Skip to main content

I ask this simple question because of the recent voting in Crimea to rejoin Russia and our government's response.

John Kerry: Crimea Vote Will Not Be Recognized By U.S., International Community

The U.S. and EU say the Crimean vote violates Ukraine's constitution and international law. If Crimea votes to secede, the U.S. and European Union plan to slap sanctions as early as Monday on Russian officials and businesses accused of escalating the crisis and undermining Ukraine's new government.
More discussion below the fold.

How truly odd, the neocons in our government seem to want war with Russia.  "Sanctions against Russian officials" BECAUSE the people of another region voted honestly and legitimately to rejoin Russia.

How's this make any sense?  Punish Russia because the people in Crimea voted as they saw fit?

As for the empty rhetoric about the vote being against the Ukraine Constitution.  Where were we or where was the "international community" when the armed rioters stormed the castle and forcibly removed their constitutionally elected representatives?

The Ukraine Constitution, Title II, Section 34:

Article 37. Everyone shall be guaranteed the right to freedom of thought and speech, and to free expression of his views and beliefs.

Article 37. Foundation and activity of political parties and public associations shall be prohibited if their programme goals or actions are aimed at the liquidation of the independence of Ukraine, change of the constitutional order by force, violation of the sovereignty and territorial indivisibility of the State, undermining national security, unlawful seizure of the state power, the propaganda of war or violence, fomentation of inter-ethnic, racial, or religious enmity, or infringement of human rights and freedoms or the health of the population.

Political parties and public associations shall not have paramilitary formations.

It seems we allowed and supported the coup and NOW we say their constitution must be followed, after the fact?

So, again, I ask:

Do people have the right to self-determination or not?

Since it's clear we didn't support the Ukraine constitution before or during the coup. What makes any rational individual believe it's actually valid now?

Since the Ukraine Constitution is null and void, the next lawful document that would bind our actions would be The UN's Universal Recognition of Inalienable Right to Self-Determination Most Effective:

Universal recognition of the inalienable right to self-determination was the most effective way the global community could guarantee protection of fundamental freedoms, the Third Committee (Social, Humanitarian and Cultural) was told today, as it concluded discussion on several human rights issues.

“Whether this right is taken away by military intervention, aggression, occupation, or even exploitation, the world cannot condone its deprivation from any peoples in any region,” the Maldives representative said.

All States facing questions of self-determination must include broader ethnic and linguistic groups in decision-making processes, said delegates, as the Committee heard from some 35 speakers in a day-long debate that concluded its consideration of the elimination of racism, and the right of peoples to self-determination, then moved on to consideration of human rights protections.

I guess our position would be contrary to these "internationally" agreed upon ideals then.

The UN's Universal Declaration of Human Rights makes a similar point:

Article 21.

    (1) Everyone has the right to take part in the government of his country, directly or through freely chosen representatives.
    (2) Everyone has the right of equal access to public service in his country.
    (3) The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government; this will shall be expressed in periodic and genuine elections which shall be by universal and equal suffrage and shall be held by secret vote or by equivalent free voting procedures.

Sadly, it seems the right of "self-determination" is merely an illusion our corporate overlords have led us to believe in.
Poll

Do the people in Crimea have the right to chose their path forward?

59%25 votes
19%8 votes
2%1 votes
4%2 votes
11%5 votes

| 42 votes | Vote | Results

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Tip Jar (7+ / 1-)

    -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

    by gerrilea on Sun Mar 16, 2014 at 11:12:36 PM PDT

  •  I think the problem SOME people have... (7+ / 0-)

    ...is the presence of Russian troops in Crimea.

    Others just are itching for a fight. I blame the Koch Bros. Their old man probably got stiffed by the Russians worxe than he'd admit back in WW2. /snark

    Float like a manhole cover, sting like a sash weight! Clean Coal Is A Clinker!

    by JeffW on Sun Mar 16, 2014 at 11:22:59 PM PDT

    •  Thanks, funny but the Russians do have an (2+ / 0-)

      agreement to be in the Crimea until 2042.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/...

      On April 21, 2010, Ukrainian President Yanukovych and Russian President Medvedev reached an agreement whereby the Russian lease on naval facilities in Crimea would be extended beyond 2017 by 25 years with an additional 5-year renewal option (to 2042–47) in exchange for a multiyear discounted contract to provide Ukraine with Russian natural gas.
      And since Wiki doesn't get into specifics, here's RT's full explanation on that agreement:

      Russia’s 25,000-troop allowance & other facts you may not know about Crimea

      4) Moscow annually writes off $97.75 million of Kiev’s debt for the right to use Ukrainian waters and radio frequencies, and to compensate for the Black Sea Fleet’s environmental impact.

      5) The Russian navy is allowed up to

      - 25,000 troops,

      - 24 artillery systems with a caliber smaller than 100 mm,

      - 132 armored vehicles, and

      - 22 military planes, on Crimean territory.

      -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

      by gerrilea on Sun Mar 16, 2014 at 11:33:39 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  this agreement is null and void... (6+ / 0-)

        using the same argument that you used in your diary.

        Please, delete this diary. You are not an expert on the region, you don't know the history or the languages, and you are effectively helping people who you would very much not like had you known them personally.

        •  First off, I will not delete this diary. (4+ / 0-)

          The question I've posed stands all by itself.

          Do people have the right to self-determination or not?

          Yes or no?

          The history is brutal, ask my Catholic ancestors that once lived in the Baltic region.

          I have no obligation to be an expert on anything, your demand is beyond our site rules.  

          And hon, this isn't about me personally, deal with it.

          -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

          by gerrilea on Sun Mar 16, 2014 at 11:44:43 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  how do you define "people" (10+ / 0-)

            and what does it mean to give people self-determination? For individuals, I guess it means individual freedoms and the right to vote. Beyond that, who gets to make the decisions as to how to group people together and give those groups a collective right to separate from a nation? We certainly didn't give the secessionists in the South that right in the Civil War.

            Gondwana has always been at war with Laurasia.

            by AaronInSanDiego on Sun Mar 16, 2014 at 11:47:57 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  This false comparison to our history doesn't (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Judgment at Nuremberg

              equal today what has occurred in the Ukraine.

              We funded and pushed for "regime change" for over 20 yrs.  It was completed through an illegal and unconstitutional violent coup, as per their own constitution...making the results unlawful, by their standards.

              Ours is a bit different.

              If we hadn't interfered there, who knows what the results would have been.

              Some truths can't be bought and packaged, they must be lived:

              Find out just what any people will quietly submit to and you have the exact measure of the injustice and wrong which will be imposed on them.
              ~Frederick Douglass
              Do the people in the Crimea not have the right to vote as they see fit?  If they actually decided to rejoin Russia, is that not their inherent UNIVERSAL right to do so?

              -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

              by gerrilea on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 12:03:01 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Do the people of Texas have the inherent (8+ / 0-)

                universal right to secede from the United States. I don't think they do. I don't know what international law is regarding this, but I don't think states or sub-national entities have a universal, inherent right to secede from their parent country.

                Gondwana has always been at war with Laurasia.

                by AaronInSanDiego on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 12:09:24 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  As for our nation, I don't think Texas could (0+ / 0-)

                  constitutionally do it alone. There would have to be a Constitutional Convention, then the treaty would have to be nullified and if the majority agreed then they could leave.

                  I did provide the UN's standards for Universal Rights.  Maybe there's some clause somewhere that guarantees the status quo.

                  The rights of ethnic peoples must be protected, like the Crimean Tartars but past that I'm not sure.  I think it would depend on their political agreements with one another.  Does this constitution allow this, does that constitution allow for something else?

                  As I've read the Ukraine constitution, they could not legitimately have the referendum, but that document became invalid when the rioters stormed the castle and torched the buildings which forced their lawfully elected representatives out and into hiding.

                  -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

                  by gerrilea on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 12:47:04 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Stunning. Where are you getting your facts from? (6+ / 0-)
                    but that document became invalid when the rioters stormed the castle and torched the buildings which forced their lawfully elected representatives out and into hiding.

                    KOS: "Mocking partisans focusing on elections? Even less reason to be on Daily Kos."

                    by fcvaguy on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 04:41:26 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Stunning isn't it? You betcha. (2+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      Judgment at Nuremberg, blackhand

                      We now claim the Ukraine constitution is valid but it wasn't when the rioters stormed the castle and pushed their lawfully elected representatives into hiding.

                      Who's zooming whom?

                      Our hypocrisy is what I have a problem with here.  Wasn't their president duly elected? Yep. Didn't the violent protesters storm the castle, unconstitutionally?  Yep.

                      Why didn't we support the rule of law then and renounce the actions of the protesters and their parliament?

                      Kerry was in the Ukraine within 72 hours to shake hands with the oligarchs that want to join the EU.

                      Where are the Ukrainian people in this? Didn't the originally say no to joining the EU and then we sent in more money and more NGO's on the ground to stir up shit? Yep.

                      Doesn't their own current constitution prevent them from joining the EU? YEP.

                      So, in all practical terms, the Ukraine constitution was nullified.

                      It was an American coup meant to ensure the raping and pillage of yet another country by the IMF and the EU to service our corporate overlords.

                      The actual people living in the Ukraine don't have any legitimate choices here.  Either become slaves to the IMF and the interests of the EU, NATO and the US or continue to be slaves to the Russian oligarchy.

                      -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

                      by gerrilea on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 08:56:48 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                    •  Because there is (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      gerrilea

                      no constitutional provision permiting what the insurrectionists did. Are you saying that Uganda's Constitution continued in full force during and after Idi Amin's coup de etat, except for the few provisions that he specifically revoked a week or so after the coup? How about Cuba's? Did the 1940 Constitution survive Batista's coup and Castro's as well?

                      That, in its essence, is fascism--ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power. -- Franklin D. Roosevelt --

                      by enhydra lutris on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 10:18:51 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  Thanks, it seems "the rule of law" is arbitrary (2+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        enhydra lutris, blackhand

                        even here on the GOS.

                        I guess it depends on who's interests you support.  I'd rather the people in the Ukraine decide their own fate without the propaganda from the East and West.

                        They must decide their destiny without our "help" or the "help" of the EU or Russia.

                        The IMF's conditions will destroy them, they just don't know it yet.  It will keep them in forced perpetual poverty while our corporate overlords rape and pillage their nation.

                        -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

                        by gerrilea on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 10:30:01 AM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                •  Why would they not (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  gerrilea, blackhand

                  Do the rest of us have the right to use force of arms to enslave Texans to be part of a country they don't want to be part of?

                  (Note: not advocacy for secession)

                  (-5.50,-6.67): Left Libertarian
                  Leadership doesn't mean taking a straw poll and then just throwing up your hands. -Jyrinx

                  by Sparhawk on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 06:20:22 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                •  Neither the world as a whole nor eastern (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  gerrilea

                  Europe is the US and neither is governed by US law. Crimea was forceably merged with Ukraine in the 50s with no consent or consideration of the Crimean people. Crimea is linguistically and ethnically distinct from Ukraine. Also historically. The new Ukraine establlished by the Euromaidan insurrectionists has already moved to outlaw the native language of Crimeas major population group and the one predominantly spoken in the country.

                  Would you, since you are so fond of analogies, say that none of the South American countries had the right to secede from Spain, or Portugal, as the case may have been, and that Panama had no right to secede from Garnd Colombia? How about Kossovo?

                  That, in its essence, is fascism--ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power. -- Franklin D. Roosevelt --

                  by enhydra lutris on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 10:15:59 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  I don't think any of those had an inherent right (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    enhydra lutris

                    to do so. Each case has to be dealt with on its own terms. I'm simply addressing the main question of this diary, wondering what is entailed by a right to self determination. I'm not advocating that Crimea be forced to remain part of Ukraine in perpetuity. Ideally there ought to be a legal process to determine its fate.

