Russia running out of cash

Basically I agree with you... That's a first, isn't it? Lol But there's been a popular revolt in the Republican party. The people overthrew the social conservative and big business/free trade/outsourcing wings of the party which was basically all the old republican party had to offer. Not that the American people were buying it anyway given that the Republicans lost the last 5 out of 6 popular votes.

Anyway, I could not care less about the Republican party of the Bushes or Paul Ryan or even Ronald Reagan, their time has passed. The Republican party of populist Trump, I am willing to give the benefit of the doubt and a chance.

 

1. The Russian troops have crossed border of the Crimea in the 18th century.

2. Russia had permission to use of its armed forces from legal presidents of Ukraine Victor Yanukovych.

 

In 2014 the Russian troops crossed the border of independent sovereign UKRAINE

Yanukovich didn't authorize invasion, let alone annexation. In any case, the current legitimate government of Ukraine wants you out. So get out.

 

I think there was one other time. Or perhaps it was me agreeing with something you had said.

Either way it shows that those that often disagree can sometimes find common ground.

I agree with your comments. I have often posted that if Red was to give a little on their hardcore anti abortion stance the party would have a much better chance. (never mind softening their position on other socially conservative issues).

One thing I would add is that as a Fiscally Conservative (Old style Republican) it is the out of control spending of Red that really turned me off.

The other thing I agree with is that there is an anti establishment movement on both sides of the fence. The raging masses are finally starting to wake up. They do not know what is wrong but they are realizing that something is wrong and it is coming from the establishment.

I prefer Trump for purely personal and selfish reasons. I work in oil and Trump will benefit me personally.

On an objective basis, there is no doubt that Hillary is 100% establishment. She is a devout worshiper of the Oligopoly-Bureaucracy Fusion Monster that run's this country.

It is true that we do not know for sure that Trump is a worshiper of the Monster. My problem is that regardless of what Trump thinks ... he comes with a whole lot of Baggage (The leaders (Congress and so on) of party he is leading are almost all worshipers of the monster)

IF and this is a big If, Trump is not establishment at the moment, odds are that he will be shortly after he is elected. (Just look at what happened to "hope and change" Obama). Even if this does not happen, one person, even the President can not do much without the backing of the establishment (which includes SCOTUS)

 

That would be ALL Bernie supporters and probably most Hillary supporters.

[video=youtube;aeOkybuCXX0]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aeOkybuCXX0[/video]

 

The real problem is not the direction the Republican Party is going, which is likely a good idea. The issues come about because of WHO they have chosen to represent it and the incredibly deep flaws he carries with him. I cannot support a man who spews hatred and division, is beyond corrupted by financial ties, promotes our adversaries worldwide, continuously lies, makes things up, and seems to have very little understanding of world affairs let alone how to rune our country.

Donald Trump by himself, has forced this LIFELONG Republican to vote Democrat for the first time just to keep him from destroying decades of societal advancement.

 

The difference is in tone and kind. Putin said he could reach eastern european capitals in weeks. Has western leaders said anything comparable? Surely Putin isn't a stupid man. He would understand that saying something like that would be percieved as a threat.

Russia had a right to station troops in some bases in crimea. They did not have a right to roam freely across all of crimea, and support independence of crimea. Russia violated ukrainian soviereignity.

I asked a counter question. The UN has condemned Russia's actions and declared that the referendum is illegitimate and invalid. So yeah, they voted, but it was illegal so it doesn't count. But more importantly, as I've said, Russia invaded ukraine. Don't you care about that? now you anser my question.

 

You're mostly right about Trump, calling him imperfect would be the understatement of this election cycle.

The problem is, it's either the new direction (which you agree is good) with Trump or the old direction with any other democratic or republican leader. And god knows when another more perfect non-establishment leader may emerge to take the country to the new direction. If ever, cause the ruling elites will learn their lesson and rewrite the rules to prevent another non-establishment candidate and popular revolt from ever happening again.

