Brexit, for once some facts.

[flecc]

Odd then that there are documents that Russia happily gifted Crimea to Ukraine in 1954.

Wicky for goodnes sake stop misrepresenting me, I've made no claim that the Crimea was Russian, it was definitely Ukrainian as I've just posted to Daniel. Please read that post.

I'm only arguing about the eastern Russian industrial region as each one of my posts has made clear.
.

 

[Wicky]

"I'm only arguing about the eastern Russian industrial region as each one of my posts has made clear."

Whatever

but how can Ukraine 'illegally' steal from the Russians land that was was mutually agreed by treaty - until Putin unilaterally decided to disregard ithe treaty and agreed border.

"Sergeant Leonid Kichatkin of the Russian 76th Airborne Division and Russian soldier Anton Tumanov died in August 2014 while fighting in eastern Ukraine. Their deaths amply demonstrate that Russian President Vladimir Putin's claim that there are no Russian troops in Ukraine is false."

"Putin also initially denied the “little green men” present during the annexation of Crimea were Russian soldiers but afterwards admitted they were."

I repeat

And that on 2 Dec 1991 Boris Yelsin and the government of the day recognised Ukrainian Independence.

Leading to a 1997 treaty between the Russian Federation and Ukraine, Russia recognized Ukraine’s borders, and accepted Ukraine’s sovereignty over Crimea.

"In accord with provisions of the UN Charter and the obligations of the Final Act on Security and Cooperation in Europe, the High Contracting Parties shall respect each other′s territorial integrity and reaffirm the inviolability of the borders existing between them."

 

[flecc]

"I'm only arguing about the eastern Russian industrial region as each one of my posts has made clear."

Whatever

but how can Ukraine 'illegally' steal from the Russians land that was was mutually agreed by treaty - until Putin unilaterally decided to disregard ithe treaty and agreed border.

"Sergeant Leonid Kichatkin of the Russian 76th Airborne Division and Russian soldier Anton Tumanov died in August 2014 while fighting in eastern Ukraine. Their deaths amply demonstrate that Russian President Vladimir Putin's claim that there are no Russian troops in Ukraine is false."

"Putin also initially denied the “little green men” present during the annexation of Crimea were Russian soldiers but afterwards admitted they were."

I repeat

And that on 2 Dec 1991 Boris Yelsin and the government of the day recognised Ukrainian Independence.

Leading to a 1997 treaty between the Russian Federation and Ukraine, Russia recognized Ukraine’s borders, and accepted Ukraine’s sovereignty over Crimea.

"In accord with provisions of the UN Charter and the obligations of the Final Act on Security and Cooperation in Europe, the High Contracting Parties shall respect each other′s territorial integrity and reaffirm the inviolability of the borders existing between them."

Once again, why do you keep repeating this stuff. I haven't denied that there were Russian soldiers present in those regions. I already understand there were. And I know that after the US destabilised Gorbachov's position to get their stooge, the drunken Yeltsin into power, that he recognised Ukraine's independence. And again I haven't denied that. And I know that the Ukraine's borders were recognised in 1997.

The dispute is that the eastern industrial area where the fighting is located is not part of Ukraine's territory, the true border not enclosing it so not part of the 1997 treaty. That's Russia's interest and why they directly militarily support their population there. They couldn't do that with the Crimea since the Ukraine's possession of that wasn't disputed, so they used the referendum device as an excuse to gain control. If the eastern industrial area is also Ukrainian, why don't they use a referendum there for their majority Russian population as an excuse to take over? It's because it's not Ukraine, they already legally own that area.

The Russians also dispute the validity of the 1954 decision to hand over Crimea, but I think their evidence for that is less than believable, so I wouldn't support them in that.
.
I'm sick of the US warmongering actions and lies that have been responsible for all the present troubles and so many past ones, but that doesn't mean I think Russia an innocent. They've often been just as bad, but they haven't been the ones initiating these troubles.

They were started by US manipulation and interference in the Ukraine's affairs to get them into the EU and subsequently NATO. When the Ukrainian president refused to sign an agreement with the EU, the US inspired euromaiden party started the orange revolution to overthrow his legal government.

I'm glad Russia has in Putin someone strong enough to face the USA down and ensure they won't win.
.

 

[Wicky]

So all the commonly agreed maps by treaty of Ukraine in relation to rest of the world are inconsequential and the only correct one is the version on Putin's desk.

Righty...

So you'll support Putin also taking back former Soviet territories Baltic States, Poland Hungary Romania Bulgaria etc. just because there are Russian speakers there due previous Russification and any borders are superfluous.

