needs counter-battery radars to pinpoint the source of enemy rocket and artillery fire, which cause about 70 percent of Ukrainian casualties.
But the Ukrainians also need some defensive arms, particularly light anti-armor weapons. The antitank missiles in the Ukrainian inventory are more than 20 years old, and a large proportion of them do not work. U.S. anti-armor weapons could fill a crucial gap.
Third, the U.S. government should approach other NATO member states about assisting Ukraine, particularly those countries that operate former Soviet equipment and weapons systems compatible with Ukraine’s hardware. If the United States moves to provide lethal assistance, we believe that some other NATO countries will do so as well.
Time is urgent. Spring arrives in three months in eastern Ukraine, and fighting could then achieve new intensity. We should help the Ukrainians deter that."
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
From places like wsj.com, linked below (I hope properly):
“As Ukraine Calls in Lazard, Here’s How Restructuring Could Play Out “
“Ukraine’s bonds have been on the rocks for the last few months, reflecting investor fears of potential losses. Now those fears could become a reality.
Ukraine has appointed debt-restructuring specialist Lazard LAZ -0.46% to manage consultations with bond holders, according to people familiar with the matter, as the cash-strapped country scrambles to ease its debt burden and the stresses on its finances.
Last week, Ukraine’s Finance Minister Natalie Jaresko said the country intended to hold talks with bond holders after requesting an extended fund facility from the International Monetary Fund that would allow Kiev more time to shore up its finances.”
...
(excerpt, read more at this link):
And Voice of America...
“Ukraine Asks IMF for New Rescue Package “
“WASHINGTON—
Ukraine has asked the International Monetary Fund (IMF) for a new and broader bailout package and will attempt to renegotiate its debt with bond holders.
IMF chief Christine Lagarde announced the request made by Ukraine President Petro Poroshenko on Wednesday after a meeting the two had on the sidelines of the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland.
Lagarde said the Ukraine leader was intending to replace the country’s current $17 billion rescue package with a new one. Lagarde said she will submit the request to the IMF board for immediate consideration.”
...
(excerpt, read more at this link):
http://www.voanews.com/content/ukraine-asks-imf-for-new-rescue-package/2609202.html
Any word about how the Rothschilds are involved? They pull the strings.
The Mandelson links on #96, silly. He’s buddies with all them boys. Come one, you gotta at least skim a few of these links. Do a little web search er somethin’.
Lotsa people read up a little; they at least wanna try to know what the wars are really about, or at least get the general idea.
I mean, if you wanna see a war movie, put one in the DVD player an watch one. But reality ain’t the movies.
No, listen . . . I work in a cube just across from Baron David René de Rothschild’s office. He has nothing to do with this mess, and sending me scattershot links is worthless.
I know you’ll never look at them, you’re just agitating for a covert/overt war to complete the Western takeover of Ukraine.
But it’s all a great opportunity for me to post links that a lot of folks read.
The conservasheeple are starting to catch on.
That’s why it’s a little difficult to sell a war to them right now.
Even if they don’t understand everything, situations like Ukraine don’t pass the smell test, once they wake up even a tiny bit.
Worth repeating to all the liberal interventionists on this thread trying to pass off a political agreement as a treaty obligation.
America can do nothing to meaningfully help Ukraine
If ukraine wants to help its self, she should bomb Moscow, the Kremlin
That is very well said.
I mean, look at the quality of the responses from the pro-interventionists - accusing long term FReepers of wanting to have sex with Putin, or being on the Russian payroll, among other things.
If that doesn't wake up people new to the issue ...
But, war fever being what it is, Americans may be able to encourage Ukrainians to commit suicide in large numbers...
Bombing Kremlin is costly pleasure, it will turn off gas to Europe Ukraine including and they would feel very uncomfortable in winter. Besides bombs must be delivered somehow to Kremlin. Ukraine has no planes.
What other nations do is their own affair.
The President of the United States has NO AUTHORITY to conclude agreements with other nations or states that are binding on the citizens of the 50 States. Why do you suppose it's the SENATE that has to ratify treaties, and not the Congress? It's because the Senate represents the States in their sovereign personae, that's why.
It does not matter if lawless Presidents conclude 16, 16 000, or 16 million phony "agreements", without Senate deliberation and ratification they are toilet paper.
Pieter,
First: No one wants war, but the Ukraine people no longer want to be slaves to Pharaoh Putin
Second: Wow! so you are a self-proclaimed conspiracy theorist World Order
Third: Your post utilizes the typical Liberal/Socialist modus operandi, when you can’t argue the facts you attempt personality assassination!
Fourth: I am not concerned that anyone that reads my posts totally know my heart and hopefully not give a second thought to these ravings.