To me it's new direction with Trump now, or never. I don't blame people who can't vote for him, the risk/reward calculation is different for each of us... But in my book, if Trump is at his worst as President, the system of checks and balances will prevent him from doing much damage and he will at least shake up Washington and open the path for future leaders, with his agenda but without his baggage.

 

How will the oil business benefit if Trump is in office?

 

The UN slammed them because it goes against our agenda and our geopolitics. Now answer the question or continue to act like a European.

Did Crimea vote to be with Russia or stay with Ukraine

 

Pipelines getting built.

 

All Bernie supporters hate Trump? Wonder why then the silly Trump supporters on this forum keep saying that a lot of Bernie supporters are voting for Trump. I hope you are right though and they all do vote for Hillary.

 

Would be wonderful if anyone, anywhere, could actually explain the direction in which the Republican party is going. To me it would be like trying to say where all the pieces are going in the middle of a massive explosion.

 

TrumpHumpers need to constantly make things up just like he does....it's in the handbook.

 

The UN slammed them because the referendum was illegal and therefore null and void. What is it you don't understand? Do you think that anyone can just hold votes at any time and it's valid? It doesn't work like that. Thyne ignorance doth not come as a suprise though.

 

If my own daughter is any indication, she loves Bernie, she hates Trump, she hates Hillary. She's staying home.

 

That's what she tells you anyway! Probably sneak off work to vote for Hillary.

 

It seems to be going in the direction of the American people... Not the elites and the ruling classes but regular middle americans loving their country, struggling to put food on the table and maintain their lifestyle and their values..... It's a long road and it's easy to get lost but at least this is the direction of the Trump's republican party. The democrat party on the other hand is sinking deeper and deeper into the pockets of their donors, lobbyists and special interests.

 

Absolutely hates her guts. I can tell, she's my daughter, after all.

 

Maybe the dictator should give back a portion of what he has stolen and yes, it is easy to understand why a con artist such as Trump admires a creep such as Putin.

 

Ukraine twice "just held votes and it was valid", so what?

The first time it was in 2004 when Yanukovich won the presidential election, but so-called "Orange revolution" made authorities to hold the third round of election - what was absolutely illegal - so the Yanukovich's rival Yuschenko could win. That was the situation when you have to vote as many times as it needs the "right" candidate to win.

The second time it happened in 2014 when Yanukovich - which became the president through democratic election of 2010 (mr.Yuschenko managed to collect only about 5% of votes) - was once again ousted from power through "revolution". No any legal procedures were implemented to make it in a lawful way.

So, why it's ok "just hold votes at any time" in Kiev, but in Crimea it's "illegal, null and void"?

 

Maybe the thief Browder should give back the money what he has stolen from Russian state budget?

 

The Russian troops didn't cross border of Ukraine in the Crimea in 2014. They were also in the 2013th year, both in the 2012th, and in the 2011th and so on there till the 18th century.

Yanukovych has confirmed that he asked Putin to enter troops to Ukraine

http://www.reuters.com/article/orutp-yanukovich-interview-idRUMSEA3102J20140402

When the truth and the facts on side of Russia, you need only to lie and offend the interlocutor. It don't make sense to communicate with you further.

 

Russia repeatedly freely moved the troops in the Crimea and earlier. I already gave examples above. So, anyway, a problem not in 2014.

In this case the UN makes such statements what are profitable the USA. It is specific formality of a question on the one hand.

Russia has attacked Ukraine no more, than the USA has attacked Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Libya, Somalia, Yemen... If the USA why it is impossible for Russia can act this way? Russia has made even much less, than the USA, because Russia didn't bomb Ukraine, didn't wipe out her city, didn't kill tens of thousands of people.

 

“Elementary, my dear Watson“ - it has "illegal, null and void" because - NATO didn't bomb Kiev (as Belgrade) and in the Crimea there is no American military base. If there was the American base in the Crimea. Crimeans could have - the independent Crimean state. But unfortunately, NATO didn't bomb Kiev and there is no American base in the Crimea. It illegal!