Ukraine

For discussion of religion and politics

Moderators: LawBeefaroni, $iljanus

Post Reply
User avatar
Rip
Posts: 26952
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 9:34 pm
Location: Cajun Country!
Contact:

Re: Ukraine

Post by Rip »

Grifman wrote:
Rip wrote:Well along with the new sanctions I noticed this.
U.S. President Barack Obama on Thursday announced more sanctions on people and one bank in response to Russia's annexation moves, as well as a new executive order that authorizes possible further sanctions on what he called "key sectors" of the Russian economy.
SO you guys can quit asking me if that would be legal. It's an executive order that as we all know throws legality out the window. I would imagine we can sanction/seize pretty much whatever we like now.
I'm not sure how you get that we can legally seize any assets we want. It mentions sanctions against sectors of the Russian economy but that's totally different from seizing the assets of private individuals and Russian companies that have nothing to do with the Crimean annexation.

I know the US can target sanctions at certain individuals and govt entities and govt related companies/banks. It's not clear to me that we can seize the assets of an individual Russian citizen or a Russian company with no links to the issue. If you can show me that, fine. But so far you've still shown nothing.

Every Russian citizen/company that has substantial assets we could get to is associated with the Russian government. If they weren't they wouldn't have those assets for very long. There is no such thing as a wealthy Russian person/company that is anti-Russian government.
User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 84922
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Chookity pok
Contact:

Re: Ukraine

Post by Isgrimnur »

Rip wrote:
Isgrimnur wrote:Seeing as the executive order cite the legal justification on which they are based, anyone that could prove standing should have plenty of justification to challenge said orders in court.
National security, case closed.
They tried that with the Malaysian professor. It didn't work.
It's almost as if people are the problem.
User avatar
Rip
Posts: 26952
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 9:34 pm
Location: Cajun Country!
Contact:

Re: Ukraine

Post by Rip »

Isgrimnur wrote:
Rip wrote:
Isgrimnur wrote:Seeing as the executive order cite the legal justification on which they are based, anyone that could prove standing should have plenty of justification to challenge said orders in court.
National security, case closed.
They tried that with the Malaysian professor. It didn't work.
That wasn't an executive order. The only court that could challenge an executive order is the SCOTUS and that ain't going to happen in this case.
User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 84922
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Chookity pok
Contact:

Re: Ukraine

Post by Isgrimnur »

Federal courts have plenty of jurisdiction. The DC Court of Appeals invalidated 12954, and Truman's fight over nationalizing the steel industry started in the DC District Court.
It's almost as if people are the problem.
User avatar
Rip
Posts: 26952
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 9:34 pm
Location: Cajun Country!
Contact:

Re: Ukraine

Post by Rip »

Isgrimnur wrote:Federal courts have plenty of jurisdiction. The DC Court of Appeals invalidated 12954, and Truman's fight over nationalizing the steel industry started in the DC District Court.
Still ended at SCOTUS, like I said the only court that would have any luck rejecting an executive order is SCOTUS. It could start somewhere else but is certain to end up at SCOTUS and there is no way in hell they override this one.
User avatar
GreenGoo
Posts: 43061
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 10:46 pm
Location: Ottawa, ON

Re: Ukraine

Post by GreenGoo »

Rip wrote:
No I am saying that in practice an executive order is above the law and makes any discussion about whether actions it takes are legal or not mute.
Really? No one is going to call him on it? And you call yourselves language nazis? I can hear Fret's forehead veins popping from here.

And I don't want to hear about how the discussion was muted so it makes perfect sense.

Heathens.
User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 84922
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Chookity pok
Contact:

Re: Ukraine

Post by Isgrimnur »

It's a moo point anyway.
It's almost as if people are the problem.
User avatar
NickAragua
Posts: 6164
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2009 5:20 pm
Location: Boston, MA

Re: Ukraine

Post by NickAragua »

Isgrimnur wrote:It's a moo point anyway.
MOOOOOOOOOO
Enlarge Image
Black Lives Matter
User avatar
cheeba
Posts: 8727
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 3:32 am

Re: Ukraine

Post by cheeba »

Isgrimnur wrote:Have they tried not being Tatars? /s
Then who would make their sauce and how would we eat fish?
User avatar
Grifman
Posts: 21970
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 7:17 pm

Re: Ukraine

Post by Grifman »

Rip wrote:
Grifman wrote:
Rip wrote:Well along with the new sanctions I noticed this.
U.S. President Barack Obama on Thursday announced more sanctions on people and one bank in response to Russia's annexation moves, as well as a new executive order that authorizes possible further sanctions on what he called "key sectors" of the Russian economy.
SO you guys can quit asking me if that would be legal. It's an executive order that as we all know throws legality out the window. I would imagine we can sanction/seize pretty much whatever we like now.
I'm not sure how you get that we can legally seize any assets we want. It mentions sanctions against sectors of the Russian economy but that's totally different from seizing the assets of private individuals and Russian companies that have nothing to do with the Crimean annexation.

