reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
#1 is answered.....Yanku fled rather than fulfill his part of het deal of Feb 21.
#1. . . Lmao, its a SIGNED agreement. As long as the U.S. says that it no longer matters then thats that. . . If only it was that simple.
The agreement was signed through the mediation of (3) European countries: Poland, Germany & France. In addition, Yanukovych agreed to the opposition's
1) Agreed to early parliamentary elections
2) Agreed to early presidential elections
3) Agreed to return to the 2004 Constitution
Also under Ukranian law there are (3) ways a president can be removed, and fleeing isn't one of them.
So explain, what was the purpose of the coup takeover, when Yanukovych agreed to give up power? That is the question being asked.
#2 - because it is the right of the elected parliament to do so if they so choose - they chose to do so for Yanku....why should they not be allowed to
do so when he's not there? Assuming it is actually true in the first place.....
#2. . . Bwahaha @ 'the elected parliament'. Pretty sure they were SELF APPOINTED! aka anti-constitutional takeover. . . So the newly self-appointed
govt decided to appoint an Ukranian Jewish billionaire (Igor Kolomoisky) who has a history of scamming as the new oligarch. Guess removing a corrupt
govt & replacing it w/ an EVEN greater corrupt govt is good, right?
No wonder the people of Ukraine don't accept this new illegitimate govt.
#3 - because as a sovereign parliament that is its right to do so
#3. . . Sure they do have the right however Ukraine's regional majority speaks russian. This move sowed discontent & destabilized Ukraine even
further, for what reason? Kinda like shooting yourself in the foot to prove a point.
#4 - answers itself - "Several Constitutional court judges were accused of violating their oath ...." - what a stupid "question"!!
#4. . . Or that it was purposely disbanded in order to prevent a procedural impeachment which could be challenged?
#5 - Why would the west support the "coup"?? Really - the west hasn't answered that?? I'm pretty sure the answers are all over het
MSM.......something to do with democracy, supporting a mass public movement to get rid of a corrupt president - something a lot of people on here
think the US should do, but you can't see how much worse this guy was than anything you have in het USA??
#5. . . Thanks for the same lame brain answer thats been spewed out by the western WAR media.
Democracy, really? Um, self appointed ring any bells in that chicken brain?
Removing corruption? By installing an even greater corrupt non-elected govt?
I'm not sold on your claim that "a lot of people" back the US on this issue. Plenty of comments stating otherwise. . .
no you haven't "raised the State Dept" - you've just shown up your inability to comprehend the situation.
I comprehend the situation perhaps it's your inability to provide non copy & paste answers borrowed from the comments section of the link I provided
(unless thats you Mike Campbell?). . . tsk tsk plagiarism
edit on 5-3-2014 by JWash because: (no reason given)
5-3-2014 by JWash because: (no reason given)
edit on 5-3-2014 by JWash because: line spacing