                    Gondwana has always been at war with Laurasia.

                    by AaronInSanDiego on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 03:01:41 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                •  Why Shouldn't they? (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  gerrilea

                  What makes the status of a nation so supreme?  Nations are an artificial construct.  They were not ordained and a directive for their existence did not come down from the sky on stone tablets.

                  If the people of any particular region do not wish to be part of the nation that claims them, they should have every right to succeed from it.

                  At most, the international community might have a responsibility to ensure that such a decision has not been coerced, but it should remain the right of those people to maintain or sever ties as they see fit.  If this were not to happen, how would national boundaries look today?  At what point did they become identically frozen?  Would the US and parts of SE Asia be under the rule of the British Crown?  Would Europe be ruled by the Catholic Pope in the Vatican?

                  "It's not surveillance, it's data collection to keep you safe"

                  by blackhand on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 12:26:11 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  what makes the status of Crimea or Texas supreme? (0+ / 0-)

                    These are all constructs, as are the laws which support them. So what?

                    Gondwana has always been at war with Laurasia.

                    by AaronInSanDiego on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 02:53:26 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Answering the question with a question doesn't (0+ / 0-)

                      get to the heart of the matter, does it?

                      The "so what" would be the people of a specific area being allowed to determine their own destiny, however they decide upon it.

                      Personally I believe NYC would be better off if it became it's own little fiefdom.  They're used to being controlled by Oligarch's, let them have at it.

                      Their urban politics controls our entire State.  Thanks but the problems we face upstate is not equal to their problems.  We're forced to live under their rules.  I simply don't agree that I have any self-determination when they dictate policy.

                      Could you address what blackhand asked?

                      -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

                      by gerrilea on Wed Mar 19, 2014 at 07:03:30 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  I'll try again. (0+ / 0-)
                        What makes the status of a nation so supreme?  Nations are an artificial construct.  They were not ordained and a directive for their existence did not come down from the sky on stone tablets.
                        The status of the nation is not supreme, and neither is the status of a state within it.
                        If the people of any particular region do not wish to be part of the nation that claims them, they should have every right to succeed from it.
                        I disagree, and I see no reason why that should always be the case. Nothing I've said means that sub-national entities should always be prevented from seceding, or that national boundaries are set in stone. I simply don't believe this is an issue of inherent rights.
                        Their urban politics controls our entire State.  Thanks but the problems we face upstate is not equal to their problems.  We're forced to live under their rules.  I simply don't agree that I have any self-determination when they dictate policy.
                        Most large states deal with this. Voters in rural and areas often feel their interests are not represented well in the capitol, and that the urban areas have undue influence. As individuals, however, your vote carries the same weight as anyone else's.

                        I don't know the specifics of New York, but in California, the majority of the population live in the major metropolitan areas. If the rural part of the state were to split off, the state would lose many of the agricultural resources and other resources that are in that part of the state, which would be disadvantageous to those in the metro areas. The rural areas in turn would not have access to the tax base of the metro areas, but if they feel they are not benefiting from it anyway, their desire to split would be understandable.

                        So there are some political issues to be dealt with. But that doesn't mean that the rural area has the inherent right to split off, regardless of the interests of the rest of the state. Secession may be turn out to be the best solution, but it shouldn't automatically happen just because a majority of the residents in a given area decide they want that.

                        What if 55% of one town votes to form a new state, and 45% of another town in the same area votes for it? Does the town with the majority become part of the new state and the town without the majority stay with the old state? what about districts within a city, or cities within a county that have different wishes. Do they all have the same right to have their wishes become law? what about the individuals with different views within a town? Do you understand the problem I have with casting this as an inherent, inalienable right?

                        Gondwana has always been at war with Laurasia.

                        by AaronInSanDiego on Wed Mar 19, 2014 at 10:24:52 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

              •  see my comment below... n/t (0+ / 0-)
              •  I call shenanigans (5+ / 0-)

                You asked:

                The question I've posed stands all by itself.

                Do people have the right to self-determination or not?

                Yes or no?

                Aaron addressed exactly that question, whereupon you complained that his "false comparison to our history doesn't equal today what has occurred in the Ukraine."

                This is how "just asking questions" gets a bad name. If you aren't actually interested in discussing your own question, that's fine, but then it's pretty lame to accuse someone else of a "false comparison."

                "Democracy is a political system for people who are not sure they are right." —E. E. Schattschneider

                by HudsonValleyMark on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 02:56:56 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Nope, don't agree. Did the British have NGO's (0+ / 0-)

                  in the South agitating for civil war?

                  Did they spend billions of dollars and decades to divide our nation with the ultimate goal for us to become puppets of their machinations?

                  Does our mutual treaty allow the participants to dissolve said constitution? Yep...it would take a new constitutional convention, then through said document, they could add an amendment for its nullification, once agreed upon, the United States is no longer.

                  Did the South invade DC and kick Lincoln out of the White House and then appoint their own leaders then claim that it was "constitutional"?  By any definition, that would be a coup and is exactly what happened in the Ukraine.

                  It's at this point the red-herring becomes clear.  It's not an honest question or discussion.

                  We created this mess and now we're crying foul at the results.

                  The cognitive dissonance and hypocrisy has been revealed.

                  -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

                  by gerrilea on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 09:52:02 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  the problem is (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    kalmoth

                    I'm not prepared to accept your premise that the US is responsible for this situation. But you are conflating the discussion of the general concept of self determination, which is what you asked and which is what I was addressing, with the specifics of this situation, and the claiming I'm dishonest or hypocritical.

                    Gondwana has always been at war with Laurasia.

                    by AaronInSanDiego on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 03:57:03 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Not you personally, the argument you present. (0+ / 0-)

                      We've always had a respectful debate on issues we don't see eye to eye on.

                      I think the argument for or against Texas leaving is a bit misleading because we have a different agreement.

                      I have explained what I think would have to occur for them to leave, if they voted for it but it could be done.

                      If our White House was stormed by extremists, then the POTUS was pushed into hiding and then the Congress threatened and coerced into "voting" for the POTUS' impeachment, and then the appointment of another in their stead would be completely unconstitutional. If Russia then flew into DC and quickly recognized the new leadership, does that make those actions constitutional or legal? Nope, it would be a coup.

                      At that moment we no longer have a constitution or the rule of law...just a false meme to be repeated ad nauseam to placate the masses into compliance.

                      New York could vote to join Canada, Texas could vote to join Mexico or become independent, Maine, Vermont, New Hampshire could vote to become one entity.  The floor would be open for each State to set it's own path forward.  The majority could also send in their National Guard and kick the bastards out of DC and restore our constitutional republic.  Once restored, we could then kick the Russians ass for undermining our system of government and attempting to install their puppets.

                      See how this works yet?

                      -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

                      by gerrilea on Tue Mar 18, 2014 at 12:30:29 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

              •  Where is this coming from? (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                kalmoth
                It was completed through an illegal and unconstitutional violent coup

                KOS: "Mocking partisans focusing on elections? Even less reason to be on Daily Kos."

                by fcvaguy on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 04:40:25 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

            •  Re (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              gerrilea
              We certainly didn't give the secessionists in the South that right in the Civil War.
              Putting aside the red-herring slavery argument, can you articulate a good reason to force people by force of arms to be part of a nation that they do not want to be a part of?

              (-5.50,-6.67): Left Libertarian
              Leadership doesn't mean taking a straw poll and then just throwing up your hands. -Jyrinx

              by Sparhawk on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 06:18:13 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  law enforcement. (0+ / 0-)

                If Texans or anyone else disobey federal laws, the federal government has three right to enforce those laws.

                Gondwana has always been at war with Laurasia.

                by AaronInSanDiego on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 07:53:37 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Sounds like tyranny to me (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  gerrilea, blackhand

                  Under that theory, any country can do whatever it wants under the idea of "law enforcement".

                  Laws and governments are only legitimate under the consent of the governed. If you don't have that, you don't have a real government, regardless of what laws you have written down on paper.

                  (-5.50,-6.67): Left Libertarian
                  Leadership doesn't mean taking a straw poll and then just throwing up your hands. -Jyrinx

                  by Sparhawk on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 08:16:49 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  the consent of every individual? (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    kalmoth

                    So if an individual decides to not follow the laws, they have that right, without the government interfering?

                    Gondwana has always been at war with Laurasia.

                    by AaronInSanDiego on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 08:35:08 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Collective consent (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      gerrilea

                      If 90% of Californians (for example) voted to invent their own country, who are the rest of us to say otherwise?

                      (-5.50,-6.67): Left Libertarian
                      Leadership doesn't mean taking a straw poll and then just throwing up your hands. -Jyrinx

                      by Sparhawk on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 09:26:29 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  what is the cutoff (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        kalmoth

                        where we determine that California has the right to secede? 50%+1 vote? 2/3 majority? What if the rural counties want to secede but not the urban areas?

                        And what if the referendum occurs while Mexican armed forces are in the country, and the choices are between becoming a territory and becoming part of Mexico, but remaining a state isn't on the ballot?

                        Gondwana has always been at war with Laurasia.

                        by AaronInSanDiego on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 02:36:30 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  Good question, wouldn't/shouldn't that be (0+ / 0-)

                          decided by them as well?

                          Is a simple majority enough or must there be a super-majority to make it valid?

                          I think I'd have to support the super-majority position, it would be a drastic move that they would all have to live with.

                          -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

                          by gerrilea on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 02:54:38 PM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  you mean there isn't a universal, (0+ / 0-)

                            inherent answer to these questions? How do they get determine the answer? Who is they that have the right to make the determination? The state, which is as much a construction as the United States?

                            Gondwana has always been at war with Laurasia.

                            by AaronInSanDiego on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 03:05:25 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Maybe you missed the part where I said that (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Sparhawk

                            they should decide that for themselves.  What I think or want is secondary to their wishes.

                            It's not our decision to make.  We may have opinions on what would be appropriate but that would be our place to decide it for them.

                            The people are "they"...are they not?

                            Humm...a bit wordy there, sorry.

                            Their "State" was overthrown in a Coup and the participants are trying to claim legitimacy by saying their constitution is now in full effect.  Well, they got into that position by violating it in the first place.

                            -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

                            by gerrilea on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 03:56:26 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  sorry, going back and forth (0+ / 0-)

                            with context here. "State" in my comment was referring to the hypothetical case of the state of California. In Crimea, it would be roughly equivalent to Crimea itself within Ukraine.

                            Gondwana has always been at war with Laurasia.

                            by AaronInSanDiego on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 06:52:34 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                •  While it may be a nice theory, in practice (0+ / 0-)

                  there are movements to nullify the police authority of federal agents within States.

                  Remember over 300 municipalities throughout the US nullified the Patriot Act?  Many have moved to nullify the NDAA as well.  Some have tried to nullify the criminal actions of the TSA too.

                  They're getting more and more bold and realizing they don't have to agree to the dictates that strip the rights of their citizens by the federal government.

                  Wiki has a great introduction with various links to things the States have tried to do, including Supreme Court decisions.

                  It's worth a review...

                  http://en.wikipedia.org/...

                  -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

                  by gerrilea on Tue Mar 18, 2014 at 12:42:31 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  yes, but there are limits to (0+ / 0-)

                    what the courts would allow states and municipalities to do. And that's assuming the states and municipalities accept the authority of federal courts. In none of these cases have they fully rejected the federal government. Secession goes beyond what the 10th amendment allows.

                    Gondwana has always been at war with Laurasia.

                    by AaronInSanDiego on Tue Mar 18, 2014 at 07:16:55 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Agreed. There are limits, I think both gov'ts (0+ / 0-)

                      are testing what they can get away with.

                      -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

                      by gerrilea on Tue Mar 18, 2014 at 08:27:50 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

              •  if they don't want to be part of the nation, (0+ / 0-)

                they have the option of leaving its territory.

                Gondwana has always been at war with Laurasia.

                by AaronInSanDiego on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 07:55:07 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Wow, is that really what you believe or is this (0+ / 0-)

                  just an esoteric exercise?

