I doubt Russia will actually wage war with the West.
They would lose in their present state.
PM announces air, naval, land forces support in Ukraine
- Thread starter FiveParadox
- Start date
I doubt Russia will actually wage war with the West.
They would lose in their present state.
Okay, let's get this straight:
THERE ARE NO CANADIAN MILITARY ASSETS GOING TO UKRAINE
Our aircraft are going to eastern Europe; Poland, the Baltic States, the Czech Republic, all of which ARE NATO countries.
I personally believe that if Putin is determined to drop a new Iron Curtain, it is NATO's role to ensure that curtain is a far east as we can push it.....but that requires NATO act as a unit, and the EU (including even the UK) is dragging its feet, the US is currently led by a useless idiot, and there is NOTHING Canada can do on their own.
So Putin gets to eat Ukraine.
I figure it would like sending in the military to step between two fibbers because I really can't place a lot of faith in what either side claims. If there was a democratic vote to opt out of the EU and we are supposed to be democracy why are we taking a side against it? Sanctions, I can understand.
Thanks Neville, I'd prefer to put out the fire while it's still relatively small.
I'm sure these countries are watching with keen interest as well.
Czechslovakia [Now the Czech and Slovak Republic]
Hungary
Poland
East Germany [now United]
Romania
Bulgaria
Albania
Yugoslavia {No Serbia, Croatia, Bosnia Herzegovinia, Macedonia,Kosovo, Montenegro]
The argument is always the same.
All those nations have high percentages "ethnic Ukrainians" who know what Bolshevism is all about and aren't going to have it forced by the barrel of a gun ever again.
Was it illegal for the Ukrainian Parliament to depose Yanukovych? Can't get a straight answer in the media.
Fine for Harper to talk tough but he has eviscerated the military like most of the PMs before him.
I'm OK with containing Putin. But I'd prefer the Ukeleleans put up a fight first. As far as I can tell they simply walked away from their naval base in Crimea. If they aren't going to fight for it, why should we?
Fine for Harper to talk tough but he has eviscerated the military like most of the PMs before him.
I'm OK with containing Putin. But I'd prefer the Ukeleleans put up a fight first. As far as I can tell they simply walked away from their naval base in Crimea. If they aren't going to fight for it, why should we?
As a free nation we have an obligation to protect the people and their livelihoods that help keep them free.
The Canadian Military has not been eviscerated. They were under the Liberals, but don't kid yourself, our soldiers are ready and able and thankfully far better equipped than they have been in a long time.
They are putting up a fight. Crimea wanted to leave.
Boy you are wasting your breath trying to talk sense to BR on this one.
Yes and seizing of Oligarch booty was the right thing to do under the Tymoshenkos
This about dnuffing out the Soviets that never really went away.
You think CAF has been gutted? Hell no.We have combat experience the Bolsheviks don't. You can act tough all you want without ever pulling a trigger but once you have numerous times it's all instinct and your one badass mofo.
I don't see a huge difference to be honest. The government--Liberal or Conservative--are always looking for money, and there's always money to be found in the defence budget. MIlitary funding as a percentage of GDP has dropped significantly since 2009--from 1.4 to 1.1%.
The biggest problem is the continued fustercluck in the procurement process. It's embarrassing.
If I understand correctly, Russia now owns most of the Ukrainian navy. Not that they had much of one, but still. They should have fought for their military bases and killed those soldiers that defected to Russia as traitors, in my opinion. Or maybe they all defected, I don't know.
They are putting up a bit more of a fight now.
Yes, in hindsight "eviscerated" was the wrong word. But the number one priority of this government is eliminating the deficit, and the military, like every other government endeavour, has had to pay the price for that.
The Russians aren't great fighters anyway. Regardless I can't see a land war at this point. We'll probably never see another traditional land war again actually.
Combat experience will help, but it will be a very different engagement than Afghanistan, I would imagine. The Russians can do a little better than IEDs.
Article 111 of the Ukraine constitution sets out the procedure for impeachment.
By a vote of the majority of its members (not only those members present), the Verkhovna Rada (the elected legislature of Ukraine) can vote to initiate impeachment proceedings against the president. The Verkhovna Rada would then establish a commission consisting of a special procurator and special investigators to conduct an investigation into the conduct of the president.
