Russian, Ukrainian & FSU Information & Manosphere Discussion Forums

Information & Chat => News & Political Discussion => Topic started by: andrewfi on March 07, 2019, 11:53:07 AM

Title: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: andrewfi on March 07, 2019, 11:53:07 AM
Hello, welcome back! How are you?
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: Markje on March 07, 2019, 02:26:43 PM
The 8th of March is tomorrow. You still have time. Contact me if your lady is in Ukraine; I can arrange flowers/gifts delivery on short notice anywhere in Ukraine for $60! Flowers (not included) are about $15.

Welcome back man, how are you?
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: Stirlitz on March 07, 2019, 02:56:35 PM
Thank you. Not so good as five/ten years ago. The Crimea is lost and a lot of business with it too as well as my life style and some property there. But it’s life. I guess I am still luckier than certain Syrians. No bombing and gas attacks from Russian planes so far. One thing is for certain, I spend more time with my wife now that I no longer shuttle between Odessa and the Crimea. And I’m a different person. I am tougher and more determined now. I was in the army and got my own AKM at home now. I don’t give up.
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: AvHdB on March 07, 2019, 03:03:55 PM
Greetings to my favorite spy!
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: Confederate on March 07, 2019, 07:09:36 PM
Thank you. Not so good as five/ten years ago. The Crimea is lost and a lot of business with it too as well as my life style and some property there. But it’s life. I guess I am still luckier than certain Syrians. No bombing and gas attacks from Russian planes so far. One thing is for certain, I spend more time with my wife now that I no longer shuttle between Odessa and the Crimea. And I’m a different person. I am tougher and more determined now. I was in the army and got my own AKM at home now. I don’t give up.

Very interesting. Were you just recently in the Ukrainian Army? Can you tell us more, for example where you were stationed? Being from Odessa don’t you speak Russian as your first language?
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: Confederate on March 07, 2019, 07:13:11 PM
Greetings to my favorite spy!


I wouldn’t joke about that. The mere implication could cause serious problems should Russia try to get their land bridge.
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: AvHdB on March 07, 2019, 07:19:07 PM
Greetings to my favorite spy!


I wouldn’t joke about that. The mere implication could cause serious problems should Russia try to get their land bridge.

Relax, Stirlitz is a famous character from a TV series in the Soviet Union time. He was a spy who is/was part of folklore. Sort of James Bond & Austin Powers in a single character.

NB: Edit after Confederate Post.
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: Confederate on March 07, 2019, 07:21:14 PM
Greetings to my favorite spy!


I wouldn’t joke about that. The mere implication could cause serious problems should Russia try to get their land bridge.

Relax, Stirlitz is a famous character from a TV series in the Soviet Union time. He was a bumbling spy.


TPTB are just absurd enough to ignore that and consider it to be a cover.  :chuckle:
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: Stirlitz on March 08, 2019, 01:33:22 PM
Very interesting. Were you just recently in the Ukrainian Army? Can you tell us more, for example where you were stationed? Being from Odessa don%u2019t you speak Russian as your first language?
I was there in 2015. I was stationed in Odessa. In fact, at Odessa Airport as a border guard.

(http://i.piccy.info/i9/39ee96c5941a4d9c861afb49e3b7fb67/1552077876/380225/1238771/2015_08_27_0051.jpg)

I speak Odessan as my native language as I was born in Odessa. I am told that those hordes in the north speak the same language but it sounds different although they indeed use a lot of similar words.

Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: Confederate on March 08, 2019, 02:17:24 PM
Very interesting. Were you just recently in the Ukrainian Army? Can you tell us more, for example where you were stationed? Being from Odessa don’t you speak Russian as your first language?
I was there in 2015. I was stationed in Odessa. In fact, at Odessa Airport as a border guard.

(http://i.piccy.info/i9/39ee96c5941a4d9c861afb49e3b7fb67/1552077876/380225/1238771/2015_08_27_0051.jpg)

I speak Odessan as my native language as I was born in Odessa. I am told that those hordes in the north speak the same language but it sounds different although they indeed use a lot of similar words.


Well congratulations on being patriotic. I’m glad you feel it toughened you up. It’s a very serious situation for Ukraine. I’ve heard that the number of Ukrainian males serving is quite small which puts a lot of pressure on the frontline combat troops.

I went into the service right after High School, it was a patriotic thing to do being from a small city originally. Thankfully never saw combat. Now that I know more about it I wouldn’t go again unless the continental USA was being invaded.

PS. That’s an excellent photo of you BTW, thanks for sharing!
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: Manny on March 09, 2019, 05:01:16 PM
Welcome back, Igor. It’s been a long time. 8 years actually.

Crimea is lost

You don’t think Crimea returned home by democratic vote?
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: andrewfi on March 09, 2019, 05:02:16 PM
Welcome back, Igor. It’s been a long time. 8 years actually.

Crimea is lost

You don’t think Crimea returned home by democratic vote?
Crimea has been lost to Ukraine. It does not matter about a vote.
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: Manny on March 09, 2019, 05:04:18 PM
Welcome back, Igor. It’s been a long time. 8 years actually.

Crimea is lost

You don’t think Crimea returned home by democratic vote?
Crimea has been lost to Ukraine. It does not matter about a vote.

Nice to see Igor back all the same.
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: Markje on March 10, 2019, 02:15:11 AM
 I will happily recommend igor & his services to anyone who asks
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: NS1 on March 10, 2019, 08:34:18 AM
Welcome back, Igor. It’s been a long time. 8 years actually.

Crimea is lost

You don’t think Crimea returned home by democratic vote?

There was a vote, I doubt it was very democratic LOL.
As said above the how and why have little consolation now.
It is what it is. Likely the sad part is two very close countries
are not so close anymore.
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: AvHdB on March 10, 2019, 09:55:58 AM
I will happily recommend igor & his services to anyone who asks

I second the recommendedation.
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: Stirlitz on April 23, 2019, 01:26:49 PM
You don’t think Crimea returned home by democratic vote?
Not sure what to say unless you are kidding. OK, I DO NOT THINK SO. Of course, not. The Crimea was occupied using military force, that is a clear fact. Any 'vote' that you refer to was slapstick for domestic users. It was about 30% of the locals who went there.

And it did not return home. What is its 'home'? It was Greek for a thousand years. It was Turkish for 300 years.
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: msmoby on April 23, 2019, 01:49:52 PM
Poor Stirlitz,

Perhaps he didn't realise RUA stands for Revisionists Unite Against ( facts), now

Thou shalt not question the mantra ...

How could anyone suggest the 'little green men' were not GRU physically seizing Parliament, the hosts military installations, TV / radio / comms masts ..by pointing guns were not acting militarily ?

How could anyone question the 'referendum' result or the need to become Russian ?..
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: Confederate on April 23, 2019, 02:06:03 PM
You don’t think Crimea returned home by democratic vote?
Not sure what to say unless you are kidding. OK, I DO NOT THINK SO. Of course, not. The Crimea was occupied using military force, that is a clear fact. Any 'vote' that you refer to was slapstick for domestic users. It was about 30% of the locals who went there.

And it did not return home. What is its 'home'? It was Greek for a thousand years. It was Turkish for 300 years.

 :popcorn:
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: dcguyusa on April 23, 2019, 04:37:43 PM
The inhabitants of this planet (descended from who knows where or maybe conjured up from dirt) appear to have this notion that they "own" certain regions of the planet.  When the next major asteroid or comet makes a bee line straight to the center of the planet, I don't think their pronouncements of ownership will be able to be backed up.   :GRAVE:  :o (:)
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: BillyB on April 23, 2019, 09:58:05 PM

Article 73 of the Ukrainian constitution says any change of borders is to be voted in a referendum of all Ukrainian people. In other words if an Oblast wants to leave, it has to be by vote of all Ukrainian people. The vote in Crimea wasn't legal.
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: msmoby on April 24, 2019, 01:01:21 AM
BillyB

You are in the wrong place to  put that point..

Manny and andrewfi - will both contend who had the bigger army was 'correct' when it comes to Ukraine


...and anyway - according to the Communist Party of Ukraine ( SSR) - Ukraine never left the USSR and it never - legally broke up ;)



Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: Markje on April 24, 2019, 08:30:02 AM

Article 73 of the Ukrainian constitution says any change of borders is to be voted in a referendum of all Ukrainian people. In other words if an Oblast wants to leave, it has to be by vote of all Ukrainian people. The vote in Crimea wasn't legal.

Yet Crimea wasn't Fully Ukrainian to begin with, its full name being "The autonomous republic of Crimea" , so not all of Ukrainian law applied on Crimea. They certainly had their own right to vote and they did just that.

Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: Markje on April 24, 2019, 08:32:43 AM
You don’t think Crimea returned home by democratic vote?
Not sure what to say unless you are kidding. OK, I DO NOT THINK SO. Of course, not. The Crimea was occupied using military force, that is a clear fact. Any 'vote' that you refer to was slapstick for domestic users. It was about 30% of the locals who went there.

And it did not return home. What is its 'home'? It was Greek for a thousand years. It was Turkish for 300 years.

Home is where the heart is. Most of my inlaws living in Crimea feel "Crimean", and only after that Russian or Ukrainian.

During the vote, I saw a huge skype-time with my mother inlaw in Evpatoria and that was basicly a huge streetparty. There certainly weren' any guns involved and everyone already knew the outcome before the voting ended.
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: cufflinks on April 24, 2019, 02:36:53 PM
Stirlitz iirc your mother lived in a small Crimean village surrounded by peach orchards - hope she is well despite the politics of the UA/RU situation - congrats on your choice to serve in the Armed Forces accelerates a mans maturity and focus.
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: BillyB on April 24, 2019, 11:48:10 PM

Article 73 of the Ukrainian constitution says any change of borders is to be voted in a referendum of all Ukrainian people. In other words if an Oblast wants to leave, it has to be by vote of all Ukrainian people. The vote in Crimea wasn't legal.

Yet Crimea wasn't Fully Ukrainian to begin with, its full name being "The autonomous republic of Crimea" , so not all of Ukrainian law applied on Crimea. They certainly had their own right to vote and they did just that.

The Autonomous Republic and Crimea Constitution in the link below. It conforms with the Ukrainian Constitution.

https://web.archive.org/web/20140312144006/http://www.rada.crimea.ua/en/bases-of-activity/konstituciya-ARK

For Crimeans to want to change the border of Ukraine, an all Ukrainian referendum must take place according to Article 73. All Ukrainians must be allowed to vote or the vote is illegal.

States in the USA are given the freedom to make their own laws to a certain extent too. My State legalized marijuana. The federal government says it's illegal. A person in my state gets pulled over with the drug by the State or city cops will not get arrested. If a federal law enforcement officer pulls over someone in my state with the drug, they can get arrested.
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: Markje on April 25, 2019, 04:54:54 AM

Article 73 of the Ukrainian constitution says any change of borders is to be voted in a referendum of all Ukrainian people. In other words if an Oblast wants to leave, it has to be by vote of all Ukrainian people. The vote in Crimea wasn't legal.

Yet Crimea wasn't Fully Ukrainian to begin with, its full name being "The autonomous republic of Crimea" , so not all of Ukrainian law applied on Crimea. They certainly had their own right to vote and they did just that.

The Autonomous Republic and Crimea Constitution in the link below. It conforms with the Ukrainian Constitution.

https://web.archive.org/web/20140312144006/http://www.rada.crimea.ua/en/bases-of-activity/konstituciya-ARK

For Crimeans to want to change the border of Ukraine, an all Ukrainian referendum must take place according to Article 73. All Ukrainians must be allowed to vote or the vote is illegal.

States in the USA are given the freedom to make their own laws to a certain extent too. My State legalized marijuana. The federal government says it's illegal. A person in my state gets pulled over with the drug by the State or city cops will not get arrested. If a federal law enforcement officer pulls over someone in my state with the drug, they can get arrested.

Im sorry, I tend to believe a Ukrainian lawyer any day over some URL with rada.ua in the name.

Plus, if you ask the same webpage from somewhere BEFORE the vote (say 2012) , article 48 is the last. So no, sorry, I don' believe the link.
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: andrewfi on April 25, 2019, 05:26:12 AM
Somebody, not Mark, missing the point, again. At the instant of the coup, the state of Ukraine as it existed under the legitimate head of state Yanukovych ended. A new state was formed and, eventually, a new president and head of state was chosen and a new constitution created.

There have been many versions of constitutions in Ukraine but given the actions in 2014 they were rendered moot. That said, if one wishes to rely upon a constitution, Mark's missus is right. :)
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: 2tallbill on April 25, 2019, 11:49:42 AM
Poor Stirlitz,

Perhaps he didn't realise RUA stands for Revisionists Unite Against ( facts), now

How could anyone question the 'referendum' result or the need to become Russian ?..

It stands for the Removing of Unapproved Activities or posts that
the forum owner would prefer not to see.

Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: BillyB on April 25, 2019, 09:35:18 PM
Im sorry, I tend to believe a Ukrainian lawyer any day over some URL with rada.ua in the name.


I've never seen two lawyers agree on everything. They have flaws.

Plus, if you ask the same webpage from somewhere BEFORE the vote (say 2012) , article 48 is the last. So no, sorry, I don' believe the link.

If you have a better link to their Constitution, I will read it. Article 1 is the only thing anyone needs to read to see Crimea's Constitution is tied to Ukraine's

At the instant of the coup, the state of Ukraine as it existed under the legitimate head of state Yanukovych ended. A new state was formed and, eventually, a new president and head of state was chosen and a new constitution created.

There have been many versions of constitutions in Ukraine but given the actions in 2014 they were rendered moot. That said, if one wishes to rely upon a constitution, Mark's missus is right. :)

Usually when a coup happens, the guy who initiated the coup deletes the protection/Constitution of the people. When the people oust a president, they don't delete their protection/Constitution. If you can cite a law pertaining to that issue, I'd like to see it. If you can't cite a law, you are giving us your opinion of what goes down in a coup by the people. Ukraine's Constitution was never a failure. Their politicians were/are a failure.
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: Markje on April 26, 2019, 04:27:40 AM
Im sorry, I tend to believe a Ukrainian lawyer any day over some URL with rada.ua in the name.


I've never seen two lawyers agree on everything. They have flaws.

Plus, if you ask the same webpage from somewhere BEFORE the vote (say 2012) , article 48 is the last. So no, sorry, I don' believe the link.

If you have a better link to their Constitution, I will read it. Article 1 is the only thing anyone needs to read to see Crimea's Constitution is tied to Ukraine's

At the instant of the coup, the state of Ukraine as it existed under the legitimate head of state Yanukovych ended. A new state was formed and, eventually, a new president and head of state was chosen and a new constitution created.

There have been many versions of constitutions in Ukraine but given the actions in 2014 they were rendered moot. That said, if one wishes to rely upon a constitution, Mark's missus is right. :)

Usually when a coup happens, the guy who initiated the coup deletes the protection/Constitution of the people. When the people oust a president, they don't delete their protection/Constitution. If you can cite a law pertaining to that issue, I'd like to see it. If you can't cite a law, you are giving us your opinion of what goes down in a coup by the people. Ukraine's Constitution was never a failure. Their politicians were/are a failure.