                  If you really think this then should we tell the undocumented workers here to just leave?  Or the Blacks that are forever faced with oppression? Or myself, as a transgendered woman, where I'm continually faced with discrimination? Or worse, how about the Native Americans?  Should we tell them to leave as well if they don't like the lives we've granted them in the concentration camps we call reservations?

                  I find your position unbearable.  I seriously hope you are just arguing esoterically.


                  "Well if you can't work within the system we've so graciously allowed you to be a slave in, leave the country."

                  One of my greatest hero's has a response for you:

                  “Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will. Find out just what any people will quietly submit to and you have found out the exact measure of injustice and wrong which will be imposed upon them, and these will continue till they are resisted with either words or blows, or both. The limits of tyrants are prescribed by the endurance of those whom they oppress.”

                  ~Frederick Douglass

                  -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

                  by gerrilea on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 10:21:56 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Are you really surprised at the response (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    gerrilea

                    This diary is getting?  This site is predominantly left leaning.   While separate and distinct, leftism is frequently associated with state-ism and you are proposing self determination against the authority of the state.

                    I am waiting for the howls of outrage claiming right wing talking points as this type of talk is frequently the area of the Libertarian, NRA types.

                    "It's not surveillance, it's data collection to keep you safe"

                    by blackhand on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 12:55:15 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                  •  none of those examples (0+ / 0-)

                    Are equivalent to what I am saying. I'm talking about people who explicitly do not want to be governed by the laws of this land. Undocumented workers want to work here and be part of this country, not the other way around. Indigenous Americans have rights as a colonized people. That doesn't necessarily apply to ethnic Russians living in Crimea, IMO.

                    Gondwana has always been at war with Laurasia.

                    by AaronInSanDiego on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 02:43:32 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

          •  all people have a right to self-determination... (3+ / 0-)

            and all people have a right to have a REAL vote on it, not a rigged one that will not be recognized by any international institution, leaving them in legal limbo.

          •  this is a valid question. (4+ / 0-)

            self-determination is just great until some people don't like what other people have decided or themselves.

            Is it OK when some people "democratically"self-determine that women are second-class citizens, or worse,  property?  Or pick another egregious example.

            Complex topic.

            don't always believe what you think

            by claude on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 08:24:32 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Agreed, the human condition is very complex. (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              claude, blackhand

              When does self-determination become oppression at the hands of the majority?  The tyranny of democracy is something we've been dealing with for millennia going back to the ancient Greeks.

              Today we've become controlled by the corporate elite and they have manufactured our consent, as Noam Chomsky says.

              Oppression, no matter how it's packaged, is still oppression.

              "Well, we voted for it so you must accept your role as second class citizen. Run along now hon and enjoy the privileges we've granted you."

              -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

              by gerrilea on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 10:04:20 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

        •  Please do NOT delete this diary despite (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          gerrilea, Elwood Dowd

          the very rude call for it's censorship below:  

          . You are not an expert on the region, you don't know the history or the languages,
          Blah blah bleeh....  

          It's just offensive on so many levels, when the commenter does not know the diarist or his "expertise" or lack thereof.

        •  Please delete this bullshit comment, oh (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          gerrilea

          all-knowing master of the universe. It is gorundless baseless bullshit based on assemptions of facts not in evidence.

          That, in its essence, is fascism--ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power. -- Franklin D. Roosevelt --

          by enhydra lutris on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 10:06:43 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  and I am sorry, but if Wikipedia... (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Susan from 29, fcvaguy

        is just about as deep as your scholarship goes.... I am at a loss what  to say.

        •  Your personal attacks will not be addressed (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Judgment at Nuremberg, Sparhawk

          further.

          I'll ask you once again:

          Do people have the right to self-determination or not?

          Let's discuss these things honestly.  If my "scholarship" is lacking, I expect you to give me and this community sources for the expansion of our knowledge on this subject.

          Anything less is a dishonest trick to end community participation and discussion.

          -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

          by gerrilea on Sun Mar 16, 2014 at 11:49:10 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I am sorry, but I will not write a diary... (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            fcvaguy

            about the political problems of Zimbabwe, because pretty much all I know about Zimbabwe is what I hear on the BBC and on the NPR.

            I have already published two rec-listed diaries on the subject of Ukraine/Crimea, and contributed to a third one by pico.

            •  Yep, it's easier just to attack those that may not (0+ / 0-)

              have all the facts.

              Sweet.

              That will get us nowhere.

              Ugh.

              -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

              by gerrilea on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 12:48:40 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  there is a limit... (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                gerrilea

                to how many rec-listed diaries I can write within a time interval, I am sorry. I also usually know well enough not to write with great confidence about something about which I "may not have all the facts," and whenever I am tempted to do so, I am also well prepared to be corrected.

                Dixi.

            •  Which does not meant hat they were at all (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              gerrilea

              correct, since this is simply, for a great many here, all about "The white hats v the evil Putin". Crimea's history and ethnicity is almost always completely ignored in all these "rah-rah Euromaiden insurrection" diaries

              That, in its essence, is fascism--ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power. -- Franklin D. Roosevelt --

              by enhydra lutris on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 10:23:32 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

          •  and I don't attack you as a person.... (3+ / 0-)

            I merely note that you are using second-hand, misinterpreted, or questionable sources and apparently lack the expertise to assess their veracity.

        •  Your Diary is on point (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          gerrilea

          Please don't be bullied by the rude comments.  

        •  Despite being at a loss what to say (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          gerrilea

          you keep talking.

        •  Not even wikipedia (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          kalmoth

          is saying what diarist is saying.

          KOS: "Mocking partisans focusing on elections? Even less reason to be on Daily Kos."

          by fcvaguy on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 04:42:14 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  What are you talking about? The legal (0+ / 0-)

            contract that the Russians had with the Ukraine that allows them to be there until 2042 or the agreed upon troop levels is in error?

            Could you show me what it is you're talking about that I've gotten wrong ?

            -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

            by gerrilea on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 07:40:32 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  The Government of Ukraine has a good website (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              gerrilea, kalmoth

              with all sorts of information.  The Parliament archives all of its sessions. I was able to find the treaty it ratified dated April 27, 2010:

              On Ratification of the Agreement between Ukraine and Russia on the Black Sea Fleet of the Russian Federation on the territory of Ukraine.

              Irony in the title (on the territory of Ukraine.)

              It doesn't specify anything about troop levels.

              Instead, it extended the existing agreement for 25 years till 2042, with provisions for the 5 years after that.
              Russia agreed to pay Ukraine 100 million US dollars for its privileges.
              It also includes a contract for natural gas so that the supplier, Gazprom, would be protected against the risk of future price declines below $333 / 1000 cu meters.

              Signed 4/21/2010
              Ratified 4/27/2010

              The day that it was ratified, it appears that there was a scuffle over it in the Parliament but it passed by a very slim margin.

              There is no existence without doubt.

              by Mark Lippman on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 09:12:20 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Should say Russia's payment=$100 million per year (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                gerrilea, kalmoth

                Maybe this invasion is how the Russian Federation does budget cuts nowadays.

                There is no existence without doubt.

                by Mark Lippman on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 09:16:25 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Now that's something I'd have to agree with. (0+ / 0-)

                  As ironic and as disgusting as it is and a tad bit funny.

                  Ugh.

                  Now you've peaked my attention, thanks.

                  -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

                  by gerrilea on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 10:52:29 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  no matter how heated the arguments get here, (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    gerrilea, kalmoth

                    I try to keep a sense of proportion.

                    You might be interesting in an intriguing story Putin told about Edward Snowden during an interview he gave to an AP reporter last September. The transcript of the English language translation is on the Kremlin website.

                    http://eng.kremlin.ru/...

                    It's funny how not a word of that was ever published in the US.  

                    There is no existence without doubt.

                    by Mark Lippman on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 11:18:27 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Thanks for the link. (0+ / 0-)

                      Interesting stuff:

                      "When issues related to the use of force are dealt with outside the framework of the UN and Security Council, then there’s risk that such unlawful decisions might be applied against anybody and on any pretext."
                      "Wherever Ukraine goes, anyway we shall meet sometime and somewhere. Because we are one nation. Because we have one Dnieper Kiev baptistery, we certainly have common historical roots and common destiny. We have common religion, common faith, and we have very similar culture, languages, traditions and state of mind."
                      On Snowden:
                      VLADIMIR PUTIN: If it was really secret information and if such a person caused us some damage, then I would certainly seek his prosecution to the fullest extent permitted by Russian law.

                      JOHN DANISZEWSKI: In that regard, do you think the US administration is right to seek his return from Russia, to ask you to send him back?

                      VLADIMIR PUTIN: Probably, yes. You see, the problem is completely different. We do not know if the administration is right or not. The thing is not that we protect Snowden. We do not protect him at all. The problem is that we do not have an agreement with the United States on mutual extradition of criminals. We repeatedly suggested that the United States should conclude such an agreement, but we were refused.

                      -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

                      by gerrilea on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 12:12:47 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

              •  Thanks, I couldn't find that info when I googled (0+ / 0-)

                it...Russia Today keep coming up.  But the facts are the same, aren't they?

                I haven't made an error here on the troop levels or the agreement that was made.

                -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

                by gerrilea on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 10:53:46 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  The question is Why make a treaty that extends the (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  gerrilea

                  lease in Crimea in exchange for natural gas and money?

                  Ukraine's trouble is a corrupt beyond belief oligarchy and its dependence on natural gas imported from Russia. In 2004 the President was poisoned with dioxin which left his face disfigured. Russia was accused but the case, an apparent assassination attempt, was never solved. In 2009, Russia cut the natural gas supply on the first of the year.  Yulia Tymoshenko, who made a fortune in natural gas before taking office as prime minister renegotiated the contract.
                  In 2010, Yanukovych renegotiated again to extend the Crimea military base leases. Considering how crooked Ukraine's leaders have been, this grim story is punctuated with a chuckle when you think of Putin talking about how similar both countries are.

                  Yanukovych signed to extend the EU Affiliation Agreement in December 2011 but it soured a year later. The EU and observers said the 2012 parliamentary elections were rigged. And despite, or maybe because of, the renegotiated gas contracts, the country's finances were worse than ever.

                  The Big Oil companies showed up with plans to frack for natural gas in newly discovered reserves along the border with Russia. The press releases announced Ukraine's energy independence in January 2013, once everything was up and running. Royal Dutch Shell is the only company, so far, to meet with the interim government and it announced its intention to proceed with its development plans.

                  Russia will probably want take the part of Ukraine where the gas fields are and it will say that the ethnic Russians in the region need protection.  In a way this is really a conflict between multi-national corporations and Russia, a country stuck in the 20th century with, wait for it . . . some of the biggest, if not the biggest oil and gas reserves in the world. The nation states of the EU and North America get to provide cannon fodder, if necessary.

                  There is no existence without doubt.

                  by Mark Lippman on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 04:47:20 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

      •  They have a right to bases in Crimea (11+ / 0-)

        They don't have a right to occupy the entire Crimea.

        We have a right to have a base in Cuba, but that wouldn't give us the right to occupy the entire country, or even the entire Province of Guantanamo. I suspect that if we did occupy Guantanamo Province, and then held a "referendum" designed to legitimize our occupation, everybody here would be denouncing such action.

        Bin Laden is dead. GM and Chrysler are alive.

        by leevank on Sun Mar 16, 2014 at 11:43:36 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  What if there was a coup in Cuba that was (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Judgment at Nuremberg, blackhand

          hostile to our presence there?  Then what do you think we would do?  Just walk away?

          Didn't JFK threaten total worldwide destruction after the Cubans agreed to let the Soviets in and have their nuclear weapons pointed directly at us?

          ISN'T this exactly what we did and are doing in the Ukraine?  Directly threatening Russia but instead of being 90 miles away, it's on their damn border!

          My god man, aren't you paying attention?