I know the US can target sanctions at certain individuals and govt entities and govt related companies/banks. It's not clear to me that we can seize the assets of an individual Russian citizen or a Russian company with no links to the issue. If you can show me that, fine. But so far you've still shown nothing.

Every Russian citizen/company that has substantial assets we could get to is associated with the Russian government. If they weren't they wouldn't have those assets for very long. There is no such thing as a wealthy Russian person/company that is anti-Russian government.
It's not a matter of being pro or anti Russian govt. It is a matter of having a direct connection to the govt and what it is doing. Look, quit just making up stuff that you don't know what are talking about. If you really think the US govt can seize the assets of any Russian citizen or company, then prove it. Find us some relevant links that actually show the US govt can do this. Up to now, all you've done is keep giving your opinion, which not worth a pile of snot (any more than mine is). I'm kind of getting tired of the go around where you just keep asserting the same thing wiithout any proof, as if I should just take your word.
Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions. – G.K. Chesterton
User avatar
Grifman
Posts: 21970
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 7:17 pm

Re: Ukraine

Post by Grifman »

Rip wrote:
Isgrimnur wrote:Federal courts have plenty of jurisdiction. The DC Court of Appeals invalidated 12954, and Truman's fight over nationalizing the steel industry started in the DC District Court.
Still ended at SCOTUS, like I said the only court that would have any luck rejecting an executive order is SCOTUS.
No, that's not what you said. You said the only court that could challenge an executive order is SCOTUS which is clearly not true. Either you need to be more precise in your language or quite changing your argument when you've been proven wrong.
Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions. – G.K. Chesterton
User avatar
Grifman
Posts: 21970
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 7:17 pm

Re: Ukraine

Post by Grifman »

Rip wrote:
Isgrimnur wrote:So you're saying that an executive order, on its face, is an illegal exercise of power? :pop:
No I am saying that in practice an executive order is above the law and makes any discussion about whether actions it takes are legal or not mute.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jim-garri ... 70819.html
President Obama's National Defense Resources Preparedness Executive Order of March 16 does to the country as a whole what the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act did to the Constitution in particular -- completely eviscerates any due process or judicial oversight for any action by the Government deemed in the interest of "national security." Like the NDAA, the new Executive Order puts the government completely above the law, which, in a democracy, is never supposed to happen. The United States is essentially now under martial law without the exigencies of a national emergency.
Since executive orders have been challenged in court before, I don't think this proves anything. You'd have to have this go through the courts to see if it would stand. It's just words on paper right now.
Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions. – G.K. Chesterton
User avatar
AWS260
Posts: 12869
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2006 12:51 pm
Location: Brooklyn

Re: Ukraine

Post by AWS260 »

Grifman wrote:
Rip wrote:No I am saying that in practice an executive order is above the law and makes any discussion about whether actions it takes are legal or not mute.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jim-garri ... 70819.html
President Obama's National Defense Resources Preparedness Executive Order of March 16 does to the country as a whole what the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act did to the Constitution in particular -- completely eviscerates any due process or judicial oversight for any action by the Government deemed in the interest of "national security." Like the NDAA, the new Executive Order puts the government completely above the law, which, in a democracy, is never supposed to happen. The United States is essentially now under martial law without the exigencies of a national emergency.
Since executive orders have been challenged in court before, I don't think this proves anything. You'd have to have this go through the courts to see if it would stand. It's just words on paper right now.
I don't think you get it, Grif. The United States is now under MARTIAL LAW. Did you see who wrote that Huffington Post story? The president of WISDOM UNIVERSITY. Basically the world's wisest person, by definition.

MARTIAL LAW.

WISDOM.
User avatar
Rip
Posts: 26952
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 9:34 pm
Location: Cajun Country!
Contact:

Re: Ukraine

Post by Rip »

Waaaaaa!

