TV comedy president takes big lead in Ukraine election

Maybe his will bring a fresh approach to governing a horribly corrupt oligarchy which is financially backed by western interests for the sole purpose of being a threat to Russia's borders. Meanwhile, countries that legitimately need help like Greece and Spain are ignored or crippled with debt and austerity by the same institutions.

The hypocrisy is stunning.

Maybe Zelesnsky will take that approach that negotiation and dialog is the way to go with Russia rather than conflict and escalation. Who knows. He is a bit of a wild card which is what makes the run off elections so interesting.

I bet the EU and Washington would hate any negotiated settlement with Russia.

 

There really is no "negotiated" settlements when dealing with the Russians.

 

The economy is doing well creating jobs though hardly "full employment.". This is continuation of trends that started in Obama's 2nd term. Actually the unemployment rate has risen to 3.9% over the last two months but that's still pretty good.

How do you measure NATO's strength? Just because some official says so?

No I don't expect you to rely on progressives but to do exactly what you have always done. And when this economic cycle turns down - which it inevitably will, I expect you to suffer the consequences only with unprecedented levels of corporate and personal debt.

It will be interesting..........

 

Your hatred of Russia is noted.I put you in the same category on this forum as those who hate Muslims and toady for Israel.

That being said, if you have some reasonable argument as why negotiated settlement with Russia is impossible i would be more than interested in hearing it.

It is the US that is busy pulling out of international agreements - right?

 

It's interesting that your ilk credits Trump's amazingly strong economy to Obama's trend during whose presidency it was actually pretty stagnant, but blame Trump for the debt and deficit, which is undeniably Obama's trend, Obama borrowed more than all his predecessors combined, not Trump.

That being said, the economy is super strong under Trump, NATO claims to be stronger than ever and credits Trump policies. And deficits will have to wait for Trump's second term. Governing is an art of prioritization after all.

Your admiration of him notwithstanding, there's only that much a president can do in one term and Trump's accomplishments already exceed those of his predecessors, including Reagan, Clinton and Kennedy.

 

Yes likely they would, it would be in Ukraine's best interest to mend their relationship with Russia

 

Nope. Percentage-wise, Obama's contribution to the debt was to the tune of 8 trillion which places him 5th behind the likes of Ronald Reagan and GWB. According to Trump's own budget, he will increase it over 5 Trillion in his first term and is budgeted for 9T in his second. And don't forget the fiscal stimulus Obama decided to implement to combat the 2008 failure of the deregulated investment banking crisis.

"As projected in Table S-10 in the FY 2020 budget, Trump plans to add $5.088 trillion to the debt in his first term. That's a 30 percent increase from the $20.245 trillion debt at the end of Obama's last budget for FY 2017. If he remains in office for a second term, he plans to add $9.1 trillion. Trump had promised to eliminate the debt during his campaign.

• FY 2021 - $1.276 trillion.
• FY 2020 - $1.281 trillion.
• FY 2019 - $1.314 trillion.
• FY 2018 - $1.217 trillion."

https://www.thebalance.com/us-debt-by-president-by-dollar-and-percent-3306296

The economy was quite robust during Obama's second term as well, in fact the growth curve is almost linear between the two administrations:


"President Trump started with a distinct advantage with a workforce of 145.7 million, 9% larger than when President Obama took office. If the workforce were to only grow by 2%, that would add just over 2.9 million jobs a year or 243,000 per month. Over the course of 10 years, there would be over 29 million jobs added.

Additionally, over President Obama’s last six and five years in office after the economy had recovered from the Great Recession, the average employment gains were 2.42 and 2.48 million jobs per year. Pretty much on track to add 25 million over 10 years. So it appears that Trump can reach his 25 million job growth goal even if the economy continued to grow at the pace under Obama .

To provide a monthly comparison, the average employment gain in Obama’s last six years in office (after getting out of the recession's impact) was 201 thousand. And the average for his last five years was 207 thousand, essentially the same as the 208 thousand for the first nine months this year."

https://www.forbes.com/sites/chuckj...inuation-from-obamas-presidency/#2f20db431af3

AS for your second claim, there is no evidence that NATO is any more combat efficient or that anything Trump has done has improved that. In fact, the NATO chief Stoltenberg just gave a major speech in which he discredits your entire argument and states that Trump is a major problem the alliance will have to deal with - the "lack of principled leadership from the US:

"Stoltenberg delivered his remarks to mark NATO's 70-year history as the trans-Atlantic alliance faces unprecedented challenges, chief among them, according to veteran US and foreign diplomats, Trump and "the absence of strong, principled American presidential leadership."
"Trump is regarded widely in NATO capitals as the Alliance's most urgent, and often most difficult, problem," said the February report by Harvard's Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs and its Kennedy School based on interviews with current European and North American leaders, former senior officials, academics and journalists.
The report notes "Trump's open ambivalence about NATO's value to the US, his public questioning of America's Article 5 commitment" which mandates that members come to the defense of any nation in the alliance that's been attacked, as well as his "persistent criticism of Europe's democratic leaders and embrace of its anti-democratic members and continued weakness in failing to confront NATO's primary adversary President Vladimir Putin of Russia."

https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/03/politics/nato-70-stoltenberg-congress/index.html

Trump has done nothing but give a big tax break to the most wealthy Americans while doing almost nothing for any other sector of the economy all the time riding a growth surge that his predecessor began. He has divided and weakened America and is ruining any belief that America is an honest broker on the international stage by tearing up multi-lateral agreements, threatening new arms races and destabilizing entire region of the globe from the milddle east to China with threats of trade wars and even really dangerous shooting wars. He has made America pretty much a laughing stock everywhere on the globe and given late night comedians enough material with his incompetence to last a lifetime.