          The global military standpoint and the geo-political ambitions of NATO increasingly underline and give a glimpse of NATO operations and military directives. The system of military alliances is tightening and its main targets seem to be the Eurasian giants; Russia, China, and possibly India. NATO expansion is not just limited to Europe and the former Soviet Union, but is in pursuit of a global characteristic. In Asia an Asiatic parallel sister-alliance to NATO is being formed from the network of existing military alliances in the Asia-Pacific Rim. [30] China, Russia, and Iran now are in the forefront of a reluctant Eurasian alliance that is taking shaping to oppose NATO and the United States. Ultimately it may be in the Middle East that the pace for NATO expansion will be established. If the Middle East falls under the total control of the Anglo-American alliance and NATO the stage will be set for a new phase of the “long war” that will lead all the way into the heart of Eurasia.

          -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

          by gerrilea on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 02:32:40 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Ukraine's interim government wasn't hostile to (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            kalmoth, hmi, Loge

            Russia's military lease in Crimea.

            What if there was a coup in Cuba that was hostile to our presence there?  
            What is the basis for suggesting the interim government was hostile to Russia's military leases in Crimea before armed gunmen took over two airports there on February 28.

            The interim government has released statement after statement calling for the matter to be "resolved politically and diplomatically."

            And Putin said at an important press conference on December 19 that Russia would work with whomever came out on top when he was asked about the turmoil in Ukraine.

            There is no existence without doubt.

            by Mark Lippman on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 08:15:45 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Who were the armed gunmen? (0+ / 0-)

              What side were they on?

              If they were Russian, do they not have a right to protect their assets in the region?  We've made that claim various times.

              Shit didn't we invade Iraq, wait, Afghanistan, no no wait, Libya, Egypt...et al to keep nuclear weapons from going off here?

              Doesn't our "war on terror" grant us this right to preemptively strike anywhere in the world against those that don't like us? Yep, screw international law on this point, correct?

              It's clear to me that once the Ukrainian puppet government gets established, they'll be kicking the Russians out and then most assuredly join NATO and the EU.

              -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

              by gerrilea on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 09:13:11 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  They completely sealed off Crimea at its (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                kalmoth

                choke points on the isthmus that connects it to the rest of Ukraine.

                That's an area the size of the state of Massachusetts with a population of 2 million.

                Russia had the right to restrict access to its bases and to protect their perimeter. That's a tiny fraction of the total Crimea land mass.

                Russia did not have the right to close the whole of Crimea to the outside world so that it became an ordeal for anyone to come or go.

                And there was no threat to Russia's assets to justify such actions. Russia signed a treaty in 1994 pledging to respect Ukraine's territorial and economic integrity.  

                There is no existence without doubt.

                by Mark Lippman on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 09:34:09 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

      •  are troops on land in Crimea (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        kalmoth, Loge

        allowed under that agreement, or just naval troops on naval facilities? In any case, if I'm not mistaken, the numbers of Russian forces in Crimea now exceed then numbers you listed.

        Gondwana has always been at war with Laurasia.

        by AaronInSanDiego on Sun Mar 16, 2014 at 11:44:26 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  The Russians are allowed (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Oh Mary Oh, kalmoth

        in certain parts of Crimea, not ALL OVER Crimea, as an occupying force as they currently are.

        Why are there over 4000 Russian militia in the capital of Crimea?

        KOS: "Mocking partisans focusing on elections? Even less reason to be on Daily Kos."

        by fcvaguy on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 04:18:11 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  This is what I know, if you have some other (0+ / 0-)

          source, provide it.

          http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...

          SIMFEROPOL, Ukraine/KIEV, March 16 (Reuters) - Crimeans voted in a referendum on Sunday on whether to break away from Ukraine and join Russia, with Kiev accusing Moscow of pouring forces into the peninsula and warning separatist leaders "the ground will burn under their feet".
          The puppet regime in Kiev is not a legitimate source.

          All we have are accusations without evidence.

          -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

          by gerrilea on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 07:48:14 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  the "puppet regime"... (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            fcvaguy, AaronInSanDiego

            in Kiev is the Ukrainian parliament (Rada)  elected in 2012, in an election which did have international monitors.

          •  you're not quoting facts, you're quoting propogand (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            kalmoth, ExpatGirl
            The puppet regime in Kiev
            That puppet regime is constituted of democratically elected members of parliament.

            The Crimean parliament is where you should direct your ire. Its a sham.

            KOS: "Mocking partisans focusing on elections? Even less reason to be on Daily Kos."

            by fcvaguy on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 08:31:21 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Didn't you hear? (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              fcvaguy, kalmoth

              Only the US engages in propaganda.

              Tell Warner Brothers Pictures that Rooney Mara is #NotYourTigerLily.

              by ExpatGirl on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 09:34:39 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Could you show me where I ever stated that? (0+ / 0-)

                Anywhere on DK, ever?

                We're inundated with propaganda from all sides.  Trying to deduce what the actual truth is nearly impossible.

                -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

                by gerrilea on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 10:58:38 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

            •  Were they not also duly elected? (0+ / 0-)

              Do they not legitimately speak for the majority there?

              If not, then I'd agree with you.

              And what about the protesters burning government buildings?

              How many of the "democratically elected parliament members" were threatened or coerced or beaten?

              Cheering a 'Democratic' Coup in Ukraine

              With Yanukovych and many of his supporters fleeing for their lives, the opposition parties seized control of parliament and began passing draconian new laws often unanimously, as neo-Nazi thugs patrolled the scene. Amazingly, the U.S. news media treated all this as uplifting, a popular uprising against a tyrant, not a case of a coup government operating in collusion with violent extremists.

              -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

              by gerrilea on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 11:10:43 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  a perfect example of why I criticized your (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Sharon Wraight, kalmoth

                sources. From your link:

                By Robert Parry, Consortium News | Op-Ed

                KOS: "Mocking partisans focusing on elections? Even less reason to be on Daily Kos."

                by fcvaguy on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 12:49:09 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Republished in it's entirety by Truthout. (0+ / 0-)
                  This piece was reprinted by Truthout with permission or license. It may not be reproduced in any form without permission or license from the source.
                  It seems you are attempting to create a problem where there is none.

                  I agree with the assessment, deal with it.

                  -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

                  by gerrilea on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 01:08:42 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  why does the fact that it was republished at truth (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    kalmoth

                    make any sort of difference? It's still an opinion piece.

                    Gondwana has always been at war with Laurasia.

                    by AaronInSanDiego on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 09:14:11 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  sorry, truthout. n/t (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      kalmoth

                      Gondwana has always been at war with Laurasia.

                      by AaronInSanDiego on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 09:15:33 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                    •  Well, I personally consider Truthout to be (0+ / 0-)

                      a legitimate operation and repeating the entire OP-ed gives a little more weight to this opinion.  It wasn't "referenced" and critiqued...there is a difference, subtle as it may be.

                      Besides, I'm still missing the problem fcvaguy has with the it myself.

                      The opinion piece is based on facts, is it not? Are the facts in question?  

                      I've come to view fcvaguy's "reinstatement" here to be in bad faith.  He's become like he always was.  He has to make it personal, every chance he gets.  He could have expressed why the opinion piece I've referenced isn't a legitimate source...it's it simply because it's an opinion?  Isn't that the way this site works? If you have a position on a topic that is based on some fact, figure or whatever...show us.  I did, now it's not good enough, for whatever contrived reasons he can create.

                      Robert Parry is and always has presented us with a balanced fact based articles and opinions based on such.  He is, IMO, a true progressive and his opinion holds more water than most.

                      I guess fcvaguy doesn't like real conversation, but that's just a personal observation I've witnessed in this diary.

                      -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

                      by gerrilea on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 11:17:44 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

  •  The options up for vote (12+ / 0-)

    did not seem like a real choice, as I read them. Also, how many didn't participate in the election in protest. And do we really know that the outcome being reported is correct? Why should one part of the country be given this option just as Russia's troops have entered the region?

    Gondwana has always been at war with Laurasia.

    by AaronInSanDiego on Sun Mar 16, 2014 at 11:30:23 PM PDT

  •  the outcome was faked... (10+ / 0-)

    the turnout was abysmal (and even among those who did turn out, many were told to go and promised difficulties at work if they don't), non-Crimean residents were allowed to vote with Russian passports as IDs, lastly, the international voting observers were turned back and not allowed into Crimea.

    Еще вопросы есть?

    •  Do you have proof of this borderline CT? (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Judgment at Nuremberg, Pluto

      I'd just like facts...all that I've read, thus far says turnout was at least 80% and for rejoining Russia.

      -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

      by gerrilea on Sun Mar 16, 2014 at 11:40:18 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Isn't that the figure reported by (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        kalmoth, Lawrence

        the Russian government? Is it credible?

        Gondwana has always been at war with Laurasia.

        by AaronInSanDiego on Sun Mar 16, 2014 at 11:49:40 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  ... (8+ / 0-)

        1. questionable turnout...

        http://grani.ru/...

        2. Reported turnout was 80%.

        http://korrespondent.net/...

        3. Crimean Tartars (2nd largest ethnicity, 13-20% of voters) boycotted the "referendum."

        http://www.newsru.com/...

        This makes the reported turnout highly improbable, if not impossible... along with 96% "Aye" vote.

        4. people report of coercion

        http://crimea.comments.ua/...

        5. international observers were kicked out

        http://lenta.ru/...

        Kindly apologize.

        borderline CT
        •  Don't forget the pre-marked ballots and the (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          sewaneepat, fcvaguy, Loge

          false choice of Russia or independence. With no "remain with Ukraine" on the ballots.

          "Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." --M. L. King "You can't fix stupid" --Ron White -6.00, -5.18

          by zenbassoon on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 12:01:30 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  oh yeah, people voting with Russian passports... (4+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Lawrence, Oh Mary Oh, fcvaguy, tardis10

          http://glavnoe.ua/...

          and journalists kicked out of polling stations.

          http://slon.ru/...

        •  Had you provided these links before personally (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Judgment at Nuremberg

          insulting me, I may have apologized.  As yet, you've come into my diary and been a dick.

          That said, thank you for the links.  I'll review them as I can.

          There is a point that you haven't addressed.  If the Crimean Tartar's compose 13% of the total population and had they decided to vote, would it have made a difference in the outcome of the referendum?

          Sadly, it would not.

          -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

          by gerrilea on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 12:35:19 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  no offense meant... (4+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            gerrilea, fcvaguy, DaNang65, tardis10

            but please do realize that I did not perceive this diary in the best of light from the get-go.

            And it is my point exactly, there would be a possibility that Crimea would secede even if a real and internationally recognized referendum were held on its future... however, what happened was not that, but an extralegal disgrace, and all the residents of Crimea were robbed of their vote - because instead of voting their will, they were used as a prop in a political scam.

          •  and I am sorry for any offense real or perceived, (0+ / 0-)

            but I don't think it is an insult to suggest  that you are likely not Russian, not Ukrainian, and just as likely likely did not major in Russian history.

            Якщо помилився, винен. Тільки здається мені, все вірно вгадав.

            •  I did not major in Russian History...I am a (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              kalmoth

              Lithuanian (and Irish) descendent and a Catholic.  My grandparents came to America in 1912, met on the boat over and got married.  My grandfather was 100% Lithuanian, my grandmother was 100% Irish, both were Catholics.

              Some of my grandfathers family got out before the shit hit the fan.  I know the Soviets intentionally starved millions of Catholics, 60+ million if memory serves.  My grandfather had 8 brothers and sisters and I only know of two that made it with him here with my great-grandfather.

              We've tried to do a family tree and search history for them but have come up wanting. They changed their names and went in different directions. We know a little more about my grandmother's roots in Ireland however.

              -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

              by gerrilea on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 01:02:42 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  I am sorry... (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                gerrilea, tardis10
                 I know the Soviets intentionally starved millions of Catholics, 60+ million if memory serves.
                but the maximum number of Catholics in Russian Empire (not counting Poland), according to the Catholic Encyclopaedia, peaked at five million some time in the nineteenth century....