The impeachment procedures of Ukraine were not followed when Yanukovich was outted. Therefore any government between Yanus leave and Poros election was invalid. Impeachment of a sitting president was a very clear and strict provision in Ukraines laws. It even named a direct successor should this event come to pass, but the person named was also outted with Yanukovich. This alone means it was a full coup and nothing else.
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: andrewfi on April 26, 2019, 04:30:37 AM
Billy, making stuff up to suit your 'argument' will not help you when dealing with people who think on a different level. Some people know the difference between bullshit and knowledge and prefer knowledge as a more useful tool.
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: msmoby on April 26, 2019, 12:08:08 PM
Billy, making stuff up to suit your 'argument' will not help you when dealing with people who think on a different level. Some people know the difference between bullshit and knowledge and prefer knowledge as a more useful tool.

Looking forward to seeing evidence of factual knowledge from your goodself..
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: BillyB on April 26, 2019, 09:58:37 PM
The impeachment procedures of Ukraine were not followed when Yanukovich was outted. Therefore any government between Yanus leave and Poros election was invalid. Impeachment of a sitting president was a very clear and strict provision in Ukraines laws. It even named a direct successor should this event come to pass, but the person named was also outted with Yanukovich. This alone means it was a full coup and nothing else.

Who ousted Yanukovych? Nobody physically removed him from power. He left Ukraine on his own free will.

Did you read the Ukrainian Constitution? Don't rely on lawyers. It's easy to understand. Impeachment due to crimes committed isn't the only way a president can be relieved of his duties. A president can die or has the inability to exercise his/her powers and be relieved of his/her duties. In Yanukovych's case, the Rada removed him on grounds that he was unable to fulfill his duties. Anybody that doesn't show up for work gets fired....including the president.  Yanukovych was free to come back and defend himself from impeachment but he chose to stay in Russia and buy a 52 million dollar house.

Billy, making stuff up to suit your 'argument' will not help you when dealing with people who think on a different level. Some people know the difference between bullshit and knowledge and prefer knowledge as a more useful tool.

If you like intelligent debate, say something intelligent.  If you want to discuss what was legal and illegal, use the Constitution. Point out an article in the Constitution that backs your position. Your opinion doesn't matter to me.
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: Markje on April 27, 2019, 06:13:07 AM

Who ousted Yanukovych? Nobody physically removed him from power. He left Ukraine on his own free will.
You mean, he left Ukraine at gunpoint fearing for his life.
Thats not free will, its a life-or-death decision.

Quote
Did you read the Ukrainian Constitution? Don't rely on lawyers. It's easy to understand. Impeachment due to crimes committed isn't the only way a president can be relieved of his duties. A president can die or has the inability to exercise his/her powers and be relieved of his/her duties. In Yanukovych's case, the Rada removed him on grounds that he was unable to fulfill his duties. Anybody that doesn't show up for work gets fired....including the president.  Yanukovych was free to come back and defend himself from impeachment but he chose to stay in Russia and buy a 52 million dollar house.
I did, there are exactly 3 reasons for impeachment. unable to fill his duties is not one. And its a finite non-amendable list as well.

1. President is sick and/or terminally ill and is unable to fullfill his duties (context!!!!)
2. President committed heinous crimes like mass-murder ala hitler style (forgot the exact wording).
3. President commits treason against the state of Ukraine.

Non-amendable list, only these 3 points count. Yanukovich is not sick or terminally ill, they failed to make a case for treason or heinous crimes.

So. Illegal impeachment.

Also the constitution states directly that if a president is impeached, the prime minister (at that time also of yanukovich's party) takes the presidency and will work towards swift elections to allow the people to choose a new president.

All of that didnt happen either, the prime minister was also denied and there were no swift elections, they dragged their feet for months on end and when it was finally there, 3 major oblasts (Crimea, Donetsk and Lughansk) were not allowed to vote.

Billy, making stuff up to suit your 'argument' will not help you when dealing with people who think on a different level. Some people know the difference between bullshit and knowledge and prefer knowledge as a more useful tool.

Quote
If you like intelligent debate, say something intelligent.  If you want to discuss what was legal and illegal, use the Constitution. Point out an article in the Constitution that backs your position. Your opinion doesn't matter to me.
Articles 109/111 of the ukraine constitution, the wording of which is exacter than my quotes above. Do search for the pre-2014 version as it has since been amended with new articles.

Also , to even be allowed to vote for impeachment, another safety-provision in Ukraine's law wasn't followed. a 3/4 majority of all of the highest circle of judges must agree to the vote and find yanukovich guilty BEFORE a vote. (also didnt happen). Article 108 of the const.
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: msmoby on April 27, 2019, 06:26:47 AM
Markje,

Yankovych fled Ukrainian justice ( willingly) aided by Russian GRU personnel

You KNOW this and the shame portrayed by the Party of Regions at his family dynasty looting Ukraine!s coffers.

A bit like your 'no military action' in Crimea... you have an interesting (selective) version of factual events..

Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: Confederate on April 27, 2019, 07:42:33 AM
I see the usual pro-Russian apologists (Andy and Mark) have gone into hyper-drive trying to defend that bloated thug thief Yanucrookich. As BillyB just wrote upthread he could have easily gone back to Kiev and defended himself against impeachment, he didn’t do it because he was facing life in prison for his crimes against the Ukrainian people.
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: Confederate on April 27, 2019, 07:44:22 AM
The impeachment procedures of Ukraine were not followed when Yanukovich was outted. Therefore any government between Yanus leave and Poros election was invalid. Impeachment of a sitting president was a very clear and strict provision in Ukraines laws. It even named a direct successor should this event come to pass, but the person named was also outted with Yanukovich. This alone means it was a full coup and nothing else.

Who ousted Yanukovych? Nobody physically removed him from power. He left Ukraine on his own free will.

Did you read the Ukrainian Constitution? Don't rely on lawyers. It's easy to understand. Impeachment due to crimes committed isn't the only way a president can be relieved of his duties. A president can die or has the inability to exercise his/her powers and be relieved of his/her duties. In Yanukovych's case, the Rada removed him on grounds that he was unable to fulfill his duties. Anybody that doesn't show up for work gets fired....including the president.  Yanukovych was free to come back and defend himself from impeachment but he chose to stay in Russia and buy a 52 million dollar house.

Billy, making stuff up to suit your 'argument' will not help you when dealing with people who think on a different level. Some people know the difference between bullshit and knowledge and prefer knowledge as a more useful tool.

If you like intelligent debate, say something intelligent.  If you want to discuss what was legal and illegal, use the Constitution. Point out an article in the Constitution that backs your position. Your opinion doesn't matter to me.

 :chuckle:  tiphat
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: BillyB on April 27, 2019, 09:57:10 AM
So. Illegal impeachment.


There was no illegal impeachment because there was NO IMPEACHMENT. Impeachment isn't the only way a president can get relieved of his or her duties.

Also the constitution states directly that if a president is impeached, the prime minister (at that time also of yanukovich's party) takes the presidency and will work towards swift elections to allow the people to choose a new president.


Yanyukovych's party can't take the presidency because there was NO IMPEACHMENT.

3 major oblasts (Crimea, Donetsk and Lughansk) were not allowed to vote.


Citizens there could go to voting stations outside a war zone. Government can't set up voting stations in a war zone and guarantee safety. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know if voting stations were set up, some would get bombed.

Also , to even be allowed to vote for impeachment, another safety-provision in Ukraine's law wasn't followed. a 3/4 majority of all of the highest circle of judges must agree to the vote and find yanukovich guilty BEFORE a vote. (also didnt happen). Article 108 of the const.

There was NO VOTE TO IMPEACH so 3/4 majority not necessary. Why apply the rules for impeachment when impeachment didn't happen? Yanukovych abandoned his job The day before he left, he called for early elections on his presidential website. Ukraine had early elections. Nothing wrong with that.

You mean, he left Ukraine at gunpoint fearing for his life.
Thats not free will, its a life-or-death decision.


Are you sure the guns were pointed at him? hundreds of civilians died. Thousands were injured. How many politicians do you know got hurt or died? The parliament issued a warrant for his arrest, accusing him of "mass killing of civilians." Later he was sentenced in absentia to thirteen years' imprisonment for high treason by a Ukrainian court. I'm sure you know he's one if the richest men in the world with his worth estimated to be over 20 billion dollars. Hopefully Yanukovych comes back to Ukraine someday to prove his innocence.


Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: Markje on April 27, 2019, 10:56:14 AM
I see the usual pro-Russian apologists (Andy and Mark) have gone into hyper-drive trying to defend that bloated thug thief Yanucrookich. As BillyB just wrote upthread he could have easily gone back to Kiev and defended himself against impeachment, he didn’t do it because he was facing life in prison for his crimes against the Ukrainian people.
What does Russia have to do with what happened within Ukraine? thats a whole different country.

Its like saying I am pro-canadian because we are talking about the Impeachment of Clinton.
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: Markje on April 27, 2019, 11:05:24 AM

There was no illegal impeachment because there was NO IMPEACHMENT. Impeachment isn't the only way a president can get relieved of his or her duties.

Yanyukovych's party can't take the presidency because there was NO IMPEACHMENT.

There was NO VOTE TO IMPEACH so 3/4 majority not necessary. Why apply the rules for impeachment when impeachment didn't happen? Yanukovych abandoned his job The day before he left, he called for early elections on his presidential website. Ukraine had early elections. Nothing wrong with that.

I am sorry, I thought Impeachment was the proper american-english word to describe all the legal removal of presidents from power. If there is another more common word to cover all legal cases, please educate this non-native english writer. Still stands complete with the correct articles in the Ukrainian constitution that those are the only legal ways to remove a president from power.


3 major oblasts (Crimea, Donetsk and Lughansk) were not allowed to vote.


Citizens there could go to voting stations outside a war zone. Government can't set up voting stations in a war zone and guarantee safety. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know if voting stations were set up, some would get bombed.
The logistics didn't matter. If you turned up with a Passport of Ukraine issued in said 3 oblasts you were denied the vote. Thats what I meant with "not allowed to vote". (Personal experience also, from my Crimean inlaws whom did try to vote but werent allowed to. Source: Myself.).



You mean, he left Ukraine at gunpoint fearing for his life.
Thats not free will, its a life-or-death decision.


Are you sure the guns were pointed at him? hundreds of civilians died. Thousands were injured. How many politicians do you know got hurt or died? The parliament issued a warrant for his arrest, accusing him of "mass killing of civilians." Later he was sentenced in absentia to thirteen years' imprisonment for high treason by a Ukrainian court. I'm sure you know he's one if the richest men in the world with his worth estimated to be over 20 billion dollars. Hopefully Yanukovych comes back to Ukraine someday to prove his innocence.

I truly hope so too. It shouldn't matter where the guns were pointed, he had enough loyal guards to provide him with safety.

Leaving his post could be treason, although Ukrainian law at that time did not stipulate a president must be physically close to Ukraine/kyiv. Another thing that was fixed later.

The arrest warrent with "mass murder" of civilians is a big joke, if you compare it to what Poroshenko did  :censored: Thank god he is gone. Will see what happens with Zelensky.

Mark.
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: Confederate on April 27, 2019, 01:23:45 PM
I see the usual pro-Russian apologists (Andy and Mark) have gone into hyper-drive trying to defend that bloated thug thief Yanucrookich. As BillyB just wrote upthread he could have easily gone back to Kiev and defended himself against impeachment, he didn’t do it because he was facing life in prison for his crimes against the Ukrainian people.
What does Russia have to do with what happened within Ukraine? thats a whole different country.


If Russia had nothing to do with it then why did the weasel run there for shelter?

If Russia is innocent of harboring a convicted felon and fugitive from justice when

will Russia be sending him back to face justice in Ukraine where he has been

convicted of treason and other crimes against the Ukrainian people?

Don’t try your sneaky word games with me, Mark.
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: Markje on April 27, 2019, 02:15:43 PM

If Russia had nothing to do with it then why did the weasel run there for shelter?
Dunno, why did snowden? why did 1 million ukrainians whom no longer felt safe in their own country?

Perhaps because its a world-power and stable country? A country that can offer shelter from Ukraine if it needs to?


If Russia is innocent of harboring a convicted felon and fugitive from justice when
He is guilty of a crime then? that hasn't been determined yet.

will Russia be sending him back to face justice in Ukraine where he has been

convicted of treason and other crimes against the Ukrainian people?

Don’t try your sneaky word games with me, Mark.
He hasn't been convicted a.f.a.i.k but I must confess i don't really follow the news.

As to extradition: Did Ukraine send a request yet? (or do they think its useless and didnt bother, which gives Russia no grounds to give him up)

Also, Interpol did for a short time list Yanukovich as a wanted criminal, but took it down listing "political prosecutions are not welcome".
So why did interpol decide it was not a real prosecution but rather someone whom was politically hunted with the law.
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: NS1 on April 27, 2019, 02:39:42 PM
As per normal here, the subject has gone off track.
How it happened, regardless of your position of the law.
I suspect not much happened as it should, maybe from either side.

It has happened, it has created a big divided in 2 nations.
Which will likely never be repaired.
We have even lost friends here over it.
My wife lost her land in Krym.
funny how it belongs to a Russian now.

So argue all you want, you will find a multitude
of people on both sides who will never agree.
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: Confederate on April 27, 2019, 02:45:14 PM
As per normal here, the subject has gone off track.
How it happened, regardless of your position of the law.
I suspect not much happened as it should, maybe from either side.

It has happened, it has created a big divided in 2 nations.
Which will likely never be repaired.
We have even lost friends here over it.
My wife lost her land in Krym.
funny how it belongs to a Russian now.

So argue all you want, you will find a multitude
of people on both sides who will never agree.

You’re off base. The truth is the truth and it will come out in the end.

And unlike Putin’s Russia motto might doesn’t make right.
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: NS1 on April 27, 2019, 02:57:44 PM
what am i off base on?
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: AvHdB on April 27, 2019, 04:23:02 PM
We are far removed from matters regarding Stirlitz.

But anyways the first woman I dated from Russia her family owned a small hotel and some other rental properties on the Krym. They lost all of it when the Krym 'joined' Russia. Notwithstanding they were Russian. As well as Orthodox (Christian's) and Tartars.

So much for the rule of law in Putin's Russia.
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: B.B. on April 27, 2019, 04:34:43 PM
So I am checking in to welcome Stirlitz back.

I saw him in Odessa when he was working as border guard at the airport.  I had already passed security and was in the business lounge.  As he can (or could at that time) go wherever he wished at the airport, he came to see me.

So we greeted each other as friends, and after the other patrons in the business lounge looked at me, quizzically, clearly thinking, "Who is this guy that border guards, who always look so stern and NEVER smile, are so friendly with?"

 :ROFL:

B/B
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: Markje on April 27, 2019, 05:17:08 PM
We are far removed from matters regarding Stirlitz.

But anyways the first woman I dated from Russia her family owned a small hotel and some other rental properties on the Krym. They lost all of it when the Krym 'joined' Russia. Notwithstanding they were Russian. As well as Orthodox (Christian's) and Tartars.

So much for the rule of law in Putin's Russia.


Ah right, and you knew what went wrong and therefore its a Lawless country and Russias fault.

