Ukraine's Military Mobilizes, Prepares For Combat: Trucks, APCs, SAMs, Howitzers, Tanks Rolling Out

page: 6
19
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 14 2014 @ 07:57 AM
link   
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
 


Take note of the posters join date. It seems to be the "in thing" now.

As for the other - No, there never really seems to be a link back to the sources to support the claims being made. I've had several times now in a few threads on this topic where I have asked and all I get is an idiot ass game of round robin.

With the latest move by Putin to shut down any media outlet that is critical of him / Russian government I don't think we will be getting the flip side of the coin from Russian media that does not support Putin / his goals in Crimea anytime soon.




posted on Mar, 14 2014 @ 08:04 AM
link   

Xcathdra
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
 


With the latest move by Putin to shut down any media outlet that is critical of him / Russian government I don't think we will be getting the flip side of the coin from Russian media that does not support Putin / his goals in Crimea anytime soon.


It's worse than that. 10 minutes at RT and it is clear war drums beating:

Crimea referendum opponents manipulate detached norms of intl law – Churkin

Russia deploys 8,500 troops for artillery drills in south


Russia transfers nine warplanes to Belarus to ‘counter massing of forces on the border’

What frightens me the most is Putin is rarely one to flinch and the West can't afford to.
edit on 14-3-2014 by Rosinitiate because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 14 2014 @ 08:24 AM
link   

Rosinitiate
What frightens me the most is Putin is rarely one to flinch and the West can't afford to.


Moldova has been having the same interference issues Ukraine has. 3 of their autonomous provinces in Moldova have started to raise their own military and have had Russian military inside those zones for some time now.

Putin made a decision that, almost all nations, do not support. I still think this is a Putin vanity exercise meets Charlemagne issue. Put takes pride in his PR and were he to back down I don't think, politically speaking from a democratic election point of view, he would be reelected.

NATO / EU has been repositioning forces. Poland invoked article 4 / US deploys a fighter squadron (12 planes) to Poland, we deeply another 4 (extra) to augment our normal rotation in the Baltic countries.

What ever Putin's plans are I don't think he was expecting the response from the EU / NATO. They touted for a long time about how they supply energy to the west and would cut it off it actions is taken. Putin's actions have forced some of the non NATO nations in the region to seriously start considering it.

I think Put is going to invade Ukraine. Reason being Ukraine and NATO have met and discussed assistance / cooperation / beginning phases of working with NATO without becoming a full member of NATO.

When you have photos of voting ballots arriving in Crimea with yes boxes already checked (I've seen this several times and have not been able to independently confirm it). When you have Russian media falsely reporting about conditions in E. Ukraine...

If Putin does not grab what he can now, hen some of his other targets are going to become a part of NATO, at which all bets are off as to how that mess will play out.

I don't want war... In this case though, at least to me, if Russia is not stopped then the damage death and carnage of world war 2 is going to look like a New England clam bank compared to a modern war.

This would be one of those perfect times where extraterrestrials should get involved.

But we put our dreams away...

I am not familiar with the media outlet Belarus Digest. The article talks about Putin attempting to gain support from Belarus and Kazakhstan for his invasion of Ukraine (im not sure if it means just the Crimea or the other).

Those 2 countries, considered to be the closest of the former SSR's to Russia, have publicly refused to support Russian actions.

I am wondering if the Russian military deployment to Belarus deals with something more than just a buffer with NATO / EU. Both nations (Belarus / Kazakhstan) are concerned about the precedent Russia would set, and if that precedent could be used against them.



posted on Mar, 16 2014 @ 09:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


Okay, having read the link to the constitution you posted here is the part about removal of the president:
Article 110. Incapability of the President of Ukraine to exercise his authority for health reasons shall be determined at a meeting of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine and confirmed by a decision adopted by the majority of its constitutional membership on the basis of a written petition of the Supreme Court of Ukraine, upon a recourse of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine and a medical opinion.