Once a commission’s investigation has concluded, it reports its findings to the Verkhovna Rada. At this point, by a two-thirds vote of its total membership (and not just those members present), the Verkhovna Rada can issue formal impeachment charges against the president.
The Constitutional Court of Ukraine then reviews the case, and issues a report to the Verkhovna Rada with an opinion as to (a) whether the Verkhovna Rada followed the impeachment procedures correctly; and (b) whether the impeachment charges against the president include elements of treason or serious crimes (which are a mandatory threshold, pursuant to Article 111, for a president’s removal for cause).
If the Constitutional Court finds that the Verkhovna Rada followed all of the steps, and the president is found to have done something illegal with respect to treason or another serious crime, then the Verkhovna Rada may remove the president by a three-quarters resolution of its total membership (and not just those members present). These steps were not followed in this removal.
While an impeachment bill had been proposed in a previous session of the Verkhovna Rada, it had never been acted upon before the legislature’s dissolution. Much as is the case in Canada, bills are not carried forward from one session to the next. An investigation was not initiated by majority vote; there were no investigators’ report to the Verkhovna Rada; there were no formal impeachment charges; and the Constitutional Court did not have the opportunity to determine whether the process had been followed, or whether the charges related to treason or other crimes.
The only other mechanisms for removal are (a) the resignation of the president, delivered personally at a meeting of the Verkhovna Rada; (b) the removal of the president for health reasons, provided that the Verkhovna Rada has received a ruling of the Constitutional Court authorizing the removal, and a medical opinion; or (c) the death of the president.
I think there can be a strong argument made that the president’s removal was unconstitutional, and well beyond the authority of Ukraine’s elected legislature. The merits behind the removal are certainly rock solid, but Ukraine could find itself in the midst of a more agitated constitutional crisis if one of the former president’s supporting states carries through with their threats of an appeal to the Constitutional Court. A court order to reinstate Mr. Viktor Yanukovych as president would result in extreme political and constitutional discord, and would likely provoke aggression from the Russian Federation under the guise of attempting to support the “constitutional order” in Ukraine.
Source: Constitution of Ukraine, 2010 (WikiSource)
Very useful, thanks.
Funny that CNN has a story about all the propaganda in the state-owned Russian media. Seems we are subject to our own here, because it is not clear in any of the western reports I have read that that the ousting of Yanukovych was essentially a coup. I note the IMF lent Ukraine $17B. Poor Ukraine. Even if they escape Russia's clutches, it will be right into the clutches of the IMF.
Funny that CNN has a story about all the propaganda in the state-owned Russian media. Seems we are subject to our own here, because it is not clear in any of the western reports I have read that that the ousting of Yanukovych was essentially a coup. I note the IMF lent Ukraine $17B. Poor Ukraine. Even if they escape Russia's clutches, it will be right into the clutches of the IMF.
Will Vlad allow that in Eastern Ukraine?
Mind you, the insurgents are a small percentage of the population.
But consider that NATO has front line states with sizable ethnic Russian population. So if he starts what he has in those states, what would you do?
Oh yes, and all the Stans, former so called Republic, all with sizable ethnic Russian populations all sat up and took note of the reason Vlad has used.
Protecting Russians.
This is atrocious. We already spent billions of dollars and thousands of innocent lives in Afghanistan fighting somebody else's war. Now Harper wants to open the coffers amd put countless innocents at risk again over something that just isn't our business. How many more generations will live in unfathomable debt, if they are even born seeing how their potential parents may be dead. I don't understand how anyone with half a brain and a little conscience can support this knowing it could rapidly become world war 3. And this isn't a bunch of underarmed and untrained guys wearing sheets, it is a well armed and trained force with nuclear weapons. All who support this are either overly arrogant or just plain nuts.
If he starts that in the NATO nations its all over for us all. Kiss your sons and daughters and some grandkids goodbye. And the Russians can kiss theirs goodbye as well. They will not come out unscathed of this. Perhaps none of us will.
Did you mean our responsibility to protect the resources so Nato members in Europe can exploit them. Nobody care about the Ukrainians really.
Wrong Pete!!! We have an obligation to protect Canadians and our sovereignty. Sending our guys overseas to be killed in a possible 3rd world war is not protecting our citizens.