NS1 had a similar story and that amounted to 'forgetting' to register your properties with Russia after it joined Crimea.

Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: Markje on April 27, 2019, 05:18:16 PM
So I am checking in to welcome Stirlitz back.

I saw him in Odessa when he was working as border guard at the airport.  I had already passed security and was in the business lounge.  As he can (or could at that time) go wherever he wished at the airport, he came to see me.

So we greeted each other as friends, and after the other patrons in the business lounge looked at me, quizzically, clearly thinking, "Who is this guy that border guards, who always look so stern and NEVER smile, are so friendly with?"

 :ROFL:

B/B

How things have changed, he certainly smiled alot when we drove from Odessa->Evp. together. Must've enjoyed the ride as much as I did in that old classic volga.
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: NS1 on April 27, 2019, 11:15:52 PM
We are far removed from matters regarding Stirlitz.

But anyways the first woman I dated from Russia her family owned a small hotel and some other rental properties on the Krym. They lost all of it when the Krym 'joined' Russia. Notwithstanding they were Russian. As well as Orthodox (Christian's) and Tartars.

So much for the rule of law in Putin's Russia.


Ah right, and you knew what went wrong and therefore its a Lawless country and Russias fault.

NS1 had a similar story and that amounted to 'forgetting' to register your properties with Russia after it joined Crimea.

You should not presume, what you don't know.
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: Confederate on April 28, 2019, 10:32:50 AM
So I am checking in to welcome Stirlitz back.

I saw him in Odessa when he was working as border guard at the airport.  I had already passed security and was in the business lounge.  As he can (or could at that time) go wherever he wished at the airport, he came to see me.

So we greeted each other as friends, and after the other patrons in the business lounge looked at me, quizzically, clearly thinking, "Who is this guy that border guards, who always look so stern and NEVER smile, are so friendly with?"

 :ROFL:

B/B


Bond, Boston Bond.  :chuckle:
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: Confederate on April 28, 2019, 10:35:32 AM
We are far removed from matters regarding Stirlitz.

But anyways the first woman I dated from Russia her family owned a small hotel and some other rental properties on the Krym. They lost all of it when the Krym 'joined' Russia. Notwithstanding they were Russian. As well as Orthodox (Christian's) and Tartars.

So much for the rule of law in Putin's Russia.


Ah right, and you knew what went wrong and therefore its a Lawless country and Russias fault.

NS1 had a similar story and that amounted to 'forgetting' to register your properties with Russia after it joined Crimea.


Russia is the ultimate lawful country.

Well connected carpetbaggers are rewarded lawfully.  :-*

Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: BillyB on April 28, 2019, 12:57:41 PM
I am sorry, I thought Impeachment was the proper american-english word to describe all the legal removal of presidents from power. If there is another more common word to cover all legal cases, please educate this non-native english writer. Still stands complete with the correct articles in the Ukrainian constitution that those are the only legal ways to remove a president from power.


Your English is good enough to understand there are more reasons than impeachment to terminate the Ukrainian president's job before the term is up. Read Article 108 again and if you can't comprehend it, then there is not much more I can do to help.

Now no Constitution covers everything by getting specific. Let's say aliens abduct a president, do sexual experimentations on him, inject him with drugs and he becomes a vegetable. Basically the president is incapacitated. If a president leaves the country forever, he is also incapacitated - unable to act, respond, or the like. The people of a nation deserves to have laws passed and a functioning government. Life goes on with or without that president. You may not like it but that is the way it is. If a Constitution doesn't cover all bases, which they never do, parliament, people's representatives, can step up and make decisions.

The logistics didn't matter. If you turned up with a Passport of Ukraine issued in said 3 oblasts you were denied the vote. Thats what I meant with "not allowed to vote". (Personal experience also, from my Crimean inlaws whom did try to vote but werent allowed to. Source: Myself.).


Your one experiences with your inlaws doesn't mean that is the experience with everybody in those oblasts. The OSCE and UN said some, but not all were able to vote due to the threat of death to the voters.

https://www.osce.org/odihr/elections/ukraine/119078?download=true

https://www.un.org/press/en/2014/sc11417.doc.htm

He is guilty of a crime then? that hasn't been determined yet.


A high Ukrainian court sentenced Yanukovych to 13 years in prison for high treason. After Yanu fled to Russia, he wrote a letter to Putin inviting Russian troops and police into Ukraine to restore order. Of course we know the rest of the story and know that Yana wanted Russia to restore him as Supreme leader of Ukraine. Yanu should remember the oath he took to become president promising to protect Ukraine's independence and sovereignty.

Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: AvHdB on April 28, 2019, 04:56:10 PM
We are far removed from matters regarding Stirlitz.

But anyways the first woman I dated from Russia her family owned a small hotel and some other rental properties on the Krym. They lost all of it when the Krym 'joined' Russia. Notwithstanding they were Russian. As well as Orthodox (Christian's) and Tartars.

So much for the rule of law in Putin's Russia.


Ah right, and you knew what went wrong and therefore its a Lawless country and Russias fault.

NS1 had a similar story and that amounted to 'forgetting' to register your properties with Russia after it joined Crimea.


Russia is the ultimate lawful country.

Well connected carpetbaggers are rewarded lawfully.  :-*

Since the family were builders going back to the Soviet period I believe they understood the ins and outs of the system. Further the uncle was present on the Krym before, during the Anschluss and after when the holdings were stripped from the family. I doubt it had little to do with paper work that was not filed correctly.
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: Markje on April 28, 2019, 06:27:19 PM
Your English is good enough to understand there are more reasons than impeachment to terminate the Ukrainian president's job before the term is up. Read Article 108 again and if you can't comprehend it, then there is not much more I can do to help.

Now no Constitution covers everything by getting specific. Let's say aliens abduct a president, do sexual experimentations on him, inject him with drugs and he becomes a vegetable. Basically the president is incapacitated. If a president leaves the country forever, he is also incapacitated - unable to act, respond, or the like. The people of a nation deserves to have laws passed and a functioning government. Life goes on with or without that president. You may not like it but that is the way it is. If a Constitution doesn't cover all bases, which they never do, parliament, people's representatives, can step up and make decisions.
Thats why having a finite list is such a bad idea, but that doesn't make your statement true at the time of 2013/2014 though. Since then, this has been fixed.
Quote
Your one experiences with your inlaws doesn't mean that is the experience with everybody in those oblasts. The OSCE and UN said some, but not all were able to vote due to the threat of death to the voters.

https://www.osce.org/odihr/elections/ukraine/119078?download=true

https://www.un.org/press/en/2014/sc11417.doc.htm
Some in my book means less then half, otherwise you would say "half" or "most" but not "some". In the grand scheme of things, this means I am correct and you were not allowed to vote. BTW, there was no fear of death from Crimea->Mainland ukraine, yet you still could not vote.

Quote
He is guilty of a crime then? that hasn't been determined yet.


A high Ukrainian court sentenced Yanukovych to 13 years in prison for high treason. After Yanu fled to Russia, he wrote a letter to Putin inviting Russian troops and police into Ukraine to restore order. Of course we know the rest of the story and know that Yana wanted Russia to restore him as Supreme leader of Ukraine. Yanu should remember the oath he took to become president promising to protect Ukraine's independence and sovereignty.
Pulling a moby on me? Moving the goalposts here. We were talking about crimes which could lead to his legal removal from the presidency, not things committed later.
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: BillyB on April 28, 2019, 08:21:49 PM
Thats why having a finite list is such a bad idea, but that doesn't make your statement true at the time of 2013/2014 though. Since then, this has been fixed.


If you think the Constitution I linked wasn't valid in 2013/2014, show me one that was valid.

Some in my book means less then half, otherwise you would say "half" or "most" but not "some". In the grand scheme of things, this means I am correct and you were not allowed to vote. BTW, there was no fear of death from Crimea->Mainland ukraine, yet you still could not vote.


A whole nation isn't going to stop functioning because a few people can't vote.

Pulling a moby on me? Moving the goalposts here. We were talking about crimes which could lead to his legal removal from the presidency, not things committed later.


Yanukovych committed the crime inviting Russian troops and police into Ukraine days after he fled Ukraine. Why are we still talking crimes that can be used for impeachment? The Rada didn't remove Yanukovych with impeachment. They removed Yanukovych with early elections that Yanukovych signed onto the day before he fled Ukraine.

https://www.theverge.com/2014/2/21/5433322/ukraine-president-opposition-sign-pact-for-reform
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: Markje on April 29, 2019, 01:22:34 AM
i think yanukovich signed early elections back in nov. 2013 before maidan got out of control. i will check the news from that time
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: Confederate on April 29, 2019, 07:58:03 AM
We are far removed from matters regarding Stirlitz.

But anyways the first woman I dated from Russia her family owned a small hotel and some other rental properties on the Krym. They lost all of it when the Krym 'joined' Russia. Notwithstanding they were Russian. As well as Orthodox (Christian's) and Tartars.

So much for the rule of law in Putin's Russia.


Ah right, and you knew what went wrong and therefore its a Lawless country and Russias fault.

NS1 had a similar story and that amounted to 'forgetting' to register your properties with Russia after it joined Crimea.


Russia is the ultimate lawful country.

Well connected carpetbaggers are rewarded lawfully.  :-*

Since the family were builders going back to the Soviet period I believe they understood the ins and outs of the system. Further the uncle was present on the Krym before, during the Anschluss and after when the holdings were stripped from the family. I doubt it had little to do with paper work that was not filed correctly.

Whose family are you referring to? Are you writing on behalf of NS1?

Perhaps we should wait and let NS1 write for himself.

Up thread Stirlitz also lost some property, I’m sure Mark has a good excuse for that as well.
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: Markje on April 29, 2019, 09:14:27 AM
Up thread Stirlitz also lost some property, I’m sure Mark has a good excuse for that as well.

I have no idea what happened to Stirlitz's properties. You can mock me all you what meanwhile but it doesn't change that new ownership of crimea means new rules and new administration. Failure to register said properties is a sure-fire way to loose them.
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: msmoby on April 29, 2019, 09:53:04 AM



I have no idea what happened to Stirlitz's properties. You can mock me all you what meanwhile but it doesn't change that new ownership of crimea means new rules and new administration. Failure to register said properties is a sure-fire way to loose them.

I am nearly 100  perent certain that that 'new govt' of Crimea told everyone that Ikrainian owndership docs would suffice as proof of ownership and that Markje posted to that effect...

Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: Manny on April 29, 2019, 12:58:31 PM
I have no idea what happened to Stirlitz's properties.

Indeed, and since his return, he hasn't been awfully communicative on the topic here............
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: Confederate on April 29, 2019, 02:05:16 PM
Up thread Stirlitz also lost some property, I’m sure Mark has a good excuse for that as well.

I have no idea what happened to Stirlitz's properties. You can mock me all you what meanwhile but it doesn't change that new ownership of crimea means new rules and new administration. Failure to register said properties is a sure-fire way to loose them.


Save your blood-stained lies and propaganda for someone gullible enough to believe them or for your handlers back in Crimea.

The only “laws” that matter for Mr. Putin and cronies is who they believe should be rewarded for towing the party line.

Meanwhile 10,000 people and counting have lost their lives in Donbas and nearly 2 Million displaced persons due to the immoral Russian invasion of their neighbor.

Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: Markje on April 29, 2019, 02:41:49 PM
Up thread Stirlitz also lost some property, I’m sure Mark has a good excuse for that as well.

I have no idea what happened to Stirlitz's properties. You can mock me all you what meanwhile but it doesn't change that new ownership of crimea means new rules and new administration. Failure to register said properties is a sure-fire way to loose them.


Save your blood-stained lies and propaganda for someone gullible enough to believe them or for your handlers back in Crimea.

The only “laws” that matter for Mr. Putin and cronies is who they believe should be rewarded for towing the party line.

Meanwhile 10,000 people and counting have lost their lives in Donbas and nearly 2 Million displaced persons due to the immoral Russian invasion of their neighbor.

Yes, strange that, that the brunt of those 2 million chose to flee to Russia.

As to my so-called Handlers in Crimea  :ROFL: :ROFL: :ROFL: :ROFL: :ROFL: :ROFL: :ROFL: you sure are funny.

Point in fact: None of my in-laws or people I am connected with in Crimea lost their properties, including a cripple who owns a very nice plot of land right at the black-sea in the middle of Evpatoria.

Now I am sure that the 20-30 oddball people in Crimea can't speak for the masses, but for me it shows that honest & willing administration was possible for many.
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: Markje on April 29, 2019, 02:43:06 PM



I have no idea what happened to Stirlitz's properties. You can mock me all you what meanwhile but it doesn't change that new ownership of crimea means new rules and new administration. Failure to register said properties is a sure-fire way to loose them.

I am nearly 100  perent certain that that 'new govt' of Crimea told everyone that Ikrainian owndership docs would suffice as proof of ownership and that Markje posted to that effect...
Yes, I believed so too, as we were discussing some other claim of land lost.....

I thought that was NS1, but I could have been misstaken as he was rather prickly about that
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: andrewfi on April 30, 2019, 07:09:52 AM
I recall that, at the time, there were quite a few people who had property that they had never registered because they didn't actually have any right to it.

Under the previous regime that seemed to not be an issue for the authorities but the new government wanted to end the 'informal' property arrangements. Of course, it is easily understandable that people who had built homes or businesses on land to which they had no ownership rights were rather miffed when they found they could not rectify matters and that they'd blame anyone other than themselves for their self-inflicted predicament - this is normal human stuff.

Similar stuff used to happen in Spain and, quite often the current owners were, themselves, victims of people they'd bought real estate from. Of course, one can reasonably ask why the buyers did not check the legal situation at the time of purchase. In my opinion, these 'innocent victims' were complicit by dint of their choice to not look too closely at the gift horse they took possession of.
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: msmoby on April 30, 2019, 10:13:44 AM
Andrewfi

When were you last on the peninsula?

Where do you get your 'info'?









Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: Confederate on April 30, 2019, 11:48:42 AM
Andrew proving yet again that he’s never been to Ukraine, nor is he truly knowledgeable about Crimea.

I’ll take the word of a native Crimean over puffers Andy and Mark.

quote:
“Locals largely focus on different complaints. They invariably denigrate the new bureaucrats as carpetbaggers, using the word “varyagi” in Russian, an old word for Viking outsiders, especially when it comes to land confiscation.

The city of Sevastopol claims that it must repossess at least 10,000 plots to help create a rational development plan. The owners howl that the “mass land grab” will benefit crooked developers and senior officials who covet what when stitched together amounts to sprawling tracts of choice seaside property.

“Nobody thought it would be as bad, with issues emerging suddenly like the land plots,” said Roman Kiyashko, the burly Communist Party candidate for governor whose campaign slogan, “Your man from Sevastopol,” emphasized his native roots. “Russian officials act like an elephant in a china shop. They just implement their policies with no feedback.”


https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nytimes.com/2017/09/30/world/europe/crimea-annexation-russia-ukraine.amp.html
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: Markje on April 30, 2019, 01:00:18 PM
Andrew proving yet again that he’s never been to Ukraine, nor is he truly knowledgeable about Crimea.

I’ll take the word of a native Crimean over puffers Andy and Mark.

quote:
“Locals largely focus on different complaints. They invariably denigrate the new bureaucrats as carpetbaggers, using the word “varyagi” in Russian, an old word for Viking outsiders, especially when it comes to land confiscation.