"Article 111. The President of Ukraine may be removed from the office by the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine in compliance with a procedure of impeachment if he commits treason or other crime.

The issue of the removal of the President of Ukraine from the office in compliance with a procedure of impeachment shall be initiated by the majority of the constitutional membership of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine.

The Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine shall establish a special ad hoc investigating commission, composed of special prosecutor and special investigators to conduct an investigation.

The conclusions and proposals of the ad hoc investigating commission shall be considered at the meeting of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine.

On the ground of evidence, the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine shall, by at least two-thirds of its constitutional membership, adopt a decision to bring charges against the President of Ukraine.

The decision on the removal of the President of Ukraine from the office in compliance with the procedure of impeachment shall be adopted by the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine by at least three-quarters of its constitutional membership upon a review of the case by the Constitutional Court of Ukraine, and receipt of its opinion on the observance of the constitutional procedure of investigation and consideration of the case of impeachment, and upon a 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 treason or other crime."

Summarized thus:
1. the procedure of impeachment is begun by the Verkhovna Rada
2. an ad hoc investigating committee must be established
3. then the Verkhovna Rada must consider the findings of the ad hoc committee
4. the Verkhovna Rada must bring charges after a review by the Constitutional Court and the Supreme Court
5. only after all these steps are taken can removal by a vote of 3/4 of the Verkhovna Rada occur.

So you are saying that from the time the bill of impeachment was brought on Feb. 21, all the above steps were taken in less than 24 hours, including an investigation of the charges and review by two separate courts.
How was his removal legal if the parliamentary body failed to follow the steps outlined in the constitution?
How is the present "government" legitimate if the replacement process was not followed?

"Article 112. In the event of an early termination of the authority of the President of Ukraine in accordance with Articles 108, 109, 110 and 111 of this Constitution, the discharge of the duties of the President of Ukraine, for the period pending the elections and the assumption of the office by the next President of Ukraine, shall be vested on the Prime Minister of Ukraine. The Prime Minister of Ukraine, for the period of discharge of the duties of the President of Ukraine, may not exercise the powers stipulated by items 2, 6, 8, 10, 11, 12, 14, 15, 16, 22, 25, 27 of Article 106 of the Constitution of Ukraine."

How is it that Prime Minister Serhiy Arbuzov was not made president according to the above Article 112, to hold that office until such time as elections could be held?

I've heard mention several times of revocation of the existing constitution and reversion to an older model---so is this the constitution they were using?

Every single media report I can find from western sources simply state that the president was "removed" or "impeached" but make no mention whatsoever of the crimes for which he was "removed" or "impeached" or the contents of any court opinions. Don't you find that exceedingly strange?
What do you suppose would happen if the House of Representatives brought a bill of impeachment against our president the day before he was scheduled to go abroad for a meeting, waited for him to leave town and the Senate, the very next day, announced he was guilty and appointed Romney as president? That's pretty much what appears to have happened in Ukraine according to media reports.

edit on 16-3-2014 by diggindirt because: spelling



posted on Mar, 17 2014 @ 09:02 AM
link   

diggindirt
"Article 111. The President of Ukraine may be removed from the office by the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine in compliance with a procedure of impeachment if he commits treason or other crime.

The issue of the removal of the President of Ukraine from the office in compliance with a procedure of impeachment shall be initiated by the majority of the constitutional membership of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine.

The Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine shall establish a special ad hoc investigating commission, composed of special prosecutor and special investigators to conduct an investigation.

The conclusions and proposals of the ad hoc investigating commission shall be considered at the meeting of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine.

On the ground of evidence, the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine shall, by at least two-thirds of its constitutional membership, adopt a decision to bring charges against the President of Ukraine.

The decision on the removal of the President of Ukraine from the office in compliance with the procedure of impeachment shall be adopted by the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine by at least three-quarters of its constitutional membership upon a review of the case by the Constitutional Court of Ukraine, and receipt of its opinion on the observance of the constitutional procedure of investigation and consideration of the case of impeachment, and upon a 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 treason or other crime."