 

[oldgroaner]

From the Sun
"
The Sun Says
We need to stop listening to big business – which has been on the wrong side of every key debate of the last 100 years – about Brexit


The CBI is lobbying for the UK to stay handcuffed to the EU, its trading rules and customs union, but this is the worst possible outcome for the country and our future.

Fascinating, big business is of course essential to survival of the economy,
So who would the Sun prefer we should listen to?

Murdoch and Minford? no thank you!

 

[flecc]

So all the commonly agreed maps by treaty of Ukraine in relation to rest of the world are inconsequential and the only correct one is the version on Putin's desk.

Righty...

So you'll support Putin also taking back former Soviet territories Baltic States, Poland Hungary Romania Bulgaria etc. just because there are Russian speakers there due previous Russification and any borders are superfluous.

Precisely, "in relation the rest of the world" as you say, the Western view. Look up the agreement that transferred the Crimea to the Ukraine and you'll see no mention of the Russian industrial zone around Donetsk and Luhansk. It only mentioned the Crimea.

Of course I wouldn't support Russia taking over those ex Warsaw pact countries, it's not only about population and their territorial circumstances are and were totally different.

I very much doubt Russia is even particularly interested in repossession of that eastern area since its industrial base is very run down now and there's no other value there, only cost. Once again this is just using the area as a proxy in US Russian relations, neither actually wanting to go the extra step. Russia isn't actually going in to take the area and NATO aren't going in to defend it. Both are just content to have military representation there in advisory and support roles, leaving it chiefly to the locals.

Once again you've replied going far outside anything I've posted, this time with mention of other eastern European countries. There's no point in my continuing to reply to things I haven't disputed or even mentioned, I've stated my case and don't care if you disagree.

The Crimea will remain illegally in Russian hands until the day when the West concede it out of expediency, and the conflict in the eastern industrial region will eventually fizzle out when Russian support stops for the same reason, leaving it in the Ukraine.
.

 

[tommie]

flecc, would you care to comment on the Budapest Memorandum which had as one of its signatory`s The Kremlin??

and for those who aren`t familiar with the detail...

A key element of the arrangement—many Ukrainians would say the key element—was the readiness of the United States and Russia, joined by Britain, to provide security assurances. The Budapest memorandum committed Washington, Moscow and London, among other things, to “respect the independence and sovereignty and existing borders of Ukraine” and to “refrain from the threat or use of force” against that country.

The Kremlin has violated those commitments. Using soldiers in Russian combat fatigues without identifying insignia, whom Mr. Putin later admitted were Russian, Moscow seized Crimea in March.
Russia subsequently encouraged and armed separatists in eastern Ukraine. When the Ukrainian military appeared to gain the upper hand against the separatists, regular Russian army units entered Donetsk and Luhansk to support them.

What part of its commitments to “respect the independence” and “refrain from the threat or use of force” do the Russians not understand?

 

[flecc]

flecc, would you care to comment on the Budapest Memorandum which had as one of its signatory`s The Kremlin??

and for those who aren`t familiar with the detail...

A key element of the arrangement—many Ukrainians would say the key element—was the readiness of the United States and Russia, joined by Britain, to provide security assurances. The Budapest memorandum committed Washington, Moscow and London, among other things, to “respect the independence and sovereignty and existing borders of Ukraine” and to “refrain from the threat or use of force” against that country.

The Kremlin has violated those commitments. Using soldiers in Russian combat fatigues without identifying insignia, whom Mr. Putin later admitted were Russian, Moscow seized Crimea in March.
Russia subsequently encouraged and armed separatists in eastern Ukraine. When the Ukrainian military appeared to gain the upper hand against the separatists, regular Russian army units entered Donetsk and Luhansk to support them.

What part of its commitments to “respect the independence” and “refrain from the threat or use of force” do the Russians not understand?

As I've said Tommie, I recognise all that and don't support the transgressions. I've clearly stated repeatedly that the Russian takeover of the Crimea was illegal, the referendum a device to enable that to appear justified.

The dispute I'm commenting on is the Ukrainian border position on the eastern flank, the Ukrainians positioned that to take in a Russian industrial area that they took from Russia in the chaos of the breakup of the union. The USA goes along with that for it suits their purposes, making it the NATO and therefore Western position. The Russians don't accept that, neither do I.

That's all I've posted about, but some want to pretend I'm being pro Russian over a much wider number of events and accordingly post irrelevant replies. As I posted, where the positions of the USA and Russia are concerned they are both just as bad, neither are innocents where aggression is concerned.
.

 

[oldgroaner]

The Express seem confused, they are pushing this
"
Free movement petition for Commonwealth nations reaches 214,000 as Brexit plans revealed
EXCLUSIVE: A petition which advocates introducing new legislation for the free movement of citizens between the UK, Canada, Australia and New Zealand has reached over 214,000 signatures since its launch."

