Is Russia about to push toward Kiev?

From London's Daily Mail:

Here is the link: Russian Army masses troops and missile launchers on Ukraine border | Mail Online

 

there no to Kiev - to the East of Ukraine only,
the 21st century, it is important not to conquer, but to keep, and this is possible only when loyalty or support of the population occurs.
Afghanistan had been showing it for a hundred years against Britain, and the USSR, and the USA,

 

I think Russia may take more then just Crimea. Eastern Ukraine is a clearly pro-Russian territory. West Ukrainian nationalists will keep a much smaller Ukraine. Interesting how about Kiev? It is questionable, if Kiev would be a suitable place for being a capitol city of nationalist Ukraine. Will they do ethnic cleansing in Kiev? Kerry and Obama totally ignore interests of people, who live in Ukraine. They quickly embraced the Maidan revolution as "people of Ukraine". A wrong and nearsighted assumption.

 

Russia won't be so stupid to invade Kiev before the Sunday vote.. Sunday is their chance to get Crimea in a "clean" way without having to go take it.

And this will be considered theft of course; but the Western Alliance claim they want the Ukranian people to get to decide for themselves. In Crimea, they will. In the rest of Ukraine, they never did! Nobody voted for this coup de'tat and like Pronin24 said, there's no proof it was the will of the people. Every coup de'tat always claim it is for the people and yet if it were, they could do so in the regular vote. The coup de'tat is for when you don't have the support of the people but you want to take over anyway.

 

i don't think so , 80 000 are not enough for Kiev´s anschluss?

 

"clean" . you must be joking ? "referendum" is dirty as the hell

 

What about the violent overthrow that just happened in Kiev? They didn't have any vote at all!!

This is ten times better. At least it will match the will of the people there. Referendums are ten times cleaner than illegal and undemocratic coup de'tats against already legitimate governments.

 

they did have and do have all according the Ukrainian constitution .

 

And what about torching people with homemade incendiary devices, trying to run them over etc.? Is that usual constitutional procedure? None of this went to procedure and you know this.

Their constitution states that to get rid of the president, parliament has the vote, and then the president leaves. First A, then B. If they were following procedure, then why have riots at all? Why not lobby the Parliament? Why drive out the president even though no vote had yet occurred? A vote is required by procedure. Why didn't the parliament vote out the president before, if it was their will? Why only after the takeover was complete?

The president was there, parliament never had the vote. Then armed extremist thugs took over by force in a violent coup de'tat. They occupied many government buildings all around the country including Kiev. There was a fierce battle raging in Kiev. Prior to any vote, the president was driven off by armed rebels, and his office taken over. Still no vote. Is that the constitutional process, really? NOW with extremist goons in charge, ONLY NOW does parliament vote, and with armed thugs in charge, it can be considered under duress, and meaningless. No member of parliament would know what is in store for them or their families in the future if they don't accept the new status quo.

 

whats a rivers of BS, many people in California are torturing (right new) with homemade incendiary devices, etc. should France occupy Louisiana in return? senx God , today is not 1938 and the world doest buy goebbels anschluss- propaganda

 

Putin would be wise to keep his conquest limited to Crimea.

 

I agree. Had NATO not extended its tentacles beyond Berlin, an arrangement tacitly agreed by both Bush senior and Gorbachev following the end of the Cold War, then the current crisis would not have arisen in the first place. Context is important and for every action there is a reaction.

 

If somebody torches somebody in California, I would NOT sit here and claim it's constitutional! The fact remains the same as I said, this doesn't somehow change the fact that they were throwing molatavs on cops in Kiev. The takeover of power did NOT happen according to constitutional procedure and that's all you need to know.

Now, rather than cherrypicking a detail to correct, which you didn't even correct anyway, try addressing the point.

Crimea will have a vote for who's in charge. Ukraine did NOT have a vote for this hostile takeover. Crimea will be following the will of the people, the Kiev government have imposed their will on the people. Do you see the difference?

 

Kiev? No.

Donetsk and Odessa? Quite likely.

 

To an extent, the Crimean vote will represent the will of the people there.

Still, it is worth considering that intimidation has to play a part. If a much more powerful country's army is already at your door before a very important referendum, that will tend to influence the outcome.