Summarized thus:
1. the procedure of impeachment is begun by the Verkhovna Rada
2. an ad hoc investigating committee must be established
3. then the Verkhovna Rada must consider the findings of the ad hoc committee
4. the Verkhovna Rada must bring charges after a review by the Constitutional Court and the Supreme Court
5. only after all these steps are taken can removal by a vote of 3/4 of the Verkhovna Rada occur.



Yes, impeachment proceedings were held and voted on. The day of the removal vote, the ex-President Fled (according to Putin) according to the former President he had scheduled meetings in a border city.


Article 108. The President of Ukraine shall exercise his powers until the assumption of office by the newly elected President of Ukraine.

The authority of the President of Ukraine shall be subject to an early termination in cases of:

1) resignation;

2) inability to exercise presidential authority for health reasons;

3) removal from office by the procedure of impeachment;

4) his/her death.


#1 - Resignation - Does not require a written declaration.

Article 109. The resignation of the President of Ukraine shall enter into force from the moment when he personally announces the statement of resignation at a meeting of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine.

* - Occurred when he "fled" the nation.
* - Putin stated he gave up power.



#2 - Health Reasons -

Article 110. Incapability of the President of Ukraine to exercise his authority for health reasons shall be determined at a meeting of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine and confirmed by a decision adopted by the majority of its constitutional membership on the basis of a written petition of the Supreme Court of Ukraine, upon a recourse of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine and a medical opinion.

* - On January 30th 2014 Yanukovych released a statement

Yanukovych's defiant statement – released on the presidential website – followed an announcement that he is taking sick leave due to an acute respiratory illness and high fever. There was no indication of how long he might be on leave or whether he would be able to do any work. The chief medical officer said the president was suffering from a "severe cold with a high temperature".



#3 - Impeachment Impeachment

Article 111. The President of Ukraine may be removed from the office by the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine in compliance with a procedure of impeachment if he commits treason or other crime.

* - Just like in the US, the impeachment of a President is not a criminal result. The Ukrainian Constitution, just like the US Constitution, provides immunity to the President while in office. An impeachment is required in order to follow up with criminal investigations and charges. Impeachment removes the President, removing the immunity from prosecution and allowing a criminal investigation.
* - Treason / other crime, like the US Constitution, is whatever their Parliament decides it is. Impeachment is not a criminal function - its procedural.


Why was the date for Presidential Elections moved up to May?
Under Ukrainian law when a President is removed / Resigns, the action is effective immediately, with presidential Power being transferred to the Prime minister. In this case there was no Prime minister as he resigned prior to the move to impeach the President.

The Ukrainian Constitution requires elections be held within 90 days of the resignation / removal from office.


Voice of Russia - Presidential impeachment bill introduced in Ukrainian parliament

Ukraine 's Yanukovych announces return to 2004 Constitution and early presidential elections

Law Library of Congress - Ukraine: Simplified Impeachment Procedures - Ukrainian Law 408, adopted 2009

The Verkhovna Rada adopted the draft law on the ad hoc investigatory commissions, which simplifies the procedure of impeachment of the President.

The adoption of law 408 Lawmakers voted 226 votes required. In Parliament recently, repeatedly sounded calls for impeachment of President Viktor Yushchenko. To declare impeachment requires the support of three-fourths of the constitutional composition of the Parliament, in which 450 places.

A bill on the special temporary investigative commissions supported 171 of 175 deputies from the party of regions faction, 155 of the 156 deputies from the Yulia Tymoshenko Bloc, 36 of the 72 members of the pro-presidential faction "Our Ukraine-people's Self-Defense bloc, all 27 Communists and 19 of 20 deputies of the faction of the bloc of Lytvyn.

The Bill regulates the legal status and operating procedure of commissions of inquiry for impeachment proceedings.