                I'll leave it at that.

                •  Hmmm...maybe I'm getting too old... (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  kalmoth

                  http://www.bccatholic.org/...

                  Holodomor Memorial Day, a day that commemorates the 4 to 5 million Ukrainians exterminated through starvation in Joseph Stalin's Soviet Union.
                  http://www.hawaii.edu/...
                  With this understood, the Soviet Union appears the greatest megamurderer of all, apparently killing near 61,000,000 people. Stalin himself is responsible for almost 43,000,000 of these. Most of the deaths, perhaps around 39,000,000 are due to lethal forced labor in gulag and transit thereto.
                  I knew there was 60 million dead, okay, not just Catholics but the Soviets have killed the most in human history.

                  -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

                  by gerrilea on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 02:07:46 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  The Soviet Union was a joint enterprise (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    gerrilea

                    despite people calling Stalin/Beria as "Russian" - There were "Ukrainian" as well as "Russian" commies (as well as other nationalities) at all levels, including the very top.

                    The great "Holodomor" or hunger is often cited by western Ukrainians as an example of "Russian" "genocide" against Ukrainians although oddly the Holodomor struck hardest in eastern Ukraine (esp near Kharkov) where the people today oppose western Ukrainian politics and some are protesting to join Russia.  

                    Many of the western Ukrainians lived in Poland (and/or Czechoslovakia) during the Holodomor and were not even part of that. Catholics never lived in numbers in Kharkov, and not even so much in Kiev, but they are found in greatest numbers in the western Ukrainian provinces that were part of Poland during the Holodomor.  So there is a lot of strange claims about it now with those unaffected or least affected trying to use it as a cudgel against "Russians" (lol like "Stalin"born in Georgia, or Lazar Kaganovich, from near Kiev).

                    I lost an uncle (and I'm named after that uncle) during the Holodomor in Ukraine. He was not a Catholic. His family did not blame "Russians", nor fellow Ukrainians.

              •  thank you for sharing, and your grandparents... (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                gerrilea

                they made the right call :)

          •  you accused him of CT (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            kalmoth

            if you choose not to apologize, thats up to you. However, kalmoth's facts are established in a number of diaries on the subject over the past several weeks.

            KOS: "Mocking partisans focusing on elections? Even less reason to be on Daily Kos."

            by fcvaguy on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 05:05:14 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

  •  Putinoids are so used to vote-rigging... (11+ / 0-)

    that they rigged a vote that would have quite possibly turned out their way if it were held fair and square. However, what did happen in Crimea has even less credibility that the 2011 Duma election that set the statistical gold standard for vote falsification.

    •  Why trust a man... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Calamity Jean

      ...who would kill a dog that looks like him?

      Float like a manhole cover, sting like a sash weight! Clean Coal Is A Clinker!

      by JeffW on Sun Mar 16, 2014 at 11:36:32 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Are you serious? What the heck does this (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Judgment at Nuremberg

        have to do with Putin's "trustability", I don't trust the bastard as far as I can throw him, nor do I trust our governments propaganda, as it's been reported.

        Do people have the right to self-determination or not?

        Are we not denying this to the people living in the Crimea?

        -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

        by gerrilea on Sun Mar 16, 2014 at 11:51:52 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  The demonization and personalization (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        gerrilea

        of a "bogeyman" in the press is laughable, as well as simplistic.

        I expected better here, but we are as deeply brainwashed by generations of simplistic foreign policy media narratives of "freedom fighters" (like the Taliban once was) and evil "bogeymen" embodied by a single evil  person to direct our hate.

        It's just not so simple.  Usually it's not, and in this case, there are complications galore. Also Putin or not, any generic Russian leader would be alarmed at the unconstitutional COUP pulled off by the western Ukrainian radical right (as well as some well meaning moderates) and continued Nato expansion/encroachment.  

        Finally, let Crimea have it's say; they were never consulted when after centuries they were simply transferred from one Soviet Republic to another by Khrushchev in the 1950's...    At that time it was unthinkable that Russian Crimea would actually by run a a foreign power, especially one that actually honors those that collaborated with nazi's and that engaged in ethnic cleansing of Poles and Jews in the western provinces.   This is truly mortifying for most older persons living in Crimea and many on the east bank of the Dneiper.  

         

    •  Odd, that's not what's being reported. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Judgment at Nuremberg

      http://www.theguardian.com/...

      Partial results indicate more than 90% of Crimeans favor secession, according to an election official via RIA Novosti. Crimean officials say turnout was 83%. Revised numbers are expected late tonight.
      Более 95% избирателей Крыма проголосовали за присоединение к РФ
      Mikhail Malyshev, head of the referendum committee, has said that preliminary results show 95.5% of Crimean voters favor secession to Russia, RIA Novosti reports.

      After counting half the votes from polling stations, he said the remainder show 3.5% chose more autonomy with Ukraine, and 1% were disqualified and spoiled ballots. (As noted in our explainer on the Crimean referendum, the ballot lacks an option for the status quo – voters can’t choose to remain a normal region of Ukraine.)

      -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

      by gerrilea on Sun Mar 16, 2014 at 11:38:47 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  do you realize that you are quoting.... (7+ / 0-)

        Putin mouthpiece ria.ru - the same news agency whose hostile takeover by a pro-Putin crew was widely discussed a few months ago? And Guardian is reporting what "Crimean officals say..."

        •  Russia Today (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          kalmoth

          now this diary makes sense.

          KOS: "Mocking partisans focusing on elections? Even less reason to be on Daily Kos."

          by fcvaguy on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 05:06:38 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  And you need to read for comprehension. (0+ / 0-)

            Google didn't give me a direct link to the agreement that the Russians and the Ukrainians had made.  I wanted to find specific details of their deal.

            Wiki said they had an agreement to be in Crimea until 2042 but didn't elaborate, that's why I went to the horse's mouth.

            If what RT has presented is false, show me the legal document of their agreement.

            They have the right to have 20,000 troops in the Crimea, with a slew of military hardware, ships etc.

            The propaganda we're being fed is that they've invaded the country.  I haven't seen proof of this YET!  Just a lot of hot air coming from Kiev and our media.

            -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

            by gerrilea on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 07:55:30 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  before you insult others (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              kalmoth

              you should be sure to fact check your diary. You're way off in a number of places.

              KOS: "Mocking partisans focusing on elections? Even less reason to be on Daily Kos."

              by fcvaguy on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 08:29:23 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  /facepalm (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              gerrilea
              The propaganda we're being fed is that they've invaded the country.  I haven't seen proof of this YET!
              http://argumentua.com/...

               photo russian_solgiers_05_zpsb8650c16.jpg

              http://slon.ru/...

               photo 1064397_zps898a03a0.jpg

              http://ipc-dzhankoy.org/...


              Now what?

              •  Bomb the bastards! Okay just kidding. (0+ / 0-)

                While these images are truly unsettling.  Do we have proof of when/where they were taken and by whom?

                Ever since we were fed the propaganda in Iraq and the manufactured pictures of the Iraqi's meeting us as liberators and them tearing down Saddam's statue , I find these pictures to be unreliable "evidence".

                http://www.npr.org/...

                Five years ago, Baghdad fell to forces led by the United States. But according to an oft-forgotten L.A. Times report, the crystallizing moment — when a statue of Saddam Hussein came down in Baghdad — was not the spontaneous event it appeared to be.

                -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

                by gerrilea on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 11:22:10 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

      •  In 2013, fully 2/3 favored staying with Ukraine. (6+ / 0-)

        "Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." --M. L. King "You can't fix stupid" --Ron White -6.00, -5.18

        by zenbassoon on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 12:02:29 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  In Kiev they simply have revolutions (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      gerrilea

      every decade or so when the western ultra nationalistic part of the country LOSES the election and DISAGREES with the decisions of their elected President.

  •  That damned tyrant Abraham Lincoln! (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jan4insight, kalmoth

    He violated the South's right to self-determination. I assume you think John Wilkes Booth was a hero.

    Bin Laden is dead. GM and Chrysler are alive.

    by leevank on Sun Mar 16, 2014 at 11:46:45 PM PDT

    •  I think the US... (2+ / 0-)

      my very well have been better off without the South, but it was the South that started the war, so the point is kind of moot.

      •  The South did not attack any northern State (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        kalmoth, Judgment at Nuremberg

        Fort Sumter was part of South Carolina, which had already seceded.

        Bin Laden is dead. GM and Chrysler are alive.

        by leevank on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 12:05:10 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  But a rather careless stumble (4+ / 0-)

        The entire argument is rather infantile and it is little wonder a calm and knowledgeable opponent to this diary would get careless.

        I recommended your response as I would all I have read but this is wrong on its face about our own Civil War [when was war ever civil?]:

        it was the South that started the war, so the point is kind of moot.
        There was plenty of provocation on both sides.  Assuming [correctly I like to believe] the war was a fight to end slavery, there should be little doubt the war was right and just though slavery exists to this day and is supported on American territory.

        The given flashpoint for the war at Fort Sumpter is like blaming a match for a forest fire.  It was quite simply not the first act of aggression by either side, both of which were spoiling for war.

        Just picking a nit.

        Best,  Terry

      •  Not sure about that (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        gerrilea

        The south was planning post succession to establish a Caribbean and Central American slave empire.  They would have been aggressively expansionist and doubtless have generated many border incidents with the Union.  I suspect it would have put off the inevitable.  

        The biggest mistake of Reconstruction was to not seize plantations to be divided amongst former slaves and to try every major slave holder for treason.  

        I'm a 4 Freedoms Democrat.

        by DavidMS on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 05:37:06 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Do you really think the US would have been better (0+ / 0-)

        off without the resources of the South? The South would have had all the oil, all the ports south of the Chesapeake Bay, including all of the Gulf of Mexico. I guess the New England textile mills could have made do with only wool, while the South exported cotton to Europe.

        I personally am very glad that Lincoln did not let the South secede and that the Union won the war, being that I have lived in Tennessee all my life, but that is a different issue entirely than whether the North would have been better off without the resources of the South.

        You can't scare me, I'm sticking to the Union - Woody Guthrie

        by sewaneepat on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 07:03:07 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  The South didn't storm the White House and (0+ / 0-)

      install their own leaders.

      Besides our constitution isn't what's at issue here today.

      -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

      by gerrilea on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 12:19:54 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  You apparently don't think the Ukrainian ... (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        kalmoth, allergywoman

        constitution is at issue either, since you make no argument that the secession of Crimea is legal under the Ukrainian constitution.

        Bin Laden is dead. GM and Chrysler are alive.

        by leevank on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 12:35:27 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  We can't have it both ways. I think the (0+ / 0-)

          hypocrisy of our government's position is what I have a problem with here.  We created this mess and then we cry foul.

          Ughhhh...

          The Ukrainian constitution became null and void when the rioters stormed the castle and installed their own leaders.

          If we were to support a restoration of those lawfully elected representatives and a complete restoration of their constitution, then I'd have a problem with the Crimean Vote...because then under that constitution, as I've read it, they couldn't do it.

          Get rid of all the "leaders" from both camps and then have actual elections.  Let the "riff-raff" decide their own fate, not have it dictated by the US, the EU, the IMF or Russia.

          Until that is done, none of what's occurred is legitimate in my opinion.

          If the people wish to renegotiate their constitution, let them, if they wish to divide their single nation into 2, 3 or 4 parts, let them.

          It's their business, not ours, period.

          -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

          by gerrilea on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 01:13:51 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I'm pretty far from convinced at this point (5+ / 0-)

            that "we created this mess." I'm sure you've read many of the same diaries I have, so I don't feel the need to go digging for evidence that's already been presented.

            Gondwana has always been at war with Laurasia.

            by AaronInSanDiego on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 01:25:35 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  While I've read many that have convinced (0+ / 0-)

              me we did this.