I don't doubt that Crimea wants to be separated from the rest of Ukraine. However, I'm not so sure they actually want to be part of Russia. This second part might have more to do with the intimidation.

 

That is true; you do have to think about that.. That's the same reason why the parliament vote to get rid of the president after he was gone doesn't count. I think this is only such a big deal not because of the people there, but because it's prime real estate. They have resources and produce, while Western Ukraine lives on the dole being paid by the production in the East. Why don't Russia just accept the people to come and live in Russia? Maybe they want that turf too. Just like Ukraine wants to keep it and just why the EU wanted to incorporate Ukraine to do a leveraged buyout so they could plunder those resources.

Divide the land in half and let the residents go live wherever they want.

 

Very good question. Crimea obviously is a very strategically important area for Russia.

Retaining control of it will greatly benefit them.

As for the rest of Ukraine, further annexation by Russia will probably result in an all-out war.

 

Your support of a referendum under a foreign military occupation as somehow more legitimate than the Constitutional impeachment of a President overtly guilty of crimes against peaceful protesters is laughable.

 

Overtly guilty? You have proof he ordered the clubbings?

I've explained why the parliament vote AFTER the fact would be tainted.. Not only is it under duress, but reasons to vote to keep him, like they like him or think they could get appointed to some position or whatever no longer apply. I mean, he's gone. What if they voted to keep him? What would these extremist thugs do? Run after him and say sorry for kicking you out! Come back, we want you after all! No they wouldn't and you know that. They were having that government, and they just attempted to give their takeover pseudo-legitimization like they often do in a coup de'tat. Why didn't they vote to eject him before? Especially while all these riots were going on?

Now, do you have an actual argument to present instead of just calling it "laughable"?

 

Or we could you know, not support the annexation of sovereign Ukrainian territory based on literally the exact same justifications made by Hitler during the annexation of the Sudetenland and Czechoslovakia. Anyway you slice it this is an overt violation of the laws and customs of war prohibition against territorial acquisition through war, a referendum for annexation made under military occupation is illegitimate and likewise a violation of the laws and customs of war.

 

To speak, pejoratively, of NATO's "tentacles" is necessarily to imply that this self-defense organization harbors secret, aggressive tendencies; and that is simply an absurdity...

 

It's actually completely true. How is arming terrorists in Syria to overthrow Assad an act of "self defense"? How was bombing out Libya an act of "self defense"? How is encouraging the violent overthrow of Yanakovich in Ukraine and act of self defense? Like Saddam, did he also have live nuclear weapons programs, intent on using WMD's against NATO?

NATO have used their military loads of times. When did they ever get attacked? Which was an act of self defense?

 

As the head of state he is responsible for the actions of the troops under his command. Are you suggesting that they were not sent in to squash the peaceful protests under his authority? Furthermore; he did absolutely nothing to bring justice for this overt violation of basic human rights and in fact amnestied those directly responsible,

KYIV -- Ukrainian prosecutors have ended criminal proceedings against two top officials charged with abuse of power for pushing the police chief in the capital, Kyiv, to use force against antigovernment protesters.

Kyiv prosecutors said on February 12 that investigations against Volodymyr Sivkovych, deputy secretary of Ukraine's National Security and Defense Council, and Oleksandr Popov, the head of Kyiv's city administration, were dropped as part of a recent amnesty law approved by President Viktor Yanukovych.

http://www.rferl.org/content/ukraine-crackdown-officials-amnestied/25261973.html

And this is a laughable joke considering that you support a referendum for de-facto annexation under a foreign military occupation of the Crimea.

You have no argument, you are basing your assertions that the impeachment process was conducted under duress is based on nothing but your own conjecture. The current Ukrainian government in Kiev was duly elected by the Ukrainian people and derives its authority exclusively through the Ukrainian Constitution, they have 90 days from the impeachment to hold new Presidential elections, if that time passes without new elections then you will have a point but until such time you are doing nothing but spouting nonsense from the Kremlin's ministry of Propaganda. The demands from the opposition to remove the President came only after armed force was instituted by the Ukrainian authorities against peaceful protesters who a large plurality if not an outright majority of the Ukrainian citizenry supported as proven by numerous polls. The Crimea on the other hand is currently under military occupation of a foreign government.

 

+Kharkov

 

You are deluded. Your gullibility is astounding.