2 Votes were held for impeachment, and had the required quorum to present the bills and to vote on them - Both passed, resulting in impeachment of the President of Ukraine.

it was lawful and within the constitution of Ukraine.

So take your pick above in which section you would like to disagree with.



posted on Mar, 17 2014 @ 09:08 AM
link   
Ran out of room for the last part -

impeachment - Treason / Crimes.

The moment he lost his immunity he fled the country.
* - The agreement called for joint investigations into the actions in Kiev (people killed - although the Russian fanboys seem to ignore this portion).
* - It might had something to do with his 75 million dollar estate, which is interesting being he only makes 25k a year.

* - as for investigations, he has been under investigation for the last few years - Corruption being at the top of the list. In addition to missing government funds, he seems to have a healthy bank account that he cannot account for.

RT Discusses Ukraine voting changes and Presidential Impeachment from 2012
Ukrainian president's impeachment on table as exit polls predict opposition victory?


Polls have closed in Ukraine following the country's first parliamentary elections under a new voting system. The political landscape there could change dramatically if the opposition gains enough seats and forms a coalition to impeach the president.


...............................


Exit polls predict results on proportional seats only. The ruling party may still get the upper hand in the Rada if it takes enough seats on a majority voting basis.

But given the current trend, the opposition might get enough mandates to impeach incumbent President Viktor Yanukovich. Opposition leaders called it a possibility if they can assemble a majority coalition under revamped election rules.


Recent law changes have dramatically remodeled the country's voting system: for the first time since 2002, seats in Ukrainian parliamentary elections will be won on both a majority and a proportional basis. Now numerous independent candidates have a chance at winning the majority parliamentary seats. The independent deputies would then have to decide which alliances to join, and what kinds of coalitions to form.


The elections' strongest dark horse candidate is retired boxing heavyweight champion Vitaly Klitschko's Udar ('Strike') Party. Many Ukrainians believe Klitschko could be the deciding factor in the formation of an opposition coalition in parliament.


Klitschko has already vowed his party would not form a coalition with the ruling Party of Regions or the Communist Party. However, he has not yet expressed interest in joining with the opposition either.


Intrigue and speculation surround the potential makeup of the new parliament, and whether a new bloc could have enough seats to pass a vote to oust Yanukovich, dramatically changing the political landscape and power structure of post-Soviet Ukraine.


And like Russia's presidential election in spring 2012, all of Ukraine’s 32,192 polling stations are equipped with web cameras to deter voter fraud and allow the elections to be viewed online. This extensive system reportedly added $123 million to the country's budget.


The Central Election Commission, which has 15 days to process the results, says the polling day wrapped up without any major incidents. Ukrainians rather turned up in panda costumes to get cheers from onlookers.


His impeachment was a long time coming.
edit on 17-3-2014 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 17 2014 @ 10:23 AM
link   
reply to post by stormcell
 

One and the same, Russia is unpredictable currently at the world stage. They are ironing out the kinks of the old rusty curtain.



posted on Mar, 17 2014 @ 10:25 AM
link   
reply to post by Acidx
 


nah here what will happen with russia next move


Duma is set to consider legislation that would allow the Russian Federation to absorb territories now within other states. Indeed, according to Leonid Slutsky, the chairman of the Duma Committee on the CIS, if adopted, it would allow Russia to recover Crimea and other territories on the post-Soviet space.


www.interpretermag.com...



posted on Mar, 17 2014 @ 11:42 PM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


Okay, I've read your post and the links---but nowhere do I find a bill of impeachment outlining the charges for which he was impeached.
Just because there had been talk for a long time of impeachment doesn't mean that the law was followed---no bill of impeachment, no ad hoc committee investigation, no ruling from any court, just a vote to impeach one day, then another vote to impeach the next day.
I fail to understand your posting of the "health" issues or "he fled" ---which is it--he was removed for health issues? or he fled? or he was legally impeached? or the Constitution was changed without the required "All-Ukrainian referendum called by the President of Ukraine" as cited below.