The city of Sevastopol claims that it must repossess at least 10,000 plots to help create a rational development plan. The owners howl that the “mass land grab” will benefit crooked developers and senior officials who covet what when stitched together amounts to sprawling tracts of choice seaside property.

“Nobody thought it would be as bad, with issues emerging suddenly like the land plots,” said Roman Kiyashko, the burly Communist Party candidate for governor whose campaign slogan, “Your man from Sevastopol,” emphasized his native roots. “Russian officials act like an elephant in a china shop. They just implement their policies with no feedback.”


https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nytimes.com/2017/09/30/world/europe/crimea-annexation-russia-ukraine.amp.html

you do realise that i speak native crimeans weekly and my wife daily.

an article in pro western newspapers is just not believable.

i am in crimea july this year. boots in the mud etc.
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: Confederate on April 30, 2019, 01:19:55 PM
Andrew proving yet again that he’s never been to Ukraine, nor is he truly knowledgeable about Crimea.

I’ll take the word of a native Crimean over puffers Andy and Mark.

quote:
“Locals largely focus on different complaints. They invariably denigrate the new bureaucrats as carpetbaggers, using the word “varyagi” in Russian, an old word for Viking outsiders, especially when it comes to land confiscation.

The city of Sevastopol claims that it must repossess at least 10,000 plots to help create a rational development plan. The owners howl that the “mass land grab” will benefit crooked developers and senior officials who covet what when stitched together amounts to sprawling tracts of choice seaside property.

“Nobody thought it would be as bad, with issues emerging suddenly like the land plots,” said Roman Kiyashko, the burly Communist Party candidate for governor whose campaign slogan, “Your man from Sevastopol,” emphasized his native roots. “Russian officials act like an elephant in a china shop. They just implement their policies with no feedback.”


https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nytimes.com/2017/09/30/world/europe/crimea-annexation-russia-ukraine.amp.html

you do realise that i speak native crimeans weekly and my wife daily.

an article in pro western newspapers is just not believable.

i am in crimea july this year. boots in the mud etc.


So says you, the puffer.

How many people in Crimea would like to speak out but don’t for fear of being labeled an “enemy of the state” and unlawfully detained for life?

Human rights abuses of activists, isolation, unlawful movement and detainment.

http://khpg.org/en/index.php?id=1554002531
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: andrewfi on April 30, 2019, 01:43:06 PM
"detained for life"
Are you channeling moby these days?

Why are you just making stuff up?

You will never convince anyone by telling lies, it just doesn't work - whoops, sorry, I was wrong. You might convince people who know nothing and have no interest in knowing anything. Real people, nope, lies don't work on people who can think and learn. So, why do it here?
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: Markje on April 30, 2019, 02:11:31 PM
So says you, the puffer.

How many people in Crimea would like to speak out but don’t for fear of being labeled an “enemy of the state” and unlawfully detained for life?

Human rights abuses of activists, isolation, unlawful movement and detainment.

http://khpg.org/en/index.php?id=1554002531

Nobody is fearing anything, if you had been to russia, you'd know that.
Crimea is a whole different case, all people there have been living in Heaven for 5 years now, so nobody there would like to speak against Russia.

Where Crimea was the worst-performing state of Ukraine (economicly speaking) and investments were none, this has all changed.
People feel it in their wallet every day, so you can bet your ass off that everybody is in good report with Russia.
Every year I go there, I keep being amazed at the sheer amount of Russia flags, putin baubles and other pro-russian stuff.
You just can't make that stuff with surpressing the local people.

Mark.
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: msmoby on April 30, 2019, 02:29:51 PM


Nobody is fearing anything, if you had been to russia, you'd know that.


I am sat with 4 of 'em and you are kidding yourself ....  I spend a LOT of time in the region that ajoins Crimea

A LOT of Russians question corruption from the top down....it is THE main issue in every Ivanov index survey of the Sberbank


Russian is seen by many as been run by an elite for the elite's benefit

Now you are being more than a mite disingenuous..



Crimea is a whole different case, all people there have been living in Heaven for 5 years now, so nobody there would like to speak against Russia.

'All'? 

I can name you people who lost their jobs, homes and had to pack up and live the peninsula for speaking out about injustice..


Where Crimea was the worst-performing state of Ukraine (economicly speaking) and investments were none, this has all changed.
People feel it in their wallet every day, so you can bet your ass off that everybody is in good report with Russia.
Every year I go there, I keep being amazed at the sheer amount of Russia flags, putin baubles and other pro-russian stuff.
You just can't make that stuff with surpressing the local people.

Mark.

Many businesses that closed have not reopened and despite your assurances, tourism is not anywhere near back to when Ukrainians flocked

Newsflash...many Russians do not trust Crimean's ..it has long had a reputation as being corrupt

Then there's the matter of Tatar land claims...that date back to Soviet times...

You are speaking on behalf of Eth. Russians..not the indigenous people or those that made their lives there while 60 years being undisputed part of Ukraine

Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: Confederate on April 30, 2019, 05:34:35 PM
"detained for life"
Are you channeling moby these days?

Why are you just making stuff up?

You will never convince anyone by telling lies, it just doesn't work - whoops, sorry, I was wrong. You might convince people who know nothing and have no interest in knowing anything. Real people, nope, lies don't work on people who can think and learn. So, why do it here?

Mirror, mirror on the wall...
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: B.B. on May 01, 2019, 01:58:40 AM
I have no idea what happened to Stirlitz's properties.

Indeed, and since his return, he hasn't been awfully communicative on the topic here............

Probably because this has become a "Oh, but Russia totes didn't invade Crimea" gaslighting thread?  Yes, more of the usual.  :coffeeread:

B/B
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: andrewfi on May 01, 2019, 02:05:48 AM
Confederate, you are posting stuff that you made up as fact. That's dishonest, that's you, that's not me.

If you dislike the characterisation then stop lying. Simples!
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: Markje on May 01, 2019, 05:14:27 AM


Nobody is fearing anything, if you had been to russia, you'd know that.


I am sat with 4 of 'em and you are kidding yourself ....  I spend a LOT of time in the region that ajoins Crimea

A LOT of Russians question corruption from the top down....it is THE main issue in every Ivanov index survey of the Sberbank
Question is not the same as fear, i thought you were an english native speaker?

Quote
Crimea is a whole different case, all people there have been living in Heaven for 5 years now, so nobody there would like to speak against Russia.

'All'? 

I can name you people who lost their jobs, homes and had to pack up and live the peninsula for speaking out about injustice..
Let me explain the language used: , all people [currently living] there.

Note the 2 inserted words.
Quote

Where Crimea was the worst-performing state of Ukraine (economicly speaking) and investments were none, this has all changed.
People feel it in their wallet every day, so you can bet your ass off that everybody is in good report with Russia.
Every year I go there, I keep being amazed at the sheer amount of Russia flags, putin baubles and other pro-russian stuff.
You just can't make that stuff with surpressing the local people.

Mark.

Many businesses that closed have not reopened and despite your assurances, tourism is not anywhere near back to when Ukrainians flocked

You might want to check the numbers, last year was a record-breaking year for crimea, including times under ukrainian rule. This year will be even busier is the general expectation. All cheap/middle class hotels are booked solid and even the more luxurious ones are starting to sell out.

https://primechaniya.ru/home/news/aprel-2019/dorogo-no-otboya-net-krymu-prorochat-horoshij-kurortnyj-sezon/?fbclid=IwAR19aoeUkhiJ7Umb6-J1jDv5W98KUVTunUqolBpPOzOF9XQiu0pmUgctgoE

Quote
Newsflash...many Russians do not trust Crimean's ..it has long had a reputation as being corrupt
And who was adjudicator during that long time? and you speak of "had" as in past-tense, could it be that this slowly changed after 2014?

Quote
Then there's the matter of Tatar land claims...that date back to Soviet times...

You are speaking on behalf of Eth. Russians..not the indigenous people or those that made their lives there while 60 years being undisputed part of Ukraine
I speak for all people currently living in Crimea, including the Tatars. They are quite happy that they can now talk to the government in their native tongue instead of having to resort to Ukrainian. And there are more of such changes you fail to pick up every time Crimea is brought up. You are either someone suffering from Dementia or you simply do not want to hear how things changed for the better and cling to an abusive failed state that used to rule Crimea.

And since the change in 2014, Ukraine went further down the crapper, whose fault that is i will not expand on here in this topic.
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: Confederate on May 01, 2019, 08:02:17 AM


Nobody is fearing anything, if you had been to russia, you'd know that.


I am sat with 4 of 'em and you are kidding yourself ....  I spend a LOT of time in the region that ajoins Crimea

A LOT of Russians question corruption from the top down....it is THE main issue in every Ivanov index survey of the Sberbank
Question is not the same as fear, i thought you were an english native speaker?

Quote
Crimea is a whole different case, all people there have been living in Heaven for 5 years now, so nobody there would like to speak against Russia.

'All'? 

I can name you people who lost their jobs, homes and had to pack up and live the peninsula for speaking out about injustice..
Let me explain the language used: , all people [currently living] there.

Note the 2 inserted words.
Quote

Where Crimea was the worst-performing state of Ukraine (economicly speaking) and investments were none, this has all changed.
People feel it in their wallet every day, so you can bet your ass off that everybody is in good report with Russia.
Every year I go there, I keep being amazed at the sheer amount of Russia flags, putin baubles and other pro-russian stuff.
You just can't make that stuff with surpressing the local people.

Mark.

Many businesses that closed have not reopened and despite your assurances, tourism is not anywhere near back to when Ukrainians flocked

You might want to check the numbers, last year was a record-breaking year for crimea, including times under ukrainian rule. This year will be even busier is the general expectation. All cheap/middle class hotels are booked solid and even the more luxurious ones are starting to sell out.

https://primechaniya.ru/home/news/aprel-2019/dorogo-no-otboya-net-krymu-prorochat-horoshij-kurortnyj-sezon/?fbclid=IwAR19aoeUkhiJ7Umb6-J1jDv5W98KUVTunUqolBpPOzOF9XQiu0pmUgctgoE

Quote
Newsflash...many Russians do not trust Crimean's ..it has long had a reputation as being corrupt
And who was adjudicator during that long time? and you speak of "had" as in past-tense, could it be that this slowly changed after 2014?

Quote
Then there's the matter of Tatar land claims...that date back to Soviet times...

You are speaking on behalf of Eth. Russians..not the indigenous people or those that made their lives there while 60 years being undisputed part of Ukraine
I speak for all people currently living in Crimea, including the Tatars. They are quite happy that they can now talk to the government in their native tongue instead of having to resort to Ukrainian. And there are more of such changes you fail to pick up every time Crimea is brought up. You are either someone suffering from Dementia or you simply do not want to hear how things changed for the better and cling to an abusive failed state that used to rule Crimea.

And since the change in 2014, Ukraine went further down the crapper, whose fault that is i will not expand on here in this topic.

More bold faced lies from puffer Mark.

Tatar’s are decidedly NOT happy with the Russian occupation.

The main reason they arrested him is that he is a Crimean Tatar,” Bekirova says of her father, who is not allowed visits or calls from relatives. “It’s possible that his arrest had something to do with my mother being a member of the Mejlis [the Crimean Tatar assembly] or because I work for the Crimean Tatar television station ATR, which tells people what’s going on in Crimea.

“But above all I think Russia wants to use him as an example to scare the entire Crimean Tatar people – to show that even someone who has had a leg amputated and has diabetes and serious heart problems can be arrested and held in such conditions
.”


https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.irishtimes.com/news/world/europe/crimean-tatars-stand-firm-against-russian-occupation-of-homeland-1.3811335%3fmode=amp
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: AvHdB on May 01, 2019, 08:20:45 AM
While the link below is over a year old it defines many of the issues that are at play on the Krim.



https://jamestown.org/program/ukraines-everest-estate-llc-v-russia-about-more-than-money/
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: Markje on May 01, 2019, 09:02:43 AM

More bold faced lies from puffer Mark.

Tatar’s are decidedly NOT happy with the Russian occupation.

The main reason they arrested him is that he is a Crimean Tatar,” Bekirova says of her father, who is not allowed visits or calls from relatives. “It’s possible that his arrest had something to do with my mother being a member of the Mejlis [the Crimean Tatar assembly] or because I work for the Crimean Tatar television station ATR, which tells people what’s going on in Crimea.

“But above all I think Russia wants to use him as an example to scare the entire Crimean Tatar people – to show that even someone who has had a leg amputated and has diabetes and serious heart problems can be arrested and held in such conditions
.”


https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.irishtimes.com/news/world/europe/crimean-tatars-stand-firm-against-russian-occupation-of-homeland-1.3811335%3fmode=amp
You do realise that he is not only a Tatar, but also a terrorist, right?

Terrorists are a whole different ballgame from normal people.

No, I do not speak for terrorists, who are also currently not living inside Crimea. (And quite frankly, I couldn' care less about terrorists rights ).
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: Confederate on May 01, 2019, 09:20:27 AM

More bold faced lies from puffer Mark.

Tatar’s are decidedly NOT happy with the Russian occupation.

The main reason they arrested him is that he is a Crimean Tatar,” Bekirova says of her father, who is not allowed visits or calls from relatives. “It’s possible that his arrest had something to do with my mother being a member of the Mejlis [the Crimean Tatar assembly] or because I work for the Crimean Tatar television station ATR, which tells people what’s going on in Crimea.

“But above all I think Russia wants to use him as an example to scare the entire Crimean Tatar people – to show that even someone who has had a leg amputated and has diabetes and serious heart problems can be arrested and held in such conditions
.”


https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.irishtimes.com/news/world/europe/crimean-tatars-stand-firm-against-russian-occupation-of-homeland-1.3811335%3fmode=amp
You do realise that he is not only a Tatar, but also a terrorist, right?

Terrorists are a whole different ballgame from normal people.

No, I do not speak for terrorists, who are also currently not living inside Crimea. (And quite frankly, I couldn' care less about terrorists rights ).


He’s not even remotely a terrorist, this was an obvious setup and frame job by Putin’s FSB to terrorize the Crimean Tatar’s into total submission.

Stop telling bold-faced lies Mark. The Russian authorities will stop at nothing to silence dissenters, but the Tatar’s and others can see the obvious truths.
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: Markje on May 01, 2019, 11:29:48 AM

More bold faced lies from puffer Mark.

Tatar’s are decidedly NOT happy with the Russian occupation.

The main reason they arrested him is that he is a Crimean Tatar,” Bekirova says of her father, who is not allowed visits or calls from relatives. “It’s possible that his arrest had something to do with my mother being a member of the Mejlis [the Crimean Tatar assembly] or because I work for the Crimean Tatar television station ATR, which tells people what’s going on in Crimea.

“But above all I think Russia wants to use him as an example to scare the entire Crimean Tatar people – to show that even someone who has had a leg amputated and has diabetes and serious heart problems can be arrested and held in such conditions
.”


https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.irishtimes.com/news/world/europe/crimean-tatars-stand-firm-against-russian-occupation-of-homeland-1.3811335%3fmode=amp
You do realise that he is not only a Tatar, but also a terrorist, right?