              :)

              I guess we'll just have to wait and see the next few moves both countries make, ie the US and Russia.

              Let's hope it's towards peace and having the people of the Ukraine decide their own fate without either side or the EU or the IMF or anyone being in the mix.

              -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

              by gerrilea on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 02:36:36 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

          •  WE created this mess? (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            kalmoth

            Were the demonstrators in Kiev Americans, or Ukrainians? If you concede that they were Ukrainians, were U.S. troops present and holding guns to their heads to force them to demonstrate? If the answer is "no," then WE didn't "create this mess."

            Bin Laden is dead. GM and Chrysler are alive.

            by leevank on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 06:20:02 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Your propaganda doesn't float against the (0+ / 0-)

              admitted facts.

              http://www.workers.org/...

              Ukraine and Venezuela are not exceptions to this rule of imperialist intervention. For 20 years, $5 billion was invested in Ukraine to support the opposition and to create tens of thousands of nongovernmental organizations to move the country more towards the U.S. and EU and their policies. In an intercepted phone call between Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland and the U.S. ambassador to Ukraine, she discusses who the U.S. wants to be the head of the new illegitimate government, and lo and behold, the U.S. pick, Arseniy Yatseniuk, is named as the interim Ukrainian leader. This is clearly outside intervention in the affairs of a sovereign country that would not be tolerated if directed at the U.S. or its allies.

              -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

              by gerrilea on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 08:00:13 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Speaking of propaganda, you have done nothing ... (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                kalmoth, ExpatGirl, Loge

                but spew Russian propaganda. You decry the West seeking to influence what happens in Ukraine, but somehow you seem to think it's just fine when Russia not only seeks to influence what happens there, but sends armed troops to make sure that what they want to happen is what happens.

                Neither the United States nor any NATO country has occupied a square inch of Ukraine. Russia has.

                And you quote Workers World, a publication of the Workers World Party which has, among other things, supported the North Korean dictatorship, the crackdown on demonstrators in Tienanmen Square, and the Soviet invasions of Hungary and Czechoslovakia. Your support for a right of self-determination seems quite selective.

                Bin Laden is dead. GM and Chrysler are alive.

                by leevank on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 08:48:49 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Yep, it's all my fault...I don't see the world (0+ / 0-)

                  through your rose-colored glasses.

                  Are there not over a million Russian people in the Crimea?

                  It seems they already did invade, decades ago, maybe you didn't notice.

                  Again, it's the hypocrisy that is being spoon-fed to me that I have a real problem with.

                  Shit, we invaded Granada "to protect Americans".

                  Historian Howard Zinn's account of the American invasion of the small Caribbean island of Grenada, ostensibly to 'protect' US citizens, but in fact to re-assert US military and financial dominance over the region.
                  And then there's Panama, Nicaragua, etc, etc, etc.

                  Please stop with the zooming, I see through the facade.

                  :)

                  -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

                  by gerrilea on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 03:14:10 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

  •  Problem is, the ballots were pre-marked, and (8+ / 0-)

    only had two choices: Join Russia, or become independent.

    When fully 2/3 of the country in 2013 was polled to stay with Ukraine, and yet 95% voted to join Russia?

    When Tatars and Ukrainians are being beaten by Russians for dissenting?

    This isn't self-determination.

    "Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." --M. L. King "You can't fix stupid" --Ron White -6.00, -5.18

    by zenbassoon on Sun Mar 16, 2014 at 11:59:20 PM PDT

  •  No, there is no general right to secede from ... (9+ / 0-)

    a recognized national government without that government's permission. There may be special exceptions (such as was the case with the former USSR, where the various republics had some vestigial sovereignty, as was recognized by Ukraine and Belarus having votes in the UN General Assembly).  Recognizing such a "right" would be a sure route to anarchy, since there would be secessionist movements all over the world, and particularly in multi-ethnic countries.

    Bin Laden is dead. GM and Chrysler are alive.

    by leevank on Sun Mar 16, 2014 at 11:59:30 PM PDT

    •  So, your answer is people do not have a right (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Judgment at Nuremberg

      to actual self-determination and only rarely if the world approves?

      Wow.  So this wasn't about "bringing democracy" after all.

      As for this:

      since there would be secessionist movements all over the world, and particularly in multi-ethnic countries.
      Why can't there be a thousand or two thousand countries on this planet?

      Less is better?

      I find your position to be untenable to the understandings I have of what freedom actually entails.  

      -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

      by gerrilea on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 12:16:43 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  There is NOTHING in the U.N. Charter ... (9+ / 0-)

        that gives a general right of secession. There is NOTHING in generally recognized international law that gives such a right.

        Let's say that Tamil Nadu decided to secede from India. I assume you would say it has that right. But then what of the non-Tamil communities within Tamil Nadu? Would they also have a right to secede from Tamil Nadu? Where does this "right" to self-determination end? At the town level? At the village level? At the neighborhood level? At the individual property owner level?

        Once you start down this road, there is no logical stopping point until you get to each individual having a "right" to secede from whatever government they don't like -- at least if they own property that could be declared a "sovereign state." And that is the very definition of anarchy.

        I would submit that your "understandings" of "what freedom actually entails" are rather seriously deficient. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights provides that people shall have equal rights to participate in the government of their state, and to emigrate from that state if they so desire. It does NOT provide that any person or group of people has a right to unilaterally secede from their state.

        Bin Laden is dead. GM and Chrysler are alive.

        by leevank on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 12:30:15 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  by the way, a somewhat nasty subject... (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          DavidMS, leevank

          for the US is the existence of self-proclaimed "sovereign citizens," extremists who claim they have individually seceded from the US. This is the illogical limit of the right to self-determination interpreted with no regard either for law or for common sense.

        •  My aren't we a bit testy this morning... :) (0+ / 0-)

          My understanding isn't "deficient" I just don't buy into the propaganda.

          Reductio ad absurdum
          doesn't cut it for me.

          "Society must have laws, otherwise there would be chaos."
          Maybe you're not aware but the Native American Tribes here in the US are sovereign nations.  They view each individual as a sovereign citizen.  They don't have anarchy.

          You're basically arguing for the continuation of the status quo.  

          There is NOTHING in generally recognized international law that gives such a right.
          I summarily reject your position:
          "If there is no struggle there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom and yet depreciate agitation…want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightening. They want the ocean without the awful roar of its many waters…. Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will."

          ~Frederick Douglass, 1857

          "The law" is only for you and I, not for our corporate overlords.  But we do have the power to change it, if we dare.

          The right to self-determination is not a privilege granted to us.

          Humanity is evolving, heck I'm evolving.  I once believed the rule of law was the only thing that protected us from ourselves.  How blindly I believed.  The rule of law has become the means to enslave us all.

          With Liberty and Justice for Some: How the Law Is Used to Destroy Equality and Protect the Powerful

          Evolution must occur, fight against it if you will, we won't need your destructive and self-serving "belief" system much longer.

          It has destroyed the human spirit, enslaved us to the will of an elite few and denied us the ability to be one HUMAN race.

          What's playing out in the Ukraine only reaffirms my evolutionary understandings, we've been screwed and the people of the Ukraine are having it done to them in slow motion for the whole world to see.

          Let the people of the Ukraine decide their own destiny.  Then we'd truly be "bringing democracy".

          -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

          by gerrilea on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 01:55:50 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Native Americans have citizenship (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            leevank, gerrilea

            And received it in 1924.  https://en.wikipedia.org/...

            They are also members of tribes that self-govern.  https://en.wikipedia.org/...

            Its not an ideal system (there are insufficient federal resources available for law enforcement and chronic poverty for instance) and desperately needs improvement but its better than it used to be.  

            I'm a 4 Freedoms Democrat.

            by DavidMS on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 05:59:50 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  David, the point is they don't have chaos (0+ / 0-)

              and anarchy.  The living conditions on Reservations have only gotten better when they began to manufacture and/or sell their own tax-free products.

              I have over 3 yrs of first-hand experience of these things.

              How the United States stole their property was by making deals with individuals that didn't have the authority to speak for their entire citizenry.  

              What I've experienced, in real life, not from some book is that families can and do fight over their property.  The family I knew had a blood feud for over 60 yrs because one brother "sold" the family lands to another native.  The problem arises because the brother didn't have the authority to do such.  And our Bureau "sanctioned" the transfer.  It was outright theft and the brother got away with it.

              Their concepts of sovereignty are not the same as ours.  The individual is free to do as they please, they decide what is right for them. They may mutually agree to work together and provide common shelter and needs, but they are not required to do so.

              -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

              by gerrilea on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 08:12:52 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  I did not know about that (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                gerrilea, kalmoth

                I do know about the broken treaties and have no idea how to unwind that mess.  

                And the issue that you raise is a law enforcement one.  Someone fraudulently steals land.  There is no legal method to unwind that transaction.  Even today, if there ways to readdress it, there is a statute of limitations issue.  

                Worst of all, our justice systems most basic precepts (private property) don't work where much property is held in common.

                I'm a 4 Freedoms Democrat.

                by DavidMS on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 09:25:57 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

          •  Let the people of UKRAINE decide indeed! (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            AaronInSanDiego, kalmoth

            The people of UKRAINE didn't approve of Crimea seceding from Ukraine. They were never asked to vote on it. If the people of Ukraine approved, then fine, but what you're proposing is that the people of each individual part of Ukraine get to decide whether to secede.

            It's ironic that you "summarily reject" international law on the subject, and then claim that your understanding of the subject isn't deficient.

            Bin Laden is dead. GM and Chrysler are alive.

            by leevank on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 06:17:11 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  The point is clear, "the law" is only valid (0+ / 0-)

              when the US says it is.  

              The Ukrainian people are about to be raped just like we've been.  Our corporate overlords are calling the shots there, not the people of the Ukraine.

              The choices for them are, join NATO and the EU and then get IMF loans that will dictate how their country does business or continue to be exploited by the Russians.

              The majority in the Crimea agreed to be exploited by the Russians.  It was their choice, not ours.

              -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

              by gerrilea on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 08:17:59 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

          •  ... (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            leevank
            I just don't buy into the propaganda.
            Oh, but you do :)
            •  Sadly, that may be true...trying to find out (0+ / 0-)

              the actual facts are all but impossible without going to the Ukraine myself.

              We do have a few DK members that have family still inside the Ukraine, I'd be interested in what they are saying is going on.

              -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

              by gerrilea on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 08:21:25 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

          •  *Where* are you getting *this*? (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Loge, leevank
            "Society must have laws, otherwise there would be chaos."
            Maybe you're not aware but the Native American Tribes here in the US are sovereign nations.  They view each individual as a sovereign citizen.  They don't have anarchy.
            Really? Are you actually suggesting here that native nations don't "have laws", that they just practice "sovereign citizenship" and tribal members are sovereign citizens who are simply "free to do as they please" as you say below? All 566 federally recognized tribes and bands are monolitic in this and practice "law" (or rather a lack of laws) this way? And if they're not monolithic, which nations do claim practice this alleged sovereign citizenship, and how is this authorized within the federal framework?

            Surely you have some sort of tangible source for this claim?

            First of all, at federal law Indian Tribes do not have full sovereignty but are termed domestic dependent nations. Tribal courts must and do operate within the broader framework of American jurisprudence; they cannot simply ignore and must enforce federal law. Likewise, tribal councils do in fact pass and tribal police do in fact enforce laws that are in effect for their own populations, rather than just having everybody be "free to do as they please."

            You seem to be getting your knowledge of native America from pretty much the same place as your knowledge of Ukraine (not "the Ukraine" as you persist in using here, and which is a relic of the old imperialist notion that Ukraine is just a borderlands region of Russia, not a nation in its own right)....

            PW

            "No, no, we are not satisfied, and we will not be satisfied until justice rolls down like waters and righteousness like a mighty stream." --MLK

            by Progressive Witness on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 09:23:27 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  My knowledge comes directly from being there (0+ / 0-)

              on Native lands for over 3 yrs.