Doesn't much matter, I haven't heard anyone suggesting they intend to challenge the executive order.

Also let me give a partial atta boy to Obama for at least getting some action going. Still not enough, but it is a start.


Oh, and FU Putin for making Mary Landrieu one of the ones you sanction. We have her ass on the ropes and you go and give her a badge of honor. Asshole!
User avatar
NickAragua
Posts: 6164
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2009 5:20 pm
Location: Boston, MA

Re: Ukraine

Post by NickAragua »

Rip wrote:Waaaaaa!

Doesn't much matter, I haven't heard anyone suggesting they intend to challenge the executive order.

Also let me give a partial atta boy to Obama for at least getting some action going. Still not enough, but it is a start.


Oh, and FU Putin for making Mary Landrieu one of the ones you sanction. We have her ass on the ropes and you go and give her a badge of honor. Asshole!
In Russia a "saction" is actually a compliment. :lol:
Black Lives Matter
malchior
Posts: 24795
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: Ukraine

Post by malchior »

AWS260 wrote:
Grifman wrote:
Rip wrote:No I am saying that in practice an executive order is above the law and makes any discussion about whether actions it takes are legal or not mute.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jim-garri ... 70819.html
President Obama's National Defense Resources Preparedness Executive Order of March 16 does to the country as a whole what the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act did to the Constitution in particular -- completely eviscerates any due process or judicial oversight for any action by the Government deemed in the interest of "national security." Like the NDAA, the new Executive Order puts the government completely above the law, which, in a democracy, is never supposed to happen. The United States is essentially now under martial law without the exigencies of a national emergency.
Since executive orders have been challenged in court before, I don't think this proves anything. You'd have to have this go through the courts to see if it would stand. It's just words on paper right now.
I don't think you get it, Grif. The United States is now under MARTIAL LAW. Did you see who wrote that Huffington Post story? The president of WISDOM UNIVERSITY. Basically the world's wisest person, by definition.

MARTIAL LAW.

WISDOM.
Indeed! He is certainly drinking deep of the fountain of wisdom. By god, encouraging an ever ongoing analysis of supply chain needs for national defense. THE MONSTER!!!!!!!!
User avatar
Rip
Posts: 26952
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 9:34 pm
Location: Cajun Country!
Contact:

Re: Ukraine

Post by Rip »

So are we taking positions on whether Russia will invade Ukraine to grab some more or even Moldova which I hadn't even thought they would go after yet, but some in NATO seem to be concerned about?
NATO's top military commander expressed concern Sunday about the buildup of Russian forces on Ukraine's border, as Moscow's forces consolidated their control of Crimea over the weekend.
Supreme Allied Commander Europe Gen. Philip Breedlove said Russia had a large force on Ukraine's eastern border and that he was worried it could pose a threat to Moldova's separatist Trans-Dniester region.
"The (Russian) force that is at the Ukrainian border now to the east is very, very sizable and very, very ready," Breedlove, a U.S. Air Force general, said.
"There is absolutely sufficient force postured on the eastern border of Ukraine to run to Trans-Dniester if the decision was made to do that, and that is very worrisome."
I think he will go after something, no reason not to at this point.
paulbaxter
Posts: 3194
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2006 1:46 pm

Re: Ukraine

Post by paulbaxter »

No sig, must scream, etc.
User avatar
Kraken
Posts: 45091
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:59 pm
Location: The Hub of the Universe
Contact:

Re: Ukraine

Post by Kraken »

He will not grab Trans-Dneister unless he can also secure a land corridor to it through a part of Ukraine that would not take kindly to that. Which he might go for, I don't know. My sketchy knowledge of T-D came from this article.

My hunch still says that Putin will stop with Crimea, but I wouldn't lay money on it.
User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 84922
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Chookity pok
Contact:

Re: Ukraine

Post by Isgrimnur »

Seems that everyone is on the same page that Crimea is gone.
Interim Ukrainian President Oleksandr Turchynov ordered the withdrawal of armed forces from Crimea Monday, citing Russian threats to the lives of military staff and their families.