Come to think of it, that is an accomplishment that no other president has been able to achieve.........

 

Russia stole a chunk of another country’s territory. They still don’t return islands to japan that they took over in WWII. I can’t see a politician surviving if he/she accepts annexation of part of the country’s territory.
For Ukraine to even start negotiating Crimea Russia must at least stop sending its military to eastern Ukraine. That’s the very least!
Russian internal propaganda is its own enemy - russian government can’t back away after lying to its own people about crucifixions and persecution of Russian speakers.

 

No matter how you put it - 3.9% unemployment is very good. Considering liberal crying of the end of the world when trump was elected things turned out to be pretty good from economic perspective.
My personal income increased over 40% due to low unemployment and high demand for skilled workforce. With Obama things felt pretty stale.
GDP growth with trump is pretty good too.

 

If Ukraine wanted to remain intact it should have federated, but when Russia suggested it, Poroshenko said they do not take advice from Russia. Almost half of Ukraine was once part of Russia. Western Ukraine and the city of Lviv were part of Poland. Then there is the Hungarian section, the Romainian part and I believe some lands belong to Belarus and Czechoslovakia but I'm not sure. They all speak different languages and dialects, and the only unifying language is Russian.

The way it stood, all the mines and industries were in the Russian Donbas area and they were supporting the poor Western Nazi area, so the Russians in the Donbas were highly resented - thus the genocide.

Had Ukraine federated, then each part could make their own contacts and trade agreements with whatever country they wanted to. Instead the fools in the Western part were being promised one thing or another by Poroshenko so he could stay in power. Now they want to kill him. Poroshenko's all packed and ready to jump ship if he doesn't win.

 

The illegal actions towards Ukraine come from the propaganda networks of the ones who make a practice of committing illegal acts. I wouldn't believe a word of it.

There is not a single thing that Russia did that's illegal - from the Crimean referendum to reunite with Russia, to the unarmed volunteers helping the separatists. We on the other hand; Libya, Iraq, Syria, Serbia come to mind.

.

We say white's black,
and old is new,
and flip all things;
it's what we do. - Jeannette

​

 

Put me where you like....i pick a side, and really make no apologies.


You ask ....Why, a " negotiated" conclusion with some one like Russia is impossible?

Well the term "negotiate" according to some russians portrays weakness. Russians usually respond well when you put a gun between their peepers.....with the safety catch off in many cases. That demonstrates strength and indicates....don't f*** with us.

They steal stuff from other countries that feel it's theirs...like Ukraine, but feel like "brethren" to them. They have a funny way of showing it. And have no problem killing their neighbors whom the Russkis claim wetewso "generous" to them.
You were interested in hearing.....and I've schooled you.

US pulls outta intl agreements?
Russkis feel the rules dont apply to them....nuff said?

 

Except that if you were to actually school me you'd have to provide something besides opinion, your hates and biases and misconceptions. Everything you've stated above is just the product of you're hate and easily dismissed is the product of someone who allows emotion and prejudice to stain his judgement.

The Russkis feel the rules don't apply???

Clearly you have'nt been following American foreign policy. The Russians wanted to save IFN - US refused. Russia acts in good faith with other nations on international Iran treaty - US pulls out unilaterally and applies illegal sanctions.....I could go on and on but as I said before, your hate speaks for itself, and haters gotta hate, I guess..

 

What about all the territory the US has annexed over the years and never given back from the Pacific to Cuba.

Russia was ceded territory in the Islands by international agreement in the San Fransisco Treaty of 1951 though there is some dispute over some islands.

Crimeans overwhelmingly voted to be part of Russia by plebiscite and Luhansk and Donbass are ethnically Russian territories fighting for to maintain sovereignty within a nation that is being used as a wedge by wester military interests to destabalize Russia's borders.

There is a lot I don't like about Putin's Russia but the demonization is not helpful and is leading the US into a dangerous conflict it may not have thought through the consequenses of.

 

What do the US conquests of the past have to do with an annexation that happened just 5 years ago? Do you think Ukrainian government should start negotiating with aggressive Russia because the US annexed some territories in some distant past?
Russia is the only country in this world that forcefully annexed a piece of another country in the past 50-70 years.

 

It's OK now to steal territory from other countries?

Look out, Canada.

 

So you are saying that there is a time limit to the legality of annexing territory? How many years would you say the statute of limitations runs out on annexation?

I bet Cuba or Guam would disagree with you.

And your statement that no other country has annexed territory is not accurate either. China is occupying territory in the SCS and Israel is using illegal settlements to occupy the WB.

Nevertheless, Putin would have been an absolute fool to allow the historic seat of the Black Sea fleet to fall to a hostile foreign power.

Whatever else Putin is and he definately has his ugly side, he is not a fool.

Also you are saying that the sovereign will of the Crimean people who voted overwhelming to remain in Russia is of no account even though they have no desire to be a part of the corrupt, dependent Ukraine.

Why do you negate the democratic will of the people of Crimea?

Why do you hate democracy?

 

Last time you tried it it didn't work out so well.......unintended consequences and all that

 

Crimean voted "overwhelmingly"....yes, I've heard and read #s as high as 112%.....wow!! We in the US here can only dream of such polling numbers!) Who was the other 12%? Dead people, Fido the dog, pet hamsters?

Yes that "vote" happened with plenty of greenies running around with AKs well before the vote.....and minus the absence of international monitors to observe "voting" procedures.....which is needed in that part of the world.

LDPR are "russian" territories? Not totally, theresthtons of ukranians who speak russki, who were "russified" during the glory days of CCCP induced Holodomor.

They want a nation....within a nation?, yeah uh huh, thatll work swell, play both sides, something like in Quebec Canada.....we wanna separate, but still use the same house and toilet?

Oh, and those "non existent