Are people from the Commonwealth somehow different from those in the EU?
If so, would they care to put a name on what that is?

Interestingly comment is not available on this little nugget, I doubt whether Brexiteers will want "Free movement" from the next county never mind the commonwealth.

 

[oldgroaner]

And the Independent leads with this
"
Liam Fox's International Trade department is not fit to secure post-Brexit deals, warns report
Watchdog warns it ‘has not yet defined the range of capabilities and level of capacity it will require to undertake its role in delivering an independent UK trade function’
The department charged with securing trade after Brexit is not fit for the role and has been forced to delay projects as it struggles with a skills shortage, a damning report warns today.

Liam Fox’s running of the Department for International Trade (DIT) is criticised for failing to even properly set out the “capabilities and level of capacity” it will need to deliver for British business."


And Davis has upset the Tory loonies too
"
David Davis has risked a backlash from Tory MPs after indicating Britain will not refuse new EU rules in the Brexit transition period, when the UK has no power to shape them.

He suggested the Government would rely instead on the EU taking a long time to implement new rules during the likely two-year period after 2019, in the hope that by the time any come in to force the transition will be over.

But this isn't really news, is it?

 

[oldgroaner]

J.P. Morgan were putting the squeeze on according to the Beeb if there is change to access to the EU after Brexit, saying up to 25% of their staff could go.

 

[Woosh]

Found on Bloomberg this morning:

 

[flecc]

Found on Bloomberg this morning:

With regard to the comments from other EU members, it really should have been a hanging bunch of cherries being picked one by one.
.

 

[anotherkiwi]

The Express seem confused, they are pushing this
"
Free movement petition for Commonwealth nations reaches 214,000 as Brexit plans revealed
EXCLUSIVE: A petition which advocates introducing new legislation for the free movement of citizens between the UK, Canada, Australia and New Zealand has reached over 214,000 signatures since its launch."

Are people from the Commonwealth somehow different from those in the EU?
If so, would they care to put a name on what that is?

Interestingly comment is not available on this little nugget, I doubt whether Brexiteers will want "Free movement" from the next county never mind the commonwealth.

Doesn't the Commonwealth have more than 4 countries?

 

[tillson]

I saw this interview the other day and it reminds me a lot of the emotions involved in the Brexit debate. I think both the interviewer (Cathy Newman) and the interviewee (Jordan Peterson) come over well and both handle the questions and responses responsibly. I enjoyed watching the interview and thought it was an excellent debate. It may even be possible to identify issues / traits which are discussed during the interview, on this forum.

I have heard that Cathy Newman has been on the receiving end of terrible abuse and threats and that Jordan Peterson has experienced abuse from those with opposing points of view. This is where the similarities with the Brexit debate creep in and it can be seen within these pages, which is a shame.

 

[flecc]

I saw this interview the other day and it reminds me a lot of the emotions involved in the Brexit debate. I think both the interviewer (Cathy Newman) and the interviewee (Jordan Peterson) come over well and both handle the questions and responses responsibly. I enjoyed watching the interview and thought it was an excellent debate. It may even be possible to identify issues / traits which are discussed during the interview, on this forum.

I have heard that Cathy Newman has been on the receiving end of terrible abuse and threats and that Jordan Peterson has experienced abuse from those with opposing points of view. This is where the similarities with the Brexit debate creep in and it can be seen within these pages, which is a shame.

I eventually lost patience and didn't listen to the end. The one thing I got from it was the way Cathy Newman constantly shouted Jordan Peterson down, even to the extent of preventing his replies, while Peterson didn't once interrupt her.

As ever in this never ending female/male debate, emotion and distortion versus rationality.
.

 

[tillson]

I eventually lost patience and didn't listen to the end. The one thing I got from it was the way Cathy Newman constantly shouted Jordan Peterson down, even to the extent of preventing his replies, while Peterson didn't once interupt her.

As ever in this never ending female/male debate, emotion and distortion versus rationality.
.

Exactly. Very much like the Brexit debate on here and elsewhere.

 

[anotherkiwi]

Back in the good old days we had "debating" classes in high school, I guess they don't do that these days...

 

[oldgroaner]

Exactly. Very much like the Brexit debate on here and elsewhere.

Meaning?
And you implying that the likes of "Weasel words" Jackass Grease Smug somehow cancels out the sinister nature of his intentions by being a calm and apparently moderately spoken con-man?
No one has been "Shouted Down" on here, but they have signally failed to raise a Pro Brexit argument that withstands even cursory scrutiny.

And let's face it Brexit is in the hands of the worst possible bunch of incompetents to negotiate it on our behalf, isn't it?

 

[tillson]

Meaning?

To quote a well used phrase, “Exactly what it says on the tin.”