"Article 156. A draft law on making amendments to Title I General Principles, Title III Elections, Referendum, and Title XIII Making Amendments to the Constitution of Ukraine, shall be submitted to the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine by the President of Ukraine, or by not less than two-thirds of the constitutional membership of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, provided that it is adopted by at least two-thirds of the constitutional members of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, be approved by an All-Ukrainian referendum called by the President of Ukraine.

Resubmission of a draft law on making amendments to Titles I, III and XIII of this Constitution, addressing the same issue, shall be possible only at a succeeding convocation of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine."

If you want to understand better why the Ukrainians are deathly fearful of anything having to do with Nazis read a bit about Babi Yar. One of my former students gave me a book by that title that contains the story in novel form, the only way the author could tell the story of what he saw happen there during the Nazi occupation. My student's great grandfather was disappeared during that episode in history and the family has always believed that his was one of the hundreds of thousands of bodies thrown into the mass graves known as Babi Yar. He no longer lives in Kiev but many of his relatives remain there and are very, very upset and terrified when they see the Nazi symbols returning to their city.
Most US citizens have absolutely no frame of reference for what an invasion of Nazis actually meant for those rounded up by the invaders. Only American Indians could come close to understanding the type of terror they brought. My Choctaw ggg-grandmother understood what happened when soldiers rode in and rounded up people like livestock and marched them to a stockade. She was caught while visiting relatives living amongst the Cherokee.
I've heard from only two of my five Ukraine students recently. Both are very concerned about the coup and what will happen to their families under the new government, a government they believe, despite all the western propaganda, is illegal. As one pointed out, "They cannot just change the constitution in a wave of the hands in Ukraine any more than such could happen in the USA, so why is the USA government supporting them except to give Russia a problem? It is the Ukraine people they are causing the problem for, not Russia, when they sent in the new Nazis."
One student pointed out how Ukraine is very deeply in debt and Russia, whose economy is actually growing quite nicely has offered help that didn't include the bankers of the IMF with their economic hitmen ala John Perkins. He thinks Vlad, with his PhD in economics and the improvements he has made in the Russian economy looks like a better choice than the EU, which is constantly tottering on the brink of collapse and stealing money from citizens' bank accounts. Honesty, I can't say that I blame him.
It was put this way to me: The US is deeply in debt. They need help. On the one side is Mexico with rampant corruption and no economy to speak of beyond drug cartels and a bit of manufacturing moved there from the US. They say they will "help" the US with its debt problems if US just signs this simple agreement to become part of their cartel. On the other side is Canada with an economy slightly better than the US, much less debt and corruption. Canada says they will help if US joins their commonwealth. Who would you choose?
Why would you believe western propaganda over Russian propaganda? When did the west become the paragon of truth for the world?



posted on Mar, 18 2014 @ 12:45 AM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


I'd say the US and her allies have a lot of explaining to do with regards to the Nuland phone conversation and the later one from the Estonian diplomat. The first shows the US manipulating who would run the new Ukrainian government and the second seems to suggest that a single group of snipers were firing at both sides in a kind of false flag operation, most likely hired by the Ukrainian opposition.

If you couple that with the George Soros money and perhaps compare that with the Arab Spring revolution (called in advance by Lindsey Williams I might add), it seems to me that the US and EU intelligence services are very much in the game of regime change by any means.

If China subverted Mexico and installed a pro Chinese communist nation there, we might move military as well I'd imagine. I'm not defending Putin's thugery, but the US government has 0 moral authority, especially under our current Nobel peace prize winner.

Maybe it's all a grand chess game to tie up Russian forces prior to attacking Syria and Iran, as Alex Jones has intimated. But I still see Obama, and war mongerer McCain as international criminals if they are slaughtering civilians as they move their pieces across the chess board.

I predict the satanic occultic banksters who run the West have gravely miscalculated the collateral damage. World war 3 is not far off if this insanity continues.


edit on 18-3-2014 by SevenThunders because: spelling





new topics
top topics
 
19
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in

join