Terrorists are a whole different ballgame from normal people.

No, I do not speak for terrorists, who are also currently not living inside Crimea. (And quite frankly, I couldn' care less about terrorists rights ).


He’s not even remotely a terrorist, this was an obvious setup and frame job by Putin’s FSB to terrorize the Crimean Tatar’s into total submission.

Stop telling bold-faced lies Mark. The Russian authorities will stop at nothing to silence dissenters, but the Tatar’s and others can see the obvious truths.

if you believe that i will not continue this discussion. its pointless
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: cufflinks on May 01, 2019, 12:25:50 PM
Incredible that Igor after 8 years and a full tour of military duty comes back as a much more serious and mature man looking to see if there is any consulting potential here at RUA, for example, translations, discreet background inquiries of potential UA Brides or just a savvy local friend to make visits more accommodative - and - his last post on this thread was on page two and the rest a bunch of egoists who could give a damn about Igor and how he is doing posting typical RU versus UA bollox.  Next you will accuse each other of drinking your bloody Orange Juice.

The Area 51 members will know of what OJ I am speaking.
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: Confederate on May 01, 2019, 01:34:34 PM

More bold faced lies from puffer Mark.

Tatar’s are decidedly NOT happy with the Russian occupation.

The main reason they arrested him is that he is a Crimean Tatar,” Bekirova says of her father, who is not allowed visits or calls from relatives. “It’s possible that his arrest had something to do with my mother being a member of the Mejlis [the Crimean Tatar assembly] or because I work for the Crimean Tatar television station ATR, which tells people what’s going on in Crimea.

“But above all I think Russia wants to use him as an example to scare the entire Crimean Tatar people – to show that even someone who has had a leg amputated and has diabetes and serious heart problems can be arrested and held in such conditions
.”


https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.irishtimes.com/news/world/europe/crimean-tatars-stand-firm-against-russian-occupation-of-homeland-1.3811335%3fmode=amp
You do realise that he is not only a Tatar, but also a terrorist, right?

Terrorists are a whole different ballgame from normal people.

No, I do not speak for terrorists, who are also currently not living inside Crimea. (And quite frankly, I couldn' care less about terrorists rights ).


He’s not even remotely a terrorist, this was an obvious setup and frame job by Putin’s FSB to terrorize the Crimean Tatar’s into total submission.

Stop telling bold-faced lies Mark. The Russian authorities will stop at nothing to silence dissenters, but the Tatar’s and others can see the obvious truths.

if you believe that i will not continue this discussion. its pointless

Pointless for you because you live in an alternate reality Universe.

It’s not pointless for astute readers. I suggest they also read the link AvHdB posted just upthread.
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: Confederate on May 01, 2019, 01:35:50 PM
Incredible that Igor after 8 years and a full tour of military duty comes back as a much more serious and mature man looking to see if there is any consulting potential here at RUA, for example, translations, discreet background inquiries of potential UA Brides or just a savvy local friend to make visits more accommodative - and - his last post on this thread was on page two and the rest a bunch of egoists who could give a damn about Igor and how he is doing posting typical RU versus UA bollox.  Next you will accuse each other of drinking your bloody Orange Juice.

The Area 51 members will know of what OJ I am speaking.


Let Stirlitz speak for himself, or better yet repost his entire post.
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: NS1 on May 01, 2019, 01:53:05 PM
What happened here, happens on 95% of most threads.
People arguing. Whats funny is the same cast of characters
every time. A smart fellow would realize this and stop.

Most argue until tired, then wait for next thread and start over.
Same shit different topic. But if you wait, the topics gets repeated.
Kyrm was argued to point of nausea, Died off and here we are again
Same people  arguing the same  thing. I believe there is an expression
for this sort of thing.

Definition of insanity. :)
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: Confederate on May 01, 2019, 03:41:15 PM
What happened here, happens on 95% of most threads.
People arguing. Whats funny is the same cast of characters
every time. A smart fellow would realize this and stop.

Most argue until tired, then wait for next thread and start over.
Same shit different topic. But if you wait, the topics gets repeated.
Kyrm was argued to point of nausea, Died off and here we are again
Same people  arguing the same  thing. I believe there is an expression
for this sort of thing.

Definition of insanity. :)

So then why don’t you stay out of the thread. You obviously don’t have the moral fiber and stamina to fight verbally or in writing for those who’ve had their lands stolen and are in prison suffering human rights abuses.

Be like 2tall and start a bikini models thread. Stay out of threads requiring a moral backbone.
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: Confederate on May 01, 2019, 03:46:25 PM
The reality of Tatar’s opinion and resistance to RF occupation of their historic homeland:

“Ukraine lists Bekirov as one of more than 70 of its citizens who are political prisoners in Russian-run jails.

About half are members of a Crimean Tatar community that fiercely opposes Russia’s annexation of their homeland, which began five years ago when “little green men” seized state buildings and strategic sites across the Black Sea peninsula..

These Russian soldiers without insignia established de facto Kremlin control over Crimea, and prepared it for a referendum on March 16th, 2014, which Moscow claims legitimised its occupation of a region twice the size of Northern Ireland.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.irishtimes.com/news/world/europe/crimean-tatars-stand-firm-against-russian-occupation-of-homeland-1.3811335%3fmode=amp
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: Confederate on May 01, 2019, 06:50:19 PM
On the theft of the property of ordinary citizens as well as others.

“In Yalta, one land confiscation ended in tragedy after the longtime owner of a beachfront cafe discovered that it had been demolished and the cafe contract awarded to a different, anonymous developer. He committed suicide by setting himself on fire in a city park last September.

Oligarchs and other wealthy businessmen, mostly Ukrainian, lost billions of dollars in properties expropriated after annexation. But the land fight in Sevastopol seems to affect mostly ordinary people like retired teachers and navy veterans.”

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nytimes.com/2017/09/30/world/europe/crimea-annexation-russia-ukraine.amp.html
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: cufflinks on May 01, 2019, 09:45:53 PM
Incredible that Igor after 8 years and a full tour of military duty comes back as a much more serious and mature man looking to see if there is any consulting potential here at RUA, for example, translations, discreet background inquiries of potential UA Brides or just a savvy local friend to make visits more accommodative - and - his last post on this thread was on page two and the rest a bunch of egoists who could give a damn about Igor and how he is doing posting typical RU versus UA bollox.  Next you will accuse each other of drinking your bloody Orange Juice.

The Area 51 members will know of what OJ I am speaking.


Let Stirlitz speak for himself, or better yet repost his entire post.

I consider Igor a friend and you all are deliberately shiteing all over his re-intro thread - show some bloody class. Plenty of other threads for RU vs UA bull bollux... you savvy kee moe sabie?  5 Pages of horse manure since Igor's last post in this topic was completely uncalled for.
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: Confederate on May 01, 2019, 11:40:15 PM
Thank you. Not so good as five/ten years ago. The Crimea is lost and a lot of business with it too as well as my life style and some property there. But it’s life. I guess I am still luckier than certain Syrians. No bombing and gas attacks from Russian planes so far. One thing is for certain, I spend more time with my wife now that I no longer shuttle between Odessa and the Crimea. And I’m a different person. I am tougher and more determined now. I was in the army and got my own AKM at home now. I don’t give up.

No bombing and gas attacks from Russian planes so far.


That’s a pretty revealing statement from a young man who knows that a large part of his country was stolen by military force and another part is still under occupation as the bully from the East attempts to Balkanize his country.
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: Confederate on May 03, 2019, 08:00:59 AM
Russia boycotts International Tribune on Ukrainian sailors, what a surprise! Not.

Ukraine has turned to the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) over Russia’s seizure of three Ukrainian naval vessels and their crew.  Critical hearings are due on 10-11 May into Ukraine’s application for provisional measures to get the 24 men released.  Russia has a long track record of flouting international rulings and has just announced that it will not attend the open hearings on 10 May.  This ruling will, however, matter and Moscow is currently endeavouring to ‘prove’ that ITLOS does not have jurisdiction over the case.  Russia could  checkmate itself since one of the reasons why the Tribunal would decide it does not have jurisdiction is if it was proven that this was part of military conflict, which Russia has every reason to deny.


http://khpg.org/en/index.php?id=1556452166
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: Confederate on May 03, 2019, 09:00:03 AM
The Crimean economy is heavy militarized and dominated by a elite group criminals according to this article.


https://www.ecfr.eu/article/commentary_crimea_russias_newest_potemkin_village
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: Markje on May 03, 2019, 11:26:07 AM
The Crimean economy is heavy militarized and dominated by a elite group criminals according to this article.


https://www.ecfr.eu/article/commentary_crimea_russias_newest_potemkin_village

the crimean economy is tourism front and center. anyone with a brain couldve foreseen that
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: cufflinks on May 15, 2019, 01:42:20 PM
Bumping and sharing this info in various Ukraine Centric Threads:

   U.S. Embassy is looking for new Wardens:

Dear Friends:

The American Citizen Services unit is in the process of rebuilding our network of Wardens to ensure that we are able to communicate as effectively as possible with U.S. citizens in the event of an emergency. We are looking for volunteers to serve as Wardens in various regions of Ukraine. If you think you or someone you know may be interested, or you just want to learn more - let us know!

Wardens are private citizens who help the Embassy help U.S. citizens in need.  They assist travelers in distress, help us track down missing U.S. citizens, and, in the event of a natural disaster or other emergency, help us locate other American citizens so we can help get them to safety.  Most often, however, Wardens are called on to be our ‘eyes and ears’ in the community, providing valuable feedback on what life is like for ordinary U.S. citizens in every corner of Ukraine. Wardens are usually American citizens who are longer-term residents of Ukraine and, ideally, speak some Ukrainian or Russian. Please note that this is a voluntary position that does not imply financial reimbursement.

We need wardens in major cities like Chernivtsi, Dnipropetrovsk, Ivano-Frankivsk, Cherkasy, Kherson, Khmelnytsky, Lviv, Kropyvnytskyi, Mykolaiv, Poltava, Rivne, Sumy, Ternopil, Uzhgorod, Vinnytsya, Zaporizhzhya, Zhytomyr, Volyn, and Odesa. Wardens in smaller cities and rural areas are also uniquely important because those can be the hardest places for us to reach in an emergency.

If you would like to be our Warden, please provide us with your full name, DOB, passport number and your contact details via email at  KyivACS@.... Once you notify us of your interest, we’ll get back to you with further instructions.

Best regards,

American Citizen Services | Consular Section

U.S. Embassy | 4 Igor Sikorsky St., Kyiv 04112, Ukraine

Tel (380-44) 521 – 5566 | Fax (380-44) 521 – 5544
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: Stirlitz on July 01, 2020, 06:39:19 PM
Somebody, not Mark, missing the point, again. At the instant of the coup, the state of Ukraine as it existed under the legitimate head of state Yanukovych ended. A new state was formed and, eventually, a new president and head of state was chosen and a new constitution created.
Rubbish. The Ukrainian state did not end with Yanukovich running away to his masters in Russia. In fact, the parliament remained. Just the cover of a fake president-Russian agent was blown. It has nothing to do with a state ceasing to exist.

I have no idea what happened to Stirlitz's properties.
I lost everything save one of my cars and all that I could stuff into it.

I also lost all of my tourist business in the Crimea.

I lost many friends, connections, opportunities, prospects, etc.

I lost my plains and mountains where I often wandered and enjoyed the nature and quietness.

I cannot even visit my father and grandfather%u2019s graves.

In a nutshell, I lost an entire life. Not that I had to start it from scratch in Odessa, where luckily my wife has a place to live and I also had quite a lot of business and so on, but let%u2019s say I lost half of everything, roughly.

And it is not that I cannot go to the Crimea. It is true that I don%u2019t want to run a risk of being arrested by FSB aka KGB aka NKVD aka ChK or simply being summarily killed by FSB thugs like it happened to many Tatars and Ukrainians whose mutilated bodies were sometimes discovered later without any trace (no murderers found and charged). But it is not the main reason.

Even if it was completely safe to go to the Crimea, there is little point of going there other than pick up some spare parts for my car that I had stashed away for years, tools from the garage, old books and my second Volga which is docked there and cannot even be driven there, so it is a challenge to remove it to Odessa. Everything else is gone. No cruise ships at Yalta and Sevastopol. No visitors like folk at this forum to Simferopol. All phone numbers are invalid. All prices are in rubles and double or triple the Ukrainian ones. Russian laws are there which are quite different, Russian ways that I hate, and Russian unlawfullness. And I am no longer a local there, having to cross the border as a foreigner and being able to stay only 180 days a year - AT MY OWN FVCKING HOME!!!

Markje, imagine losing HALF of everything you own, do, enjoy, etc. including your income, family, friends, belongings, work, hobbies, etc. Then you will have very vague but still an idea what I lost when Russia stole my soil.

I am not the only one like this. Tens of thousands of the Crimeans have had a similar fate.

Because of that, I damn both Russia/Huylo and everyone who supports it/him. If you do, you too. May the same fate befall you. Then you will get a damn good idea how much I lost and how I feel.
I speak for all people currently living in Crimea, including the Tatars. They are quite happy that they can now talk to the government in their native tongue instead of having to resort to Ukrainian.
I don%u2019t know how you dare to speak for all people in the Crimea but you certainly have no authorization from all of them.

As for having to resort to Ukrainian, this is total lie and rubbish. When I lived in the Crimea I never had to 'resort' to Ukranian. I don%u2019t even have to do it now living in Odessa (in fact, my Ukrainian is still far from perfect even now because I hardly speak it in Odessa as few people speak it here). And how can this make one happy I fail to grasp. Perhaps for complete idiots who are unable to fully master even their mother tongue it is a bliss, not having to see a single word in a language that only slightly differs from their own.

I would refrain from debunking other stuff you posted above.
Indeed, and since his return, he hasn't been awfully communicative on the topic here............
I see no point of being too active here as you are pro-Russian as well as many other members. I am not a 'couch warrior' and prefer a real fight to words. Like I said, I own an AKM and am always ready to put it into action if the Nazis dare come to Odessa. They can only have it when I am dead, and I fvcking mean it. It%u2019s enough to lose one home. This time I am either losing nothing or my life.

The only thing I can say is: be damned for supporting the neo-Nazi Russia and suffer what we suffered in Ukraine because of it.
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: AvHdB on July 01, 2020, 08:53:52 PM
While I suspect the words of Iegor are harsh to some, everything that I have seen and heard points to a reality that he describes.

Yes Putin has accomplishments for Russia that one can admire, but as many before him, cut from a Soviet mentality, he has managed to distract his citizens from real domestic problems. On an International arena worked to promote his own 'Kremlin' centric agenda. 
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: Manny on July 01, 2020, 11:33:10 PM
I have no idea what happened to Stirlitz's properties.
I lost everything save one of my cars and all that I could stuff into it.

Why did you lose property? Who did you lose it to? What prevented you staying there?
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: Markje on July 02, 2020, 01:45:12 AM
I have no idea what happened to Stirlitz's properties.
I lost everything save one of my cars and all that I could stuff into it.

Why did you lose property? Who did you lose it to? What prevented you staying there?

@Stirlitz you may have lost many, and may even know many in the same boat as you.
I am sorry you lost all that, it isn't normal or even defendable in any way.