              Their beliefs have been watered down over a century of being subordinate to the BIA and their policies and even more so by their forced encampment upon reservations and their interactions with "Americans".

              I had long conversations that would last over months with Tribal Elders about the problems, the reality and their path forward.  They were dismayed that many would celebrate Columbus Day or Christian holidays. It was a betrayal of their culture.

              Our whitewashed history isn't reflected in the history they have lived.

              Your flawed opinion starts right here:

              All 566 federally recognized tribes
              And culminates in this:
              and how is this authorized within the federal framework?
              "Your rights end where mine begin."  I learned this simple, yet game changing, truth from them.

              What I perceived as "the rule of law" was an illusion manufactured by those whom wish to control me in/under their belief system.  "Freedom of choice" is truly a misnomer. And so it seems is "the right of self-determination."

              Today, if you don't pay the Tribal Counsel, you don't get running water, you don't get power, you don't get the comforts we take for granted when we simply turn a light switch on.

              Imagine living without hot running water or electricity, unless you have the resources to buy your own generator and supply of gas for it.  Imagine living every day of the year like this, especially in winters in your government provided toxic trailer "homes".

              Native Americans have more rights that we "Free Americans do.

              Alas, those rights are slowly being eroded away with the new venue of exploitation in Native Casinos.  The only upshot is that they are finally getting the resources to live a little better life.

              -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

              by gerrilea on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 01:02:23 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  That's a whole lot of text... (0+ / 0-)

                ...for something that answers essentially nothing.

                My mention of just how very many recognized tribes and bands there are in the present day was to point up the enormous, monolithing generalization you were making about "they" (with no further qualifiers, I can only assume you are talking about all of our continent's original nations) practicing "sovereign citizenship", when sovereign citizenship is nothing more than a right-wing militia fantasy that doesn't and has never existed. Regardless of whether the number of 566 comes from the BIA, that's at minimum 566 different ways of looking at Native viewpoint and Native experience, not the monolithic one way that you're presenting, which with all its fanciful romanticization of their supposed individual sovereignty comes just a bit too close to the Noble Savage trope for my liking.

                Secondarily, though, whether you or I or anyone else reading this likes it or not, the federal framework is the framework in which Native law and Native sovereignty operate. Your flippant dismissal of the rule of law doesn't undo that (and funny how you still haven't given us a viable alternative to the rule of law other than apparently Putin doing whatever he wants because laws are meaningless, or...erm...something...let alone defining what you mean by "rule of law," because...definitions vary).

                So you've spent three years living somewhere in Indian country. Good for you. Thanks, but I'll still put greater weight on my own five decades as a person of mixed race living in Indian country, with family members and friends who have been involved in federal cases on behalf of tribal sovereignty and tribal (and individual Native) rights--you know, that idea of "laws" that you so readily sneer at.

                You're the one who opened this line of discussion, with the notion that pre-contact Natives (I'm assuming you meant pre-contact, but frankly it's muddled enough that I can't completely tell) were somehow in a pristine state with no laws and no need for them, what with their individual sovereignty and all. It's on you to back that up, with more than "I lived there for three years."

                And if you're going to say things about us like "Native Americans have more rights that we 'Free Americans' do" in reference to treaty rights--those annoying and pesky "laws" again--I'll have to ask you to understand if I'm reluctant to view you as our ally.

                PW

                "No, no, we are not satisfied, and we will not be satisfied until justice rolls down like waters and righteousness like a mighty stream." --MLK

                by Progressive Witness on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 01:46:33 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Oh, pluease, get over yourself. (0+ / 0-)

                  Stop making shit up.

                  when sovereign citizenship is nothing more than a right-wing militia fantasy that doesn't and has never existed.
                  It has always existed, you're denial doesn't change the facts.  Our rights do not come from the State:
                  "The world is very different now. For man holds in his mortal hands the power to abolish all forms of human poverty and all forms of human life. And yet the same revolutionary beliefs for which our forebears fought are still at issue around the globe--the belief that the rights of man come not from the generosity of the state but from the hand of God."

                  ~JFK, Inaugural Address, January 20, 1961

                  I've answered your question, you don't like the answer, deal with it.  I'm not here to satisfy your personal needs or desires.

                  My "flippant" disregard for the rule of law is based solely upon the results it has brought.  Forced perpetual poverty in servitude to our corporate overlords.

                  Whether or not we are "allies" is totally your choice.  

                  Let's find out if we actually have any common ground:

                  Do you agree that sovereignty flows from the individual and it not granted by any government?
                  Do you agree that the rule of law is the last refuge you have before the scoundrels rape you?

                  Natives and their heirs, such as yourself, have been forced and indoctrinated into a system you have no control over.

                  Fighting within a corrupt system doesn't change it's inherent corrupt nature. You've already admitted that much to me.

                  You may win a temporary battle now and then, the war has already been lost, sadly.

                  The right of self-determination
                  is now contingent upon the almighty State and only if it approves.  You shall never be free until you/we are given autonomous control over our destiny.

                  The rule of law can be a tool used to ensure our individual rights and preexisting freedoms, if and when it is applied to all, equally.  It is not even close to that today.


                  The Rubicon is being crossed in this nation, as we debate this, when Americans realize "the rule of law" is an illusion, it's truly over.

                  I guess, in my heart of hearts, I don't want that to happen, I want it to be revised into a better system that cannot be utilized to keep us forever enslaved.

                  I guess we may not have common ground after all.  You freely admit that you accept this system as it is and are willing to work within it.

                  -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

                  by gerrilea on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 02:45:04 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  So you hold that our rights come from... (0+ / 0-)

                    "the hand of God"?

                    William Roper: So, now you give the Devil the benefit of law!

                    Sir Thomas More: Yes! What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil?

                    William Roper: Yes, I'd cut down every law in England to do that!

                    Sir Thomas More: Oh? And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned 'round on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country is planted thick with laws, from coast to coast, Man's laws, not God's! And if you cut them down, and you're just the man to do it, do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety's sake!

                    Go ahead, call me a "statist." You know you want to.

                    "No, no, we are not satisfied, and we will not be satisfied until justice rolls down like waters and righteousness like a mighty stream." --MLK

                    by Progressive Witness on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 03:05:21 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Actually, you made me laugh... I knew I should (0+ / 0-)

                      have put in a disclaimer about that "god stuff" but thought, it's only a minor thought in the grand scheme of the conversation, which is do our right come from the State? Not a snowballs chance in hell...

                      Now, this doesn't mean I believe in hell either.  

                      :)

                      I consider myself spiritual, not religious.  Nor do I believe in the god my Catholic upbringing told me was there.

                      The concept is very simple, rights do not flow from legal fiction.  The rights I possess, I'm born with.  Just like any other species on this planet, I have the right to procreate and to self-defense, and guess what?  To determine my own destiny.

                      We institute governments to protect these things, not grant them.  HUGE difference.

                      -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

                      by gerrilea on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 03:22:55 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                    •  Hey, wait, try this quote...I love it... (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      Progressive Witness
                      LOMAX: Why the law? Cut the shit, Dad. Why lawyers? Why the law?

                      MILTON: Because the law, my boy, puts us into everything.

                      It's the ultimate backstage pass.

                      It's the new priesthood, baby.

                      Did you know there are more students in law school than lawyers walking the Earth?

                      We're coming out, guns blazing!

                      The two of you...all of us, acquittal after acquittal after acquittal...until the stench of it reaches so high and far into Heaven, it chokes the whole fucking lot of them!

                      Now guess what movie it's from!

                      -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

                      by gerrilea on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 03:38:36 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  Of course Sir Thomas... (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        gerrilea

                        ...might never have anticipated that Satan himself would some day be a high-powered attorney. Whether that would have changed his fictional opinion is left as an exercise to the reader. :-)

                        But: good quote. That film, I have to mention though, is one of the main reasons I've still avoided seeing Keanu's take on a character I love, John Constantine.

                        "No, no, we are not satisfied, and we will not be satisfied until justice rolls down like waters and righteousness like a mighty stream." --MLK

                        by Progressive Witness on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 04:04:09 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

      •  Less is better, IMO. (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        kalmoth, gerrilea

        Best would be 0. But obviously, that's not realistic at this point.

        Gondwana has always been at war with Laurasia.

        by AaronInSanDiego on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 12:30:55 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  How exactly does a farce of a referendum (9+ / 0-)

    constitute an act of self-determination?

    It was announced 10 days prior to taking place and the date was changed 2 times.  And it was announced with armed forces from the nation wanting Crimea to join them roaming the streets.

    Ballots were printed that basically only gave a choice between yes and yes, later.

    Polling places opened, guarded by an invading force and Russian national chauvinists, and with no independent election commission in existence.

    The people voting included non-citizens, children and people voting twice.

    Media were, being kidnapped, threatened, intimidated, beaten up, and had their equipment stolen.  And all Ukrainian tv stations were switched off and replaced by Russian tv stations that were blasting out propaganda non-stop.

    Anyone who was openly against joining Russia and for joining Ukraine was likely to be intimidated, threatened, kidnapped, beaten, and even killed.

    Personally, I'm generally for the right to self-determination, but it needs to be done in a lengthy, open, free and fair process, like is currently taking place in Scotland.  This referendum, however, was a farce and a very blatant, aggressive grab of territory by Russia.

    "A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle" - Mohammed Nabbous, R.I.P.

    by Lawrence on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 03:27:49 AM PDT

  •  Some of your assumptions are incorrect (8+ / 0-)
    BECAUSE the people of another region voted honestly and legitimately to rejoin Russia.
    First, the referendum was voted upon in the Crimean parliament in an environment were pro-Russian armed militia took over the parliament, forced MPs to convene, confiscated their cellphones, and then forced to vote for the referendum at the end of a gun. The vote was not recorded nor were media allowed in. Next, the prime minister, an MP who is a member of a nationalist pro-union with Russia party that has only 3/100 seats in the Crimean parliament was installed as prime minister. Again, no vote recorded.

    Also if you read the referendum, the choice was essentially limited to "yes" and "yes". No other alternatives were allowed on the ballot to include the status quo. And, that vote was conducted under military occupation where thousands feared going to the polls. The Tatars, a large minority in Crimea, boycotted the vote.

    Since the Ukraine Constitution is null and void
    The Ukraine constitution is very much intact and very much still in effect. No idea where you're getting this from.

    People indeed have the right to self-determination. However, it needs to be done in a free and open environment, not under military occupation, and not under threat. Its a decision that needs to be sorted between Ukrainians and Crimeans without Russia in the middle, in a civilized peaceful way. They should be able to do it the way Scotland is currently doing it.

    KOS: "Mocking partisans focusing on elections? Even less reason to be on Daily Kos."

    by fcvaguy on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 04:16:58 AM PDT

  •  So what does the US do now? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    gerrilea

    The EU is urging Kiev and Moscow hold bilateral meetings to work this thing out.  
    The US is advocating sanctions against Russia until Russia withdraws from Crimea.

    In practical terms, how does this thing de-escalate?  Or does it?

  •  Should gerrilea delete this diary? (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Lawrence, ExpatGirl, kalmoth

    1. Yes

    2. Yes, in a few minutes  

    Only people who know gerrilea personally and don't like him/her can vote.

    I'll make sure the vote is open and honest by standing over those voting with a gun (p.s., the answer is "yes".)

    Seriously, the ridiculously ignorant and incorrect statements presented as fact - such as "since the Ukraine constitution is null and void" - renders the entirety of this diary moot.

    And since you cite the UN as the now legitimate body governing the situation, why is Crimea not required to follow UN protocols in declaring independence? Just some bullshit "vote" held by a pocket of the Ukranian population deemed legitimate by Russia is ok?