Russian troops have seized most of Ukraine's bases in the peninsula, including a naval base at Feodosia on Monday.
...
On Saturday, six Russian special forces armored personnel carriers broke through the gates of Belbek air base, firing warning shots into the air. In separate incidents, pro-Russian self-defense forces stormed the Novofederoskoe military base as well as a Ukrainian ship, the Slavutych.
It's almost as if people are the problem.
User avatar
Rip
Posts: 26952
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 9:34 pm
Location: Cajun Country!
Contact:

Re: Ukraine

Post by Rip »

President Barack Obama and other world leaders have decided to end Russia's role in the group of leading industrialized nations, the White House said Monday.
The move to suspend Russia's membership in the G8 is the latest direct response from major countries allied against Russia's annexation of Crimea.
http://www.cnn.com/2014/03/24/politics/ ... ?hpt=hp_t2

:clap:
User avatar
El Guapo
Posts: 42036
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 4:01 pm
Location: Boston

Re: Ukraine

Post by El Guapo »

Hey, I think Rip is giving non-sarcastic applause to Obama. :)
Black Lives Matter.
User avatar
Carpet_pissr
Posts: 20793
Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2004 5:32 pm
Location: Columbia, SC

Re: Ukraine

Post by Carpet_pissr »

If we had Dr. Manhattan, the Russians would never have dared to do what they did. Just sayin'.
User avatar
Zarathud
Posts: 17064
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 10:29 pm
Location: Chicago, Illinois

Re: Ukraine

Post by Zarathud »

After this winter, Rip is ready to return to a Cold War.
"A lie can run round the world before the truth has got its boots on." -Terry Pratchett, The Truth
"The presence of those seeking the truth is infinitely to be preferred to those who think they've found it." -Terry Pratchett, Monstrous Regiment
User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 84922
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Chookity pok
Contact:

Re: Ukraine

Post by Isgrimnur »

After dealing with unclear directions, the Ukranian Defense Minister has resigned:
Lawmakers in Ukraine accepted the resignation of the defense minister Tuesday as thousands of troops began withdrawing from the Crimean Peninsula, now controlled by Russia.

In an address to parliament, Igor Tenyukh said he rejected criticism that he had failed to issue clear instructions to troops, but that he reserved the right to step down. Lawmakers initially refused his resignation, but later accepted it. A majority then voted to appoint Col. Gen. Mikhail Kovalyov as his replacement.

Authorities in Ukraine have come under criticism for their often-hesitant reaction to Russia's annexation of Crimea, which was formalized following a hastily organized referendum this month.
Oh, and you know that cut-rate deal the Ukraine has been getting for gas?
Officials in Moscow, meanwhile, are warning Kiev that the country's new government may have to pay more for Russian gas, which is the main part of Ukraine's energy mix.

President Vladimir Putin's spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on Tuesday that the gas discount was linked to the lease deal for the Russian Black Sea fleet's presence in Crimea. Now that Crimea is part of Russia and Moscow does not have to pay for the lease, Russia sees "no reason for the discount," Peskov said, quoted by Russian news agencies.

But he added that it is up to gas company Gazprom to set the price for Ukraine.
:roll:
It's almost as if people are the problem.
User avatar
Vorret
Posts: 9613
Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Drummondville, QC

Re: Ukraine

Post by Vorret »

Isn't there a major pipeline going through Ukraine?
They just have to tap into that and boom, free gas!
Isgrimnur wrote:
His name makes me think of a small, burrowing rodent anyway.
User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 84922
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Chookity pok
Contact:

Re: Ukraine

Post by Isgrimnur »

I'm sure they'd get a boom, and gas would then become free at supersonic speeds.

Regardless, most of the pipelines start in Russia, and I'm sure they can make sure those are empty really quickly.

Image
It's almost as if people are the problem.
User avatar
Rip
Posts: 26952
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 9:34 pm
Location: Cajun Country!
Contact:

Re: Ukraine

Post by Rip »

Have to give President Obama props again, as far as talking goes that was a pretty damn good speech in Brussels today. Probably the best I have seen him make.
User avatar
GreenGoo
Posts: 43061
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 10:46 pm
Location: Ottawa, ON

Re: Ukraine

Post by GreenGoo »

He's one of the best teleprompt readers I've ever seen!
User avatar
cheeba
Posts: 8727
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 3:32 am

Re: Ukraine

Post by cheeba »

Was thinking today, which is of course dangerous. I was wondering how big is the Russian vodka market in the US. My google-fu is weak and did not discover the answer, but it did bring up many hits from people talking about boycotting Russian vodka... for Russia's treatment of homosexuals before the Olympics. There is little to nothing about people boycotting Russian products now.