But the truth is that most Crimeans did not.

You talk how you were never 'forced' to use Ukrainian in Crimea. That is because everyone flaunted the law, but the law was there anyway. What you felt about being a foreigner, is what my mother-in-law felt whilst being part of Ukraine. And I know many, many people like her also. In the end I believe 20% of Crimea did not want to return to Russia, however also did not want to return to Ukraine because of the state of the government at that time. 20% of all Crimeans is a lot of people, 1 in 5 of everyone on the streets there.

And like you, I do not visit Ukraine because of the same fear. I do not fear extradition by ukraine, but I do fear if I land on Kiev/borispol i am immediately detained for visiting Crimea without approval.
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: B.B. on July 02, 2020, 01:51:53 AM
I have no idea what happened to Stirlitz's properties.
I lost everything save one of my cars and all that I could stuff into it.

Why did you lose property? Who did you lose it to? What prevented you staying there?

He lost his house in Crimea when Russia illegally seized Ukrainian territory in violation of the 1994 Budapest Memorandum, to which Russia is a signatory and which guaranteed Ukraine's borders in exchange for Ukraine giving up it's nukes.

He then lost his business because, unsurprisingly, tourism dried up in what people were afraid might become a war zone.

He subsequently joined the Ukr military and if he crosses the border and the occupiers get a whiff that he is ex-Ukr Military then he'd be lucky if all he got was tuned up.   

Now, as much as you and another member (or two) like to jack each other off about how it "wasn't an invasion" - which it was - and that there was a "democratic vote" - which was fraudulent and violated the Ukr constitution, but that doesn't matter because the fix was in on it from the beginning - it turns out that Putin's invasion and seizure of Crimea has had Real Consequences for Stirlitz.

Figure.It.Out.

B/B
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: Markje on July 02, 2020, 02:28:00 AM
Now, as much as you and another member (or two) like to jack each other off about how it "wasn't an invasion" - which it was - and that there was a "democratic vote" - which was fraudulent and violated the Ukr constitution, but that doesn't matter because the fix was in on it from the beginning - it turns out that Putin's invasion and seizure of Crimea has had Real Consequences for Stirlitz.

B/B
I'm sorry you drink the western kool-aid B/B.

First, what happened to Stirlitz and those like him is a travesty and shouldn't have to happen. Most of that is on Western sanctions, not on Russia. Those sanctions are wrong whichever way you believe happened to Crimea. Either they are victims of Putin being screwed in the ass and then again by sanctions (way to go), or they made use of their democracy that we hold so dear and got punished for it (oooh nice).

There was no invasion. Crimea was Russian from the get-go, thats why they were 100% confident they would win the vote and didn't send anyone other then those already stationed in Sevastopol. It is true that the Sevastopol military left their base and went to simferopol, but an invasion? Nah. the win was in the pocket from the second the referendum was announced. The only thing the military was there for, was to prevent Ukraine from intefering with it. Almost all ukrainian militaries defected immediatly that day and the ones that didn't went back to Ukraine safe and sound. Nobody got killed because of the vote.

Kosovo also violated a constitution, just like those catalonians in Spain wish to violate spains constitution. Those are also being repressed by the EU because they fear instability in EU countries. Scottish also wish yes/no/yes/no/yes/no to break away from UK. Just like more than 3 out of 4 Crimeans were already dreaming of rejoining Russia, they finally got their chance in 2014 and took it with both hands.

Also, according to my mother in law (and those like her) , she had been stuck in the wrong country from 1990 for 25 years (ok in reality it was 24 years but its the idea that counts). Many crimeans didn't even know they were in ukraine until the USSR fell apart. It also didn't matter in day-to-day life until then. I go there every year and see the improvements every year. (Well in Evpatoria at least, and most years also Simferopol and Saki).

Mark.
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: msmoby on July 02, 2020, 05:11:45 AM
Markje,

You have some cheek 'lecturing' someone from Crimea that reflected the agreement Russia made with Ukraine and breached on bogus pretexts

You have long denied Tatars being oppressed and bought the spin.

When it comes to filtering propaganda, you are blind.

The casual poster will observe your flip flop when Yanu' ran away in the night to Russia.
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: Manny on July 02, 2020, 05:48:25 AM
I have no idea what happened to Stirlitz's properties.
I lost everything save one of my cars and all that I could stuff into it.

Why did you lose property? Who did you lose it to? What prevented you staying there?

He lost his house in Crimea when Russia illegally seized Ukrainian territory in violation of the 1994 Budapest Memorandum, to which Russia is a signatory and which guaranteed Ukraine's borders in exchange for Ukraine giving up it's nukes.

But by what mechanism did he lose the house? Is the allegation Russia transferred ownership to someone else? I am not aware houses were seized. Or maybe they flattened it with a bulldozer? Why didn't he stay there? Is the house still there? The claim creates more questions than it answers by its vagueness.

The claim is he somehow lost a house when Crimea reunified, the question is how or why?
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: Guile on July 02, 2020, 06:41:02 AM
And when's the last time you were in Crimea Moby?  You know nothing dude. 
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: Markje on July 02, 2020, 07:11:54 AM
Markje,

You have some cheek 'lecturing' someone from Crimea that reflected the agreement Russia made with Ukraine and breached on bogus pretexts
You really do have reading problems, I didn't lecture anyone. In fact, I made it clear that what happened to him is in-excusable (second sentence).
Perhaps thats why you're not quoting my original post, it makes you look like a fool with this text next to it.

You have long denied Tatars being oppressed and bought the spin.
And you think this was different when Crimea was in Ukrainian hands? Wake up !
But please continue your ignorance.

When it comes to filtering propaganda, you are blind.
Right back at ya!

The casual poster will observe your flip flop when Yanu' ran away in the night to Russia.
The casual poster will observe no such thing. The casual poster will only see you engaging in every discussion with exactly the opposite position as the forum member that started the discussion.

If it were just me, I might even think I was wrong somehow, despite the personal experience i have on Crimea.

Mark.

Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: AvHdB on July 02, 2020, 07:30:43 AM
Now, as much as you and another member (or two) like to jack each other off about how it "wasn't an invasion" - which it was - and that there was a "democratic vote" - which was fraudulent and violated the Ukr constitution, but that doesn't matter because the fix was in on it from the beginning - it turns out that Putin's invasion and seizure of Crimea has had Real Consequences for Stirlitz.

B/B

First, what happened to Stirlitz and those like him is a travesty and shouldn't have to happen. Most of that is on Western sanctions, not on Russia. Those sanctions are wrong whichever way you believe happened to Crimea.

There would be no sanctions if Russia had abided by the Budapest accords. But if you care to explain your thinking give it a go.
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: Markje on July 02, 2020, 08:28:08 AM

There would be no sanctions if Russia had abided by the Budapest accords. But if you care to explain your thinking give it a go.
Oh thats easy:

Crimeans were victims of Putin screwing them over : Sanctions hurt them again, punishing the victims *again* for being screwed over. Good going.

Crimeans were excercising their right of free will & democracy: They get punished for doing exactly what the west loves: Democracy. Good going (again!)

And what most people seem to forget: By the time referendum was held, Crimea was already no longer part of Ukraine. They seceeded 3 days earlier and became the independent state of Crimea.

The voting ballot also said that :
A) Join Russia
B) Go ahead as an independent state and maybe join RU or UA later.

80% of all people voted A).
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: Confederate on July 02, 2020, 08:32:01 AM
Now, as much as you and another member (or two) like to jack each other off about how it "wasn't an invasion" - which it was - and that there was a "democratic vote" - which was fraudulent and violated the Ukr constitution, but that doesn't matter because the fix was in on it from the beginning - it turns out that Putin's invasion and seizure of Crimea has had Real Consequences for Stirlitz.

B/B
I'm sorry you drink the western kool-aid B/B.

First, what happened to Stirlitz and those like him is a travesty and shouldn't have to happen. Most of that is on Western sanctions, not on Russia. Those sanctions are wrong whichever way you believe happened to Crimea. Either they are victims of Putin being screwed in the ass and then again by sanctions (way to go), or they made use of their democracy that we hold so dear and got punished for it (oooh nice).

There was no invasion. Crimea was Russian from the get-go, thats why they were 100% confident they would win the vote and didn't send anyone other then those already stationed in Sevastopol. It is true that the Sevastopol military left their base and went to simferopol, but an invasion? Nah. the win was in the pocket from the second the referendum was announced. The only thing the military was there for, was to prevent Ukraine from intefering with it. Almost all ukrainian militaries defected immediatly that day and the ones that didn't went back to Ukraine safe and sound. Nobody got killed because of the vote.

Kosovo also violated a constitution, just like those catalonians in Spain wish to violate spains constitution. Those are also being repressed by the EU because they fear instability in EU countries. Scottish also wish yes/no/yes/no/yes/no to break away from UK. Just like more than 3 out of 4 Crimeans were already dreaming of rejoining Russia, they finally got their chance in 2014 and took it with both hands.

Also, according to my mother in law (and those like her) , she had been stuck in the wrong country from 1990 for 25 years (ok in reality it was 24 years but its the idea that counts). Many crimeans didn't even know they were in ukraine until the USSR fell apart. It also didn't matter in day-to-day life until then. I go there every year and see the improvements every year. (Well in Evpatoria at least, and most years also Simferopol and Saki).

Mark.

I met a Russian woman who had relatives in Crimea who went back to Russia proper.

The Russians coming in to Crimea were in her words "carpetbaggers" similar to when the Yankees took over the old south.

Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: msmoby on July 02, 2020, 08:42:23 AM

You really do have reading problems, I didn't lecture anyone.

I 'see'

1/ No invasion
2/ Sanctions are wrong ( but two examples ) isn't insulting his ( or even my intelligence )

'Carry on' .. :'(
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: BillyB on July 02, 2020, 09:08:44 AM
The voting ballot also said that :
A) Join Russia
B) Go ahead as an independent state and maybe join RU or UA later.

80% of all people voted A).

I'm sure it was talked about before so why do you continue to ignore it? Ukraine's Constitution says any changes in its borders must be approved by an ALL Ukrainian referendum. The fact most Ukrainians were left out of the vote made the vote in Crimea illegal. So most Western nations sanctioned Russia. Look on the bright side, it's better than war.
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: Texan77 on July 02, 2020, 09:51:29 AM
Listening to the political winds in the USA sanctions on Russia likely to get worse not better. Democrat likely to come back to power and they feel Russia cost them the election in 2016. Other secrete operative operations Russia has been doing around the world are likely not to pay off for Russia in the long run. The democrats already do not like Russia and now they are getting a chance to make Russia pay.  Do not expect the relationship between Russia and the west to get better anytime soon.

Ukraine which has already seen a big jump in military aid from the USA this year because of democratic pressure likely to get much more help under a democrat government. Already most of the manufactured goods Ukraine used to get from Russia they now get from China. Much less of the natural gas Ukraine uses is much less comes from Russia. Most of the Oil Ukraine uses does not come from Russia. The country is deRussifing fast. !5% per cent of Ukraine work force working out side of Ukraine is stabilizing the country as the money these worker are sending back along with money from the IMF is setting the country up for growth. This year Ukraine will be paving a record number of roads. New solar power plants are being installed. 

Crimea was occupied and the election was completely fake. No one was able to campaign against the vote. Then they never counted the voted and just made up the numbers at the end. This is why nearly all elections in Russia are fake. No one is able to campaign against anything Putin wants. Presidential campaign Putin choses who can be on the ballot and any body is not who campaigns goes to jail. Now Putin wants to be president until 2036. Not much chance for sanctions to end before that.
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: B.B. on July 02, 2020, 12:59:10 PM
I'm sorry you drink the western kool-aid B/B.

It's not me with the "kool-aid" problem.


First, what happened to Stirlitz and those like him is a travesty and shouldn't have to happen.

Oh, look!  You got one right!


Most of that is on Western sanctions, not on Russia.

No invasion= No sanctions.  It's on Russia.


they made use of their democracy that we hold so dear and got punished for it (oooh nice).

In a fraudulent referendum, run by Russia, and conducted in contravention of the Constitution of Ukraine.  Carry on.


There was no invasion.

Bullshit.

Crimea was Russian from the get-go

Crimea was part of Ukraine for decades.  Absent the Russian invasion, it still would be.
 Period, full stop, the end. 

Nah. the win was in the pocket from the second the referendum was announced.

Correct, because: Fraud.  Plus the referendum was illegal under the constitution of Ukraine.  As well as the 1994 Budapest Memorandum, guaranteeing Ukraine's then-existing borders. 

The only thing the military was there for, was to prevent Ukraine from intefering with it.

Yes, to prevent Ukraine from maintaining its territorial integrity.  We know.

Kosovo also violated a constitution, just like those catalonians in Spain wish to violate spains constitution.

Is this your admission that the referendum violated the Constitution of Ukraine?

B/B
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: Lord of the Dance on July 02, 2020, 03:11:53 PM
I see no point of being too active here as you are pro-Russian as well as many other members. I am not a 'couch warrior' and prefer a real fight to words. Like I said, I own an AKM and am always ready to put it into action if the Nazis dare come to Odessa. They can only have it when I am dead, and I fvcking mean it. It’s enough to lose one home. This time I am either losing nothing or my life.

Not all members of RUA play sides. I remain apolitical in most matters of international politics because I'm interested in learning the perspectives of both (or all) parties of a given argument. I'm eagerly awaiting more posts from you Stirlitz.  tiphat
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: Markje on July 02, 2020, 03:13:33 PM
No invasion= No sanctions.  It's on Russia.
Or, those using their democratic right to vote are being punished with sanctions
Or, those getting screwed in the ass by putin are being punished with sanctions.
Whichever way you choose, its still bad sanctions, punishing either the victims ,or those doing what should be celebrated in the west.


they made use of their democracy that we hold so dear and got punished for it (oooh nice).

In a fraudulent referendum, run by Russia, and conducted in contravention of the Constitution of Ukraine.  Carry on.
You omitted the other part of the quote, the one where Crimea was the victim and still got hit by sanctions.
Plus I didn't hear anyone whine when the Constitution of Ukraine was violated by retiring Yanukovich. And in that event the Constitution pointed to a successor to the presidency but oops, they weren't sworn in either. Bad.
Nothing short of a coup.

There was no invasion.

Bullshit.
Then where was the violence, where were the riots, where was the unruly civilians being forced against their will?
Ah thats right, there was none.


Crimea was part of Ukraine for decades.  Absent the Russian invasion, it still would be.
 Period, full stop, the end. 
Yet Crimea didn't want that. They took their shot and it succeeded. I go there every year.

Nah. the win was in the pocket from the second the referendum was announced.

Correct, because: Fraud.  Plus the referendum was illegal under the constitution of Ukraine.  As well as the 1994 Budapest Memorandum, guaranteeing Ukraine's then-existing borders. 
No fraud, the people genuinely wanted to goto Russia. Even before 2014 the place was Russian if you bothered to visit.
Russian/Tatar was the only language spoken, despite it being outlawed. The buildings were built "russian style" as were the streets. Not Ukrainian (Lviv, Odessa, etc. wonderful cities but distinctively different).

The only thing the military was there for, was to prevent Ukraine from intefering with it.