  •  Yes, people do have the right (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Lawrence, kalmoth

    But what happened in Crimea hardly qualifies.
    If they had had a genuine referendum which had included the option of keeping the status quo. If those opposed had been allowed to campaign for their position. If Russian troops hadn't been overseeing the votes (into transparent ballot boxes where anyone who cared could see how you voted).
    If neutral election monitors had been allowed.
    If the media outlets had been allowed to remain on the air and independent. If there had been enough time for the people to consider the options, instead of a rushed process.
    If you think what just happened in Crimea qualifies as a genuine expression of the people's will, then you don't believe in self determination, you believe in political theater.

  •  The consequences of NeoCon magickal thinking (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    gerrilea

    We encourage the overthrow of a unpopular government that is friendly to our perceived adversary, and then expect the adversary will just accept the fait accompli and submit to our will, becuz we are the "sole remaining superpower".

    Or, even better,  if  the adversary pushes back, and forces a confrontation, then it gives us the opportunity to exert more instruments of national power to further reduce the risk of the emergence of a peer superpower.  

    It could be messy in the short term, but in the long term, we will be more secure.  We can certainly "win" any prolonged conflict, because we are the world's sole remaining superpower.  'Eff the EU, go USA!

  •  So do the people of Chechnya... (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Mark Lippman, leevank, blackhand

    ...also enjoy the right to self-determination?

    Odd that Putin doesn't seem to be falling all over himself to allow an election in Chechnya on secession from the Russian Federation.

    Almost makes you think his motivations have absolutely nothing to do with the wishes or rights of the people of Crimea.

    "When I give food to the poor, they call me a saint. When I ask why the poor have no food, they call me a communist." --Dom Helder Camara, archbishop of Recife

    by JamesGG on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 05:40:57 AM PDT

    •  Putin waged a campaign of genocide in Chechnya. (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      kalmoth, gerrilea, tardis10

      So much for self- determination. The UC Berkeley research published on the topic is definitive, authoritative, and comprehensive.

      If one listened to Putin, Russians everywhere have a right to self-determination. When he speaks it's hard to say whether his words are mischief, rhetoric, or bona fide foreign policy.

      The diary can't be taken seriously if you break self-determination into its two elements on either side of the hyphen. I think there's an old joke from long ago that asked: How did my land get on your side of the border?

      There is no existence without doubt.

      by Mark Lippman on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 06:14:58 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Putin (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    kalmoth, gerrilea

    is simply re-using our playbook in Kosovo.  They are going to the UN next.

    So, do we have a compelling national interest in reversing the annexation of Crimea?   Compelling enough to disrupt the world economy or risk nuclear confrontation?

  •  My gut feeling... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    kalmoth, leevank

    ...is that this vote was taken at gunpoint.  Besides, secession is generally not a legitimate option IMO as long as freely elected representatives are being sent to the national government.  Neither for that matter is a coup against a democratically elected government, though my understanding in this case is that parliament only declared the presidency vacant after the President fled the country.

  •  what are we gonna do about it? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    gerrilea

    what should we try to achieve?   How much are we willing to spend to do it?

  •  we might have to bomb (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    PhilK, gerrilea

    Crimea in order to save it.

  •  ever since this started (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Lawrence, ExpatGirl, kalmoth, tardis10, leevank

    the amount of pro-Russian propaganda has been staggering. Most of the facts being bandied around in support of the Russian positions had been spoon fed to the media by Kremlin.

    Those guys really are the masters of propaganda. Yes, there is an inherent right to self-determination with the gun to their heads. It's all free and fair.

  •  HR for calling honest and free a snap vote (5+ / 0-)

    conducted under Russian military occupation in the absence of full and free discussion, Russia having shut-down opposing media and replaced them with their own, and with the two ballot choices being accession to Russia and 'independence.'

    Shalom v' salaam; peace and wholeness

    by another American on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 06:27:47 AM PDT

    •  I laughed when I read this diary. The timestamp on (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      kalmoth, leevank

      it was a little too hasty for anyone to ponder
      self-determination which is a joke in itself in this context.
      Does the diarist know what the word "self" means? I wouldn't get worked up about it.

      There is no existence without doubt.

      by Mark Lippman on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 06:49:53 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  So, you Hr'd me for disagreement...got it. (0+ / 0-)

      wink, wink.

      Kamoth has reluctantly been providing me with evidence.

      We only know what our media tells us.  

      We have been on path to encircle Russia ever since the Soviet Union broke apart.  This is the latest results of our meddling.

      Kamoth has already admitted the majority of the people currently living in the Crimea would vote to rejoin Russia.

      Since you're claiming this was a vote "at the end of a gun", I find the argument moot if the people want it either way.

      That is the point isn't it?  The people deciding their own fate.

      -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

      by gerrilea on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 08:37:51 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  kindly don't put words into my mouth... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Loge

        I am quite capable of speaking for myself. The vote was rigged, its results are meaningless, and every single vote robbed of its power.

        •  Didn't you say this? (0+ / 0-)
          And it is my point exactly, there would be a possibility that Crimea would secede even if a real and internationally recognized referendum were held on its future...
          You then go on to point out your personal issue of the people being denied an honest vote.

          If the people in the Crimea were given a real vote that meets your standards, would they not vote to rejoin Russia?

          Yes or no?

          It's clear you've already said yes to this.  Making this whole exercise a red-herring and a diversion.

          We don't count all the votes in this damn nation, even if they will change the outcome!

          What right do we have to say their vote was rigged? Or their referendum was illegal?

          -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

          by gerrilea on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 10:48:58 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  and in the same comment I say... (0+ / 0-)
            however, what happened was not that, but an extralegal disgrace, and all the residents of Crimea were robbed of their vote - because instead of voting their will, they were used as a prop in a political scam.
            you are not arguing in good faith, and I am finished wasting my time here.
            •  It seems we're arguing past one another here. (0+ / 0-)

              You accused me of putting words into your mouth, I showed you exactly what you said, now I'm not debating honestly???

              Maybe we should get the common ground we agree upon established first, shall we?

              I believe everyone has the inherent right to self-determination, however it may be manifested.

              We agree on this, correct?

              In the constitutional system we have, voting is the only way we may get that accomplished, rarely does voting make a difference, as I pointed out above, millions of votes are never even counted, if the outcome isn't in going to change...and again...sadly we don't count votes EVEN WHEN it would change the outcome.

              In the case where counting the votes won't change the results, it does seem to be a moot exercise, it frustrates me a little that our "election officials" don't count them all but time and money are getting tight these days.

              Now where we disagree seems to be that the voting in the Crimea whether or not it was flawed. faked, ballots pre-filled, etc.  Didn't include all in the area.  The Crimean Tartar's chose not to participate.  And it seems there were only two choices given. Neither of which they agreed with.

              I cry foul every time I vote in our "s"-elections. The electronic "voting" machines are a criminal contempt of my State's Constitution and the choices I want are never there. So I end up reluctantly "voting" for the lesser of two evils.  We're told, time and again that "its the best we can do".

              I've seen the shenanigans played to get "ballot initiatives" added.  It doesn't change the fact I have no say whatsoever and my vote may not actually be counted.

              Despite all my rantings and ravings against the machine, even if all the choices I wanted were actually on the ballot, the majority surely wouldn't agree with me.

              IS THIS NOT THE REALITY IN CRIMEA?

              Or are you going to insist that your moral crusade must be addressed?  That all the choices everyone wants be on the ballot and it be done by your standards?

              Hell, come to my neck of the woods, I'd love to have you on my side in my fight against our corrupt system. You sound as stubborn as me...

              ;)

              As quickly as things devolved in the Ukraine, it's clear none of what happened was either lawful or constitutional, from the moment the rioters entered the government buildings and replaced their duly elected president.

              I think, if we are to find common ground, let's start there? Neither of us can change these events.  Whether or not the Crimean vote was a political scam is truly moot, isn't it?

              The people of the Ukraine haven't had a say in their nations affairs for a very long time.  Our corporate overlords have established themselves in the capital there, just as here.

              With almost 60% of the population being of Russian decent, it was clear Putin would move in to protect their interests.

              We're both being mislead by a false morality.  I expect to have the right of self-determination be protected. I'd expect the same right for the people of Ukraine and those in Crimea... that doesn't happen anymore in this world.

              Now what do we do?

              Option 5 in my poll was the one I chose.

              -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

              by gerrilea on Tue Mar 18, 2014 at 02:11:38 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

      •  Not for disagreement; for dishonesty. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        kalmoth

        Under the circumstances, the vote in Crimea was neither honest nor legitimate. This is an entirely separate matter from whether the residents of Crimea have a right to self-determination that might be exercised after a long-enough campaign, held under conditions of free, open discussion, etc. etc. Compare, for example, the current referendum campaign in Scotland.

        Shalom v' salaam; peace and wholeness

        by another American on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 09:20:03 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Where are you getting these arbitrary "rules" (0+ / 0-)

          from?

          might be exercised after a long-enough campaign, held under conditions of free, open discussion, etc. etc.
          Who decides what is "long enough"?  The Scottish?

          Why must there be a "campaign" again?  If the majority already want this, isn't this a venue to divide and conquer?

          I have not been dishonest about anything I've presented or the question I've asked.

          You don't have to agree with the question or the evidence, write your own diary or present evidence.

          We've been manipulated into believing so many lies.  I don't buy into the propaganda any longer.

          Our sanctions against Iraq killed over a million innocents.
          Our invasion of Iraq has killed even more and will do so for generations with the depleted uranium we've left behind.

          We created this mess in the Ukraine now we cry foul when the evil Putin moves in to clean up our mess and protect his nations security and more likely than not, make billions on the deal.

          Ugh....

          -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

          by gerrilea on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 10:40:35 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  It is not unreasonable (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    gerrilea, kalmoth

    to conclude that the referendum was less than legitimate on any number of grounds, haste, coercion, media manipulation, vote counting, etc.

    So now what do we do?

    reject the outcome, and call for a free and fair referendum?  

    reject the outcome, call on the Kiev Gov't to apply constitutional procedures for a free and fair referendum like Scotland?

    reject the outcome, and support Ukraine in an effort to recover the the Crimea?

    reject the outcome, and punish Russia for this dirty trick?

    Let the EU work it out?

  •  here's a little something.... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    gerrilea

    http://breqwas.livejournal.com/...

    report of Artem Kulikov, who went to Simferopol as a poll-watcher. Bottom line - while most people would be likely to vote pro-Russia in an honest referendum, the results of the Sunday poll were falsified.  

  •  Maybe, if they were Kossovo, or if the US (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    gerrilea

    otherwise supported their so-doing. Given these specifics. Though self-determination and plebescites have been given deep and profound lip service since the League of Nations, they have almost never been permitted to occur, instead the major powers dimply decide by fiat who and what shall be encompassed by arbitrary geopolitical boundaries that serve their own political and economic interests.

    That, in its essence, is fascism--ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power. -- Franklin D. Roosevelt --

    by enhydra lutris on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 10:04:53 AM PDT

  •  the Self of right-determination (0+ / 0-)

    near-City-State Capitalist Crimea will be the new Montenegro/Luxembourg/Monaco...

    Warning - some snark may be above‽ (-9.50; -7.03)‽ eState4Column5©2013 "I’m not the strapping young Muslim socialist that I used to be" - Barack Obama 04/27/2013 (@eState4Column5).

    by annieli on Mon Mar 17, 2014 at 10:29:48 AM PDT

  •  Crimea was a present to Ukraine (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    gerrilea

    and now has the chance to express its own wishes about that. The area, with strategic importance and lots of desirable vacation real estate, was given to Ukraine by Khrushchev within living memory for a lot of Crimeans--in 1954. From what I can tell, the people of Crimea weren't thrilled to be annexed without their consent by what was then a major satellite of the USSR orbit but not core Mother Russia herself. By important cultural indicators, Crimeans see themselves as Russian. Facts like these are often overlooked in textbooks and media stories, in the same way that Christian fundamentalists have no clue that Eisenhower added "under God" to the pledge of allegiance in 1956. (Try telling some of them that, no, really, those 2 words weren't always there.)

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site