So why can people muster themselves to boycott Russian vodka to stand up for gay rights but not do so for, well, human rights?
User avatar
Holman
Posts: 29901
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2004 8:00 pm
Location: Between the Schuylkill and the Wissahickon

Re: Ukraine

Post by Holman »

A consumer boycott of Russian vodka would be symbolic at best, just a tiny fraction of a point of GDP. (Last year's "Boycott Stoli" movement eventually stumbled over the discovery that Stolichnaya is actually produced in Latvia.)

More serious pressure will require Europe to revise its energy policy, but we know how hard that is.

I was wondering what Russian-produced products I actually buy, and I realized that 777 (Rise of Flight, IL-2 Battle of Stalingrad) and Eagle Dynamics (DCS A-10C) are both Russian companies. Will tensions with Russia mean the end of great flight sims?
Much prefer my Nazis Nuremberged.
User avatar
Defiant
Posts: 21045
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:09 pm
Location: Tongue in cheek

Re: Ukraine

Post by Defiant »

cheeba wrote: So why can people muster themselves to boycott Russian vodka to stand up for gay rights but not do so for, well, human rights?
Controversial, I know, but some of us gays like to consider ourselves human. :ninja: :P :wink:
User avatar
cheeba
Posts: 8727
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 3:32 am

Re: Ukraine

Post by cheeba »

Holman wrote:A consumer boycott of Russian vodka would be symbolic at best, just a tiny fraction of a point of GDP.
Right. The point I'm making is about the enthusiasm to boycott Russian products because of its anti-gay stance and the seeming lack of enthusiasm over its anti-neighbor stance.
Defiant wrote:Controversial, I know, but some of us gays like to consider ourselves human. :ninja: :P :wink:
Hah, sorry, poor wording on my part :oops: .
User avatar
GreenGoo
Posts: 43061
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 10:46 pm
Location: Ottawa, ON

Re: Ukraine

Post by GreenGoo »

Shrug. Who knows what grabs the public imagination. There are a billion worthy causes at any particular moment. There are thousands of human rights violations happening every day. You would think given the media attention Crimea would be prominent in peoples' minds, but I don't understand mass psychology.

It might be as simple as it being easier to relate to your neighbour/co-worker/friend who's gay than to strangers in a far away land being manhandled by their Russian neighbours.

We all have close proximity to marriages and what it entails. I suspect not many (percentage-wise) have a lot of experience with being annexed by their neighbour or what that involves.

Who knows.
User avatar
NickAragua
Posts: 6164
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2009 5:20 pm
Location: Boston, MA

Re: Ukraine

Post by NickAragua »

This situation looks to be working out for the dolphins.
Black Lives Matter
User avatar
Defiant
Posts: 21045
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:09 pm
Location: Tongue in cheek

Re: Ukraine

Post by Defiant »

cheeba wrote: Right. The point I'm making is about the enthusiasm to boycott Russian products because of its anti-gay stance and the seeming lack of enthusiasm over its anti-neighbor stance.
Keep in mind Russia's anti-gay stance has been around for a long long time and even the recent legal bans have a legislative history that goes back years, and then it was highlighted by the Olympics, while Crimea goes back weeks or months.

And there have been videos and photos of graphic violence against Russian gays, while, AFAIK, there's been very little violence in Crimea. As yet, anyway. (I would hope that maybe Russia would avoid any egregious human rights violations in Crimea because the world is watching, or that those Crimeans that would be targets of those violations have the freedom to leave Crimea to go to western Ukraine. But we'll see.)
User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 84922
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Chookity pok
Contact:

Re: Ukraine

Post by Isgrimnur »

I think if I were the former Ukranian defense minister, I'd be listening very closely to rumblings in the new government about bringing me up on charges and making plans to find a new country in which to hang my hat.
It's almost as if people are the problem.
User avatar
LordMortis
Posts: 71754
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:26 pm

Re: Ukraine

Post by LordMortis »

User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 84922
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Chookity pok
Contact:

Re: Ukraine

Post by Isgrimnur »

CNN
In a phone conversation with German Chancellor Angela Merkel on Monday, Russian President Vladmir Putin said he had ordered a partial withdrawal of Russian troops from his country's border area with Ukraine, according to Merkel's office.

A Kremlin press release about the call did not mention a withdrawal, but said Putin and Merkel discussed Ukraine, including "possibilities for international assistance to restore stability."
It's almost as if people are the problem.
User avatar
Defiant
Posts: 21045
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:09 pm
Location: Tongue in cheek

Re: Ukraine

Post by Defiant »

Post Reply