Wouldn't the Yatsenyuk guy be the one who is taking power seized in a coup of a legitimate government???
Looks to me like the golfing man-child is inviting in someone who took part in an activity that saw the ousting of an elected official--by force.
What am I missing here?
What do you base that he was ousted illegally on?
A lot.
HOWEVER, let us not forget that the stamp act was a complete legal act of law.
And The Founders were committing High Treason against the British Crown.
An NO I am not comparing the Founders to the Protesters in Ukraine or any sort of moral equivalency between the two.
It just that the "Law" in situations like this is whatever the winning side says it is.
Yes, you are correct.
What’s going to happen is that Obama is going to tell the current president of Ukraine that he has to cede the Crimea and various southern and eastern oblasts in exchange for NATO and EU membership. If he says no, the US will slowly back away from supporting the current government.
Obama REALLY wants this to go away, his body language and actions over the past two weeks indicate this.
It’s politics. Our Political Establishment does not care about electoral results. Remember that. It’s important. The people whose “turn it is” are supposed to be in charge, and we do everything we can to put them in charge. In Ukraine. And at home. It doesn’t always work out, but it’s how the Bosses roll.
Fans the Ukrainian golfing while his country is at war? Nice touch! Will the entertainment include that famous Chicago bath house too? Let’s not be niggardly with the “ show of support!” (creepers!).
IIRC - I have to look it up - the president was removed from office legally, by votes of both parties in their legislature, but it was mostly for corruption.
The interim president, a dissident who had been jailed for some time, resigned almost immediately, and I’m not sure how the current president ended up in charge. He was supposed to be more moderate but immediately started calling for restrictions on the rights of Russian-speakers, etc., which is one of the things that led to the current situation
There's some truth to that, from what I understand. I believe the Ukrainian president is only permitted to be impeached after he's convicted of a crime, which wasn't the case here.
Having said that, I'd suggest it doesn't really matter at all. The idea that the U.S. is going to sit here and work through the minutiae of a foreign legal/political process is pretty silly.
Ah yes, the pro-putin, pro-russian crowd really hates it when their BS gets called and you get your ass handed to you by a bunch of students.
Guess what, the people spoke and ousted your friend who had the interests of Russia instead of Ukraine in his evil little heart.
Think you should get over it, and accept that Ukraine is Ukrainian, not Russian.
The Russians are preparing to open the curtain on Act II.
Why did you add your opinion to the title when you are not sure who Prime Minister Yatsenyuk is? Why are you smearing him?
BTW, Oleksandr Turchynov is the acting president after the Parliament voted to oust President Yanukovych.
Next, if you had read the article you would have come accross this nugget:
"In Kiev, Putin's top foe Mikhail Khodorkovsky, a former Russian oligarch who spent a decade in Russian prisons, addressed a crowd of thousands on Independence Square, the epicentre of the protests.
"They told me what the authorities did here. They did this with the agreement of the Russian leadership," an emotional Khodorkovsky said in reference to the 100 people killed towards the end of three months of protests against ousted president Viktor Yanukovych."
When obama orders to have civilians killed, I know that you will side with him.
He must be going to have another beer summit in the Rose Garden.
Maybe Putin should invite targets of IRS abuses, Sarah Palin and Ted Cruz to Russia for talks...that would be very interesting!