Yes, to prevent Ukraine from maintaining its territorial integrity.  We know.
Without the intervention the vote would still have happened but there would have been tons more death just like in Donbass. Except that would end with Crimea being self-sustained as well and with a much smaller border to protect than Donbass has.
I'm grateful that didn't happen. Just as I would love for Donbass to end and people to stop killing each other there. Donbass is never going to Russia, so why not end it now.

Kosovo also violated a constitution, just like those catalonians in Spain wish to violate spains constitution.

Is this your admission that the referendum violated the Constitution of Ukraine?

B/B
[/quote]
Nope, just looking over the fence to see what the other side is doing.
Except for Kosovo, all those attempts are being discouraged at best (Scotland), or repressed at worst (Catalonians)

Hell, even Moby admits that most people in Crimea are happier than they were under Ukrains thumb. They even had their own respublika with their own set of laws in 2014, so the constitution of Ukraine wasn't as set in stone as you think.

Plus as a lawyer you should take into fact that by the time of the referendum, Crimea already had ceased to exist in Ukraine. They declared independence. (Favorite analogy: Watch Babylon-5 season 3, where the station leaves the earth-alliance).
I think Crimea is along the same lines although not that black and white.
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: Texan77 on July 02, 2020, 03:39:17 PM
If the democrats come to power this is how they feel.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/pelosi-us-should-sanction-russia-for-alleged-bounty-scheme/ar-BB16gSny?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=U218DHP
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: AvHdB on July 02, 2020, 05:42:13 PM
No invasion= No sanctions.  It's on Russia.
Or, those using their democratic right to vote are being punished with sanctions
Or, those getting screwed in the ass by putin are being punished with sanctions.
Whichever way you choose, its still bad sanctions, punishing either the victims ,or those doing what should be celebrated in the west.

Some are resorting to Mobyesque contortions to prove there point. Sorry this is recent history, not five years olds at the dinner table saying they want this vegetable not that one.

But wait we have members saying Russia is better off now because of the sanctions, they are less dependent on oil revenue and everything is fine because of the wisdom of those in the citadel. So come on the Krim is booming and Russia is just dandy today. Putin can shrug off the fact that some of his inner circle are inconvenienced by ineffective sanctions.

The reason for the sanctions are fairly clear to those who are interested in this sort of matter. Russia and before the Soviet Union and for centuries before those in Moscow have meddled and invaded the Borderlands. To hell with the locals it is OUR backyard. Nimbyism at its finest. The Ukraine citizens have repeatedly since they have the freedom to say so expressed a desire to be closer to Western European and not the Czar's, Supreme Leader or what ever the mom de jeur is of those in the Kremlin. It is not for nothing the present little guy is called Hulio and there are those who hear the name Putin spit on the ground.
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: Markje on July 02, 2020, 05:57:22 PM
The reason for the sanctions are fairly clear to those who are interested in this sort of matter. Russia and before the Soviet Union and for centuries before meddled and invaded the Borderlands. The inhabitants have repeatedly since they have the freedom to say so expressed a desire to be closer to Western European and not the Czar's, Supreme Leader or what ever the mom de jeur is of those in the Kremlin. It is not for nothing he is called Hulio and there are those who hear the name Putin spit on the ground. [/size][/font]
Just as there are those that activly hate Rutte and spit on the ground when they hear his name. Tough luck, he is the leader of Netherlands.

As to the moby-esque options ... please tell me where I'm wrong then.

Sanction putin: Yes
Sanction the oligarchs supporting putin: Yes
Sanction the Crimeans: Definately no.
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: BillyB on July 02, 2020, 06:24:14 PM
Plus I didn't hear anyone whine when the Constitution of Ukraine was violated by retiring Yanukovich. And in that event the Constitution pointed to a successor to the presidency but oops, they weren't sworn in either. Bad.
Nothing short of a coup.


How was it a coup? Yanukovich fled Ukraine. How was it a violation of the Constitution to replace Yanukovych? He failed to show up for work. Before Yanukovych left Ukraine, he announced early elections and guess what, they had early elections.

https://www.businessinsider.com/ukraine-president-yanukovich-agrees-to-hold-early-presidential-elections-2014-2
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: Markje on July 02, 2020, 06:26:24 PM
Plus I didn't hear anyone whine when the Constitution of Ukraine was violated by retiring Yanukovich. And in that event the Constitution pointed to a successor to the presidency but oops, they weren't sworn in either. Bad.
Nothing short of a coup.


How was it a coup? Yanukovich fled Ukraine. How was it a violation of the Constitution to replace Yanukovych? He failed to show up for work. Before Yanukovych left Ukraine, he announced early elections and guess what, they had early elections.

https://www.businessinsider.com/ukraine-president-yanukovich-agrees-to-hold-early-presidential-elections-2014-2
Because fleeing the country and failing to show up for work are both not on the list of reasons for which a president can be removed.

The list is finite of exactly 3 items. Read up on the constitution.
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: BillyB on July 02, 2020, 06:44:27 PM
Plus I didn't hear anyone whine when the Constitution of Ukraine was violated by retiring Yanukovich. And in that event the Constitution pointed to a successor to the presidency but oops, they weren't sworn in either. Bad.
Nothing short of a coup.


How was it a coup? Yanukovich fled Ukraine. How was it a violation of the Constitution to replace Yanukovych? He failed to show up for work. Before Yanukovych left Ukraine, he announced early elections and guess what, they had early elections.

https://www.businessinsider.com/ukraine-president-yanukovich-agrees-to-hold-early-presidential-elections-2014-2
Because fleeing the country and failing to show up for work are both not on the list of reasons for which a president can be removed.

The list is finite of exactly 3 items. Read up on the constitution.

Now you value the Ukrainian Constitution. Check out Articles 108 through 111. Also check out Article 73 while you're at it. You seem to think a leader of a nation can just leave forever and not be legally replaced. Insane. Yanukovych was impeached. He could've came back and handled it like a man and start of early elections like he promised but he knew he'd be caught for corruption.

https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Ukraine_2014.pdf?lang=en
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: Texan77 on July 02, 2020, 09:19:37 PM
Because fleeing the country and failing to show up for work are both not on the list of reasons for which a president can be removed.

The list is finite of exactly 3 items. Read up on the constitution.

The UN and their attorneys disagree with you. Transfer of power legal. I show it to you in the constitution years ago. He can be removed because he is unable to do the job. Congress of the Ukraine voted he was unable to do the job on it and it passed.
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: Markje on July 03, 2020, 01:48:28 AM
Because fleeing the country and failing to show up for work are both not on the list of reasons for which a president can be removed.

The list is finite of exactly 3 items. Read up on the constitution.

The UN and their attorneys disagree with you. Transfer of power legal. I show it to you in the constitution years ago. He can be removed because he is unable to do the job. Congress of the Ukraine voted he was unable to do the job on it and it passed.

My wife is also an attorney specialized in Ukrainian law in case you forgot. She agrees with me and said that the list is exactly 3 items and finite. They cannot be amended. This has been discussed at length before.  The lawbooks of Ukraine in print (student annotated version) are in my home. Especially the annotations of the law professor makes her (and me) right. You can not change the constitution because someone fled their country and is unable to do their job therefore. Then you should vote to change the constitution first but that didn't happen. Neither was 1 of 3 reasons used to remove him from power. That means it was an illegal removal of the president.

And to add insult to injury, its not just yanukovich. His successor is also named in case the president is removed. That successor however also was not chosen. So they impeached 2 people at the same time in the same move. That is also not possible according to the constitution.

The UN is simply wrong in this case, they do not have the means to value the constitution I think and just declared it 'ok' for process sake. That doesn't make it any less unlawful what happened.

So from Yanukovich's removal until Poroshenko's election there was no legal president of Ukraine.
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: Markje on July 03, 2020, 02:22:34 AM
https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Ukraine_2014.pdf?lang=en
Article 108

1.resignation;
2.inability to exercise his or her powers for reasons of health;
3.removal from office by the procedure of impeachment;
4.death

109 and 110 are not/applicable because he didn't resign himself nor was he too ill to continue.
Quote
Article 111
Head of state removal
Supreme court powers

The  President  of  Ukraine  may  be  removed  from  office  by  the  Verkhovna  Rada  of Ukraine by the procedure of impeachment, in the event that he or she commits state treason or other crime.The issue of the removal of the President of Ukraine from office by the procedure ofimpeachment  is  initiated  by  the  majority  of  the  constitutional  composition  of  theVerkhovna Rada of Ukraine.To  conduct  the  investigation,  the  Verkhovna  Rada  of  Ukraine  establishes  a  specialtemporary    investigatory    commission    whose    composition    includes    a    special procurator and special investigators.The   conclusions   and   proposals   of   the   temporary   investigatory   commission   are considered at a meeting of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine.For   cause,   the   Verkhovna   Rada   of   Ukraine,   by   no   less   than   two-thirds   of   its constitutional  composition,  adopts  a  decision  on  the  accusation  of  the  President  of Ukraine.The   decision   on   the   removal   of   the   President   of   Ukraine   from   office   by   the procedure of impeachment is adopted by the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine by no less than three-quarters of its constitutional composition, after the review of the case by the Constitutional Court of Ukraine and the receipt of its opinion on the observanceof  the  constitutional  procedure  of  investigation  and  consideration  of  the  case  of impeachment, and the receipt of the opinion of the Supreme Court of Ukraine to the effect that the acts, of which the President of Ukraine is accused, contain elements of state treason or other crime.

None of all that happened, there was no courrt case, let alone someone found guilty. Plus there was no special counsel, etc. etc. etc. So what was stipulated here was not followed. So no legal impeachment. He was also not accused of treason or other crimes that are stipulated above that warrant impeachment.

The last option was death, which was also not true.

Article 73 is also not/applicable as it does not deal with removal of a president.
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: msmoby on July 03, 2020, 03:26:13 AM
Markje doesn't like to be reminded of FACT.

Yanu' was disowned by his own party for ribbing Ukraine's coffers.

If he had stayed, he'd have been arrested and and face trial.

He ran away in the night.
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: Markje on July 03, 2020, 06:22:35 AM
Markje doesn't like to be reminded of FACT.

Yanu' was disowned by his own party for ribbing Ukraine's coffers.

If he had stayed, he'd have been arrested and and face trial.

He ran away in the night.
You have a strange way of thinking of FACT.

If he had stayed, he'd have been killed on sight. and no trial necessary.
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: Texan77 on July 03, 2020, 06:38:01 AM
https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Ukraine_2014.pdf?lang=en
Article 108

1.resignation;
2.inability to exercise his or her powers for reasons of health;
3.removal from office by the procedure of impeachment;
4.death

109 and 110 are not/applicable because he didn't resign himself nor was he too ill to continue.
Quote
Article 111
Head of state removal
Supreme court powers

The  President  of  Ukraine  may  be  removed  from  office  by  the  Verkhovna  Rada  of Ukraine by the procedure of impeachment, in the event that he or she commits state treason or other crime.The issue of the removal of the President of Ukraine from office by the procedure ofimpeachment  is  initiated  by  the  majority  of  the  constitutional  composition  of  theVerkhovna Rada of Ukraine.To  conduct  the  investigation,  the  Verkhovna  Rada  of  Ukraine  establishes  a  specialtemporary    investigatory    commission    whose    composition    includes    a    special procurator and special investigators.The   conclusions   and   proposals   of   the   temporary   investigatory   commission   are considered at a meeting of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine.For   cause,   the   Verkhovna   Rada   of   Ukraine,   by   no   less   than   two-thirds   of   its constitutional  composition,  adopts  a  decision  on  the  accusation  of  the  President  of Ukraine.The   decision   on   the   removal   of   the   President   of   Ukraine   from   office   by   the procedure of impeachment is adopted by the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine by no less than three-quarters of its constitutional composition, after the review of the case by the Constitutional Court of Ukraine and the receipt of its opinion on the observanceof  the  constitutional  procedure  of  investigation  and  consideration  of  the  case  of impeachment, and the receipt of the opinion of the Supreme Court of Ukraine to the effect that the acts, of which the President of Ukraine is accused, contain elements of state treason or other crime.

None of all that happened, there was no courrt case, let alone someone found guilty. Plus there was no special counsel, etc. etc. etc. So what was stipulated here was not followed. So no legal impeachment. He was also not accused of treason or other crimes that are stipulated above that warrant impeachment.

The last option was death, which was also not true.

Article 73 is also not/applicable as it does not deal with removal of a president.

Coups do not end is votes of parliament, next in taking power, with a national vote of a new president  in a few months. They voted her was not healthy to continue and who are you to say he was? Now your saying you have a degree in medicine. Nothing said the health had to be physical and the definition of health was left to parliament. The UN said it was all good. So go take your Russia Propaganda to someone who cares.
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: Texan77 on July 03, 2020, 07:02:41 AM
Markje doesn't like to be reminded of FACT.

Yanu' was disowned by his own party for ribbing Ukraine's coffers.

If he had stayed, he'd have been arrested and and face trial.

He ran away in the night.
You have a strange way of thinking of FACT.

If he had stayed, he'd have been killed on sight. and no trial necessary.

That was caused by Russia who hired snipers to shoot protestors. At the time it was thought he ordered protestors shot. This was done to make is appear to be a coup when it wasn't.
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: Dogsoldier on July 03, 2020, 07:09:33 AM


If he had stayed, he'd have been killed on sight. and no trial necessary.
That’s just speculation Mark.
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: BillyB on July 03, 2020, 10:18:26 AM
https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Ukraine_2014.pdf?lang=en
Article 108

1.resignation;
2.inability to exercise his or her powers for reasons of health;
3.removal from office by the procedure of impeachment;
4.death

109 and 110 are not/applicable because he didn't resign himself nor was he too ill to continue.
Quote
Article 111
Head of state removal
Supreme court powers

The  President  of  Ukraine  may  be  removed  from  office  by  the  Verkhovna  Rada  of Ukraine by the procedure of impeachment, in the event that he or she commits state treason or other crime.The issue of the removal of the President of Ukraine from office by the procedure ofimpeachment  is  initiated  by  the  majority  of  the  constitutional  composition  of  theVerkhovna Rada of Ukraine.To  conduct  the  investigation,  the  Verkhovna  Rada  of  Ukraine  establishes  a  specialtemporary    investigatory    commission    whose    composition    includes    a    special procurator and special investigators.The   conclusions   and   proposals   of   the   temporary   investigatory   commission   are considered at a meeting of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine.For   cause,   the   Verkhovna   Rada   of   Ukraine,   by   no   less   than   two-thirds   of   its constitutional  composition,  adopts  a  decision  on  the  accusation  of  the  President  of Ukraine.The   decision   on   the   removal   of   the   President   of   Ukraine   from   office   by   the procedure of impeachment is adopted by the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine by no less than three-quarters of its constitutional composition, after the review of the case by the Constitutional Court of Ukraine and the receipt of its opinion on the observanceof  the  constitutional  procedure  of  investigation  and  consideration  of  the  case  of impeachment, and the receipt of the opinion of the Supreme Court of Ukraine to the effect that the acts, of which the President of Ukraine is accused, contain elements of state treason or other crime.