Fifth: To increase your knowledge of United Methodist polity, only the General Conference speak for my denomination ..
But, I do sincerely hope you have a wonderful Saturday :)
The U.S. had made a
only the General Conference speaks for the UMC
*** Please IGNORE the last lines above:
“The U.S. had made a
only the General Conference speaks for the UMC”
gremlin crept into previous posting :)
There are 3 ways for the U.S. to form treaties:
1- The United States Constitution grants power to the President to make treaties with the “advice and consent” of two-thirds of the Senate. This is different from normal legislation which requires approval by simple majorities in both the Senate and the House of Representatives.
2- The President also makes international “agreements” through congressional-executive agreements (CEAs) that are ratified with only a majority from both houses of Congress,
3- SOLE- EXECUTIVE AGREEMENTS made by the President alone. Though the Constitution does not expressly provide for any alternative to the Article II treaty procedure, Article I, Section 10 of the Constitution does distinguish between treaties (which states are forbidden to make) and agreements (which states may make with the consent of Congress).
The Supreme Court of the United States has considered congressional-executive and sole-executive agreements to be valid . Also, there are self-executing treaties, which do not require additional legislative action, and non-self-executing treaties which do require the enactment of new laws.
However arrived at these distinctions are NOT to affect the binding status of accords under international law. A SOLE-EXECUTIVE AGREEMENTcan only cover matters within the President’s authority or matters in which Congress has delegated authority to the Presiden i.e. ARMS-CONTROL AGREEMENTS are often ratified by this form of treaty.
I have a great idea.
Why don't the Russians living in Ukraine migrate to Russia? Then the fighting would stop and the Ukrainians can stay in Ukraine.
Besides, this war makes it harder for Putin to loot more billions from Russia.
What do you think of my idea, comrades?
"All legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the united States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives."
Please discuss this "international law" of which you speak. What body or individual drafts, enacts, and proclaims it? Who is the sovereign whose law it is? Who is the sovereign who judges the law, and punishes violators, and by what right does that sovereign rule?
All you post about is Ukraine. The West wants to absorbe Ukraine completely, including having their Central Bank become a member bank of the Bank of International Settlements, as well as having Ukraine join the EU. They are being financially squeezed very hard by austerity being forced on them by IMF and other International bodies. Russia is being squeezed by the price of oil being manipulated down dramatically. The hope by financial elites is that Ukraine will completely break with Russia and completely join the West, so Western financial elites can run Ukraine more completely the way they want to: consolidate ownership of property and business in Western conglomerates, increase debt levels, etc.
United Methodist Church is globalist/liberal/socialist. It is, really, their website says so:
http://www.umc.org/what-we-believe/social-principles-social-creed
I can’t wait to see what anti-Biblical stuff the UMC “general conference” comes up with in a few months in 2016.
I was raised a Methodist - I notice their website only minimally brings up Bible verses, just cherry-picking them to support the globalist/socialist agenda. Same as when I was a kid, and was told to walk around the neighborhood begging for coins from people to put in that orange UNICEF milk carton. Step by step, working for new world order, the UMC.
No, silly Jim, the UMC explains it right on their website. There’s no such thing as “national sovereignty”, what a silly, antiquated thought. It’s all about “binding arbitration”, dontcha know.
Us silly Christians have it all mixed up - UMC has it figured out - the Bible is about globalism.
Here’s what the UMC “Church” says about things:
http://www.umc.org/what-we-believe/the-world-community
“Justice and Law
Persons and groups must feel secure in their life and right to live within a society if order is to be achieved and maintained by law. We denounce as immoral an ordering of life that perpetuates injustice and impedes the pursuit of peace. Peoples and nations feel secure in the world community when law, order, and human rights are respected and upheld.
Believing that international justice requires the participation of all peoples and nations, we endorse the United Nations, its related bodies, the International Court of Justice and the International Criminal Court as the best instruments now in existence to achieve a world of justice and law. We commend the efforts of all people in all countries who pursue world peace through law. We endorse international aid and cooperation on all matters of need and conflict. We urge acceptance for membership in the United Nations of all nations who wish such membership and who accept United Nations responsibility. We urge the United Nations to take a more aggressive role in the development of international arbitration of disputes and actual conflicts among nations by developing binding third-party arbitration. Bilateral or multilateral efforts outside of the United Nations should work in concert with, and not contrary to, its purposes. We reaffirm our historic concern for the world as our parish and seek for all persons and peoples full and equal membership in a truly world community.”
If the US had a corrupt president, even if “elected”, would you work to remove him? If not, you’re not much of a patriot.
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.