None of all that happened, there was no courrt case, let alone someone found guilty. Plus there was no special counsel, etc. etc. etc. So what was stipulated here was not followed. So no legal impeachment. He was also not accused of treason or other crimes that are stipulated above that warrant impeachment.

The last option was death, which was also not true.

Article 73 is also not/applicable as it does not deal with removal of a president.

Yanu was IMPEACHED!!!!! An arrest warrant was issued on him. He was impeached for committing crimes which falls under Article 73 so yes, he can be removed from office legally.

You're at the point of making things up. Of course there is no court case. There was none for Trump. Impeachment is a political process, not a criminal process. Impeachment doesn't take place in criminal court, it takes place in a nation's building where they conduct politics. The quality of evidence is not as important as it is in criminal courts. U.S. Congress could impeach Trump just because they "THINK" Trump committed a crime when talking with the current Ukrainian President.
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: Markje on July 04, 2020, 05:22:04 AM

Yanu was IMPEACHED!!!!! An arrest warrant was issued on him. He was impeached for committing crimes which falls under Article 73 so yes, he can be removed from office legally.
He wasn't LEGALLY impeached. The arrest warrant was not enough, he had to have been tried AND found guilty before impeachment could even begin.

Thats the whole point of the law, that it is followed. It wasn't -> illegal.


You're at the point of making things up. Of course there is no court case. There was none for Trump. Impeachment is a political process, not a criminal process. Impeachment doesn't take place in criminal court, it takes place in a nation's building where they conduct politics. The quality of evidence is not as important as it is in criminal courts. U.S. Congress could impeach Trump just because they "THINK" Trump committed a crime when talking with the current Ukrainian President.
In America maybe. In Ukraine it is a legal process followed by a political one. They work in unison together and if either isn't followed its an illegal coup.
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: Markje on July 04, 2020, 05:34:25 AM
Coups do not end is votes of parliament, next in taking power, with a national vote of a new president  in a few months. They voted her was not healthy to continue and who are you to say he was? Now your saying you have a degree in medicine. Nothing said the health had to be physical and the definition of health was left to parliament. The UN said it was all good. So go take your Russia Propaganda to someone who cares.
I would hope you care about American laws more than Ukrainian ones because you don't give a shit about ukrainian law.

As for russian propaganda: Many top-ukrainian lawyers agree with my side of this story. The law is the law, there is no propaganda in there, just the law.
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: msmoby on July 04, 2020, 06:29:05 AM
Markje,

You are in a sizeable minority of 'Ukrainian legal experts' and Yanu's own political party had disowned him... He ran away from justice and you suggest 'murder' ... :'(
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: msmoby on July 04, 2020, 06:37:50 AM
For those interested in Yanu's confused state of mind in his last days in charge ..

Even HE believes the Russian 'annexation' was a tragedy and hopes to 'persuade' VVP to hand it back   :coffeeread:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viktor_Yanukovych
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: AvHdB on July 04, 2020, 07:57:35 AM
Coups do not end is votes of parliament, next in taking power, with a national vote of a new president  in a few months. They voted her was not healthy to continue and who are you to say he was? Now your saying you have a degree in medicine. Nothing said the health had to be physical and the definition of health was left to parliament. The UN said it was all good. So go take your Russia Propaganda to someone who cares.
I would hope you care about American laws more than Ukrainian ones because you don't give a shit about ukrainian law.

As for russian propaganda: Many top-ukrainian lawyers agree with my side of this story. The law is the law, there is no propaganda in there, just the law.

As far as I can see the laws and constitution of Ukraine were never written for the situation that developed. Was the aftermath and process followed perfect, no. Was the outcome desirable, not really. Is Ukraine better off now rid of the convict, yes.

The reality because of the actions of the players the people of Ukraine have a stronger desire for closer ties with Western European norms and institutions there. For Russia that thought they could once again dominate and control 'there' Borderlands it is a bitter reality to accept.

But in the big picture one can see this as a centuries old chess game and one side just lost a rook.
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: msmoby on July 04, 2020, 08:07:29 AM

Ah right, and you knew what went wrong and therefore its a Lawless country and Russias fault.

NS1 had a similar story and that amounted to 'forgetting' to register your properties with Russia after it joined Crimea.

What Markje conveniently 'forgets' is that Russian informed property owners that Ukrainian property records would be respected .
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: Texan77 on July 04, 2020, 09:14:09 AM

I would hope you care about American laws more than Ukrainian ones because you don't give a shit about ukrainian law.

As for russian propaganda: Many top-ukrainian lawyers agree with my side of this story. The law is the law, there is no propaganda in there, just the law.

The same things happens in the USA. If the constitution reaching a point where the government can not function it is assume the framers wanted the government to function. So it is read and use in away as close as possible to let the government function. You wife is an attorney she should know this. Otherwise millions of people would die for the non function government. This is true even in your country and all others.

They took the problem to the UN and ask what they should do. The UN approved and the new government was recognized.
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: BillyB on July 04, 2020, 10:02:24 AM
He wasn't LEGALLY impeached. The arrest warrant was not enough, he had to have been tried AND found guilty before impeachment could even begin.


You obviously do not understand Article 111 of Ukraine's constitution. A president does not have to be found guilty of anything to get impeached. Impeachment is a political process, not a criminal process. Criminal court is not required to impeach. Once a president is ACCUSED of a crime, like Trump was, impeachment can begin. From Article 111

The President of Ukraine may be removed from office by the Verkhovna Rada of
Ukraine by the procedure of impeachment, in the event that he or she commits state
treason or other crime.

The issue of the removal of the President of Ukraine from office by the procedure of
impeachment is initiated by the majority of the constitutional composition of the
Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine.

To conduct the investigation, the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine establishes a special
temporary investigatory commission whose composition includes a special
procurator and special investigators.

The conclusions and proposals of the temporary investigatory commission are
considered at a meeting of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine.
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: BillyB on July 04, 2020, 10:09:20 AM
As far as I can see the laws and constitution of Ukraine were never written for the situation that developed.


Ukraine's Constitution was written for impeachment of a President that committed crimes which happened in this situation.

Of course the Constitution wasn't designed to impeach a president because he fled the country forever but if that was their only option to impeach Yanukovych, they have the right to provide the country with a leader by creating another article in the Constitution. It's stupid for any country to stop functioning forever or even temporary just because the leader abandoned his job and if a leader did so, I believed they can claim he has a mental illness and physically absent so he not fit for duty.
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: Texan77 on July 04, 2020, 11:42:51 AM
They needed 75 per cent of the votes in parliament to impeach. They could not get that many. So the found a clause in the constitution to vote the he was physically unable to do the job that only took a simple majority. They had over 2/3 votes  but still fell short of the 75 per cent. The UN said the constitution had unworkable level of votes needed for impeachment and let them use the fact he was unable to physically do the job because he was on the run for murder and they had over a 2/3 vote of parliament to vote for it. Their was nothing in the constitution that said they could not do this. The UN said they felt they followed the letter of the law though they use this clause in a way it was likely not intended.

Markje seem to think that there should of been no president and the country should not of been able to elect a new one. Due to Russian occupation  some parts of the country could not vote making it according to the constitution forever they could not elect a new president. The trouble is the Ukraine government can not operate without a president. So according to Markje the country should let law and order break down, stop paying pensions and all government functions which would leave it looking like a war zone in Africa with millions of starving people running all over Europe because they were a few votes sigh of impeachment. 

Of course Russia thought this would be a great idea. The whole thing came about because Russia wanted to destabilize Ukraine to give them reason to claim they protecting Crimea and ethnic Russians in eastern Ukraine.  So Russian propaganda claimed the new government in Kiev was not legal. 

Markje attorney friends either got there degree by mail, know this or took constitution law so long ago they forgot. Most likely they just did an attorney thing not wanting to get into a forever discussion with him on the subject and agreed with what ever he said.   
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: BillyB on July 04, 2020, 01:15:25 PM
Many articles at the time called it an emergency session impeachment. If Yanu wanted to challenge it, he should've come back. If he wanted to remain president, he should've came back and run for president in the early elections he called for. After Yanu fled, investigations found out all the corruption he was involved in. Even if one doesn't want to believe he was legally ousted, he would've been after what they learned and eventually convicted him of.

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/europe/2014/02/ukraine-parliament-ousts-president-yanukovich-2014222152035601620.html
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: Markje on July 04, 2020, 01:31:28 PM

I would hope you care about American laws more than Ukrainian ones because you don't give a shit about ukrainian law.

As for russian propaganda: Many top-ukrainian lawyers agree with my side of this story. The law is the law, there is no propaganda in there, just the law.

The same things happens in the USA. If the constitution reaching a point where the government can not function it is assume the framers wanted the government to function. So it is read and use in away as close as possible to let the government function. You wife is an attorney she should know this. Otherwise millions of people would die for the non function government. This is true even in your country and all others.

They took the problem to the UN and ask what they should do. The UN approved and the new government was recognized.

It is still illegal , and the country would continue to function. It isn't the USA where everything comes to a standstill if the president is missing/dead/whatever. The Rada can continue and only a few decisions will have to wait until after the elections.

Funny that, had they not coup'd Yanukovich, the early elections he agreed upon would be sooner than the ones actually held with Poroshenko as a winner.
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: Markje on July 04, 2020, 01:32:41 PM
Many articles at the time called it an emergency session impeachment. If Yanu wanted to challenge it, he should've come back. If he wanted to remain president, he should've came back and run for president in the early elections he called for. After Yanu fled, investigations found out all the corruption he was involved in. Even if one doesn't want to believe he was legally ousted, he would've been after what they learned and eventually convicted him of.

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/europe/2014/02/ukraine-parliament-ousts-president-yanukovich-2014222152035601620.html

Whatever had happened, what ever it is called, its simply not legal, In fact, Yanukovich would have a strong case had he gone to court over this. Yet he chose to flee to Russia because he believed his life was in danger. (right or wrong).
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: Markje on July 04, 2020, 01:34:27 PM
Is Ukraine better off now rid of the convict, yes.
Poroshenko was an even bigger thief than Yanukovich was.
Zhelensky is already backpeddeling on decisions that won him the presidency (end Donbass war).

The grivna devaluated from 11 to 30 to 1 Euro.

Civil war is claiming lives daily.
Ukraine still has no control over 2 large areas supposedly theirs.

Pensions aren't being paid and some civil servents also.

I'm not sure Ukraine is better off now, nope.
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: Markje on July 04, 2020, 01:38:45 PM
Markje attorney friends either got there degree by mail, know this or took constitution law so long ago they forgot. Most likely they just did an attorney thing not wanting to get into a forever discussion with him on the subject and agreed with what ever he said.

Don't have any real arguments smear the messenger. Sure thing. Gotya.

It doesn't make me any less wrong though, and to clarify your horseblinders concerning Russia: I am not pro-russia in this case, in fact, I'd have loved Yanukovich to end his presidency legally. He already had lost support of most of the Rada and the people on the street, no need to Rush it to end as elections were already very close. the rada could have simply voted 'no' on all his new ideas and it was done.

I'm very much pro-law though, and the law was broken any way you turn it. Back in 2014 there was also no talk of mental/physical illness it was all done and justification came after the fact. I'm sorry you do not get a time-machine to go back in the past and amend the documents filed.
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: BillyB on July 04, 2020, 07:43:14 PM
Many articles at the time called it an emergency session impeachment. If Yanu wanted to challenge it, he should've come back. If he wanted to remain president, he should've came back and run for president in the early elections he called for. After Yanu fled, investigations found out all the corruption he was involved in. Even if one doesn't want to believe he was legally ousted, he would've been after what they learned and eventually convicted him of.

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/europe/2014/02/ukraine-parliament-ousts-president-yanukovich-2014222152035601620.html

Whatever had happened, what ever it is called, its simply not legal, In fact, Yanukovich would have a strong case had he gone to court over this. Yet he chose to flee to Russia because he believed his life was in danger. (right or wrong).

Who makes the law in Ukraine? No Constitution covers for every scenario but if something unexpected arises like aliens abducting the president or the president running away forever, they will run the country until they have new elections. All perfectly legal.

If Yanu wants to come back to Ukraine and go to court, he is free to come back.


The grivna devaluated from 11 to 30 to 1 Euro.

Civil war is claiming lives daily.
Ukraine still has no control over 2 large areas supposedly theirs.

Pensions aren't being paid and some civil servents also.

I'm not sure Ukraine is better off now, nope.


You don't know who is destabilizing Ukraine right now? Years ago Poland got out from under Russia's foot and now their citizens make more money per year than Russians. Ukrainians see that and they make three times less than Russians. They want a better life too. Name one prosperous nation that is influenced by Russia?

Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: B.B. on July 05, 2020, 09:54:09 AM
It doesn't make me any less wrong though, and to clarify your horseblinders concerning Russia Ukraine: I am not pro-russiaUkraine in this case, in fact, I'd have loved Yanukovich Crimea to end his presidency secede legally.

FTFY ^

I'm very much pro-law though

Great!  Shall we discuss the 1994 Budapest Memorandum?

Or the process for secession from Ukraine, under the Ukrainian Constitution?

and the law was broken any way you turn it.

cough-cough Crimea cough-cough

...it was all done and justification came after the fact.

cough-cough Crimea cough-cough  They didn't even take the Russian license plates off of the trucks...

B/B
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: B.B. on July 05, 2020, 09:55:15 AM
As I am participating in this thread, I am not going to do it myself, but I would suggest that one of the mods who is not to break off all of the non-Stirlitz "Crimea" stuff to a different thread.

B/B
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: BillyB on July 05, 2020, 12:24:53 PM

I'm very much pro-law though

Great!  Shall we discuss the 1994 Budapest Memorandum?

Or the process for secession from Ukraine, under the Ukrainian Constitution?


I've seen people argue Russia never invaded Ukraine. It was just independent soldiers and tanks that followed their hearts that entered into Ukraine so in theory, Russia never violated the Budapest Memorandum because it wasn't them who invaded.

But the Crimean vote to secede from Ukraine was clearly illegal since it violated the Ukrainian Constitution Article 73. I don't know how Markje can claim to be pro law and constitution when he won't admit Article 73 was violated when Crimea had a vote that didn't include all Ukrainians.

Russia reminds me of a man married to a woman(Ukraine) for many years and the woman wants a divorce since her husband never provided her the quality of life he's living and the man gets upset and wants his ring(Crimea) back.
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: redroo on July 05, 2020, 08:07:11 PM
Can the MODS please split off all this bullshit about Crimea,
it is nothing to do with the thread anymore.....just people who will never back down trying to force others who will never back down to change their views  :'( :dh:
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: BillyB on July 05, 2020, 11:28:49 PM
Can the MODS please split off all this bullshit about Crimea,
it is nothing to do with the thread anymore


Pages 1-6 heavily talks about Crimea since Stirlitz discussed it on post #3. It's probably easier for a Mod to rename the thread instead of moving 95% of the posts.
Title: Re: Stirlitz, Crimea, Ukraine and Yanukovych
Post by: cufflinks on July 06, 2020, 08:05:01 AM
Instead of RUAdventures we should rename the site Russia Ukraine Belarus Triggering Unrelenting Grief....

A.K.A.  RUB and TUG in honor of all the jerking off in these threads dedicated to RU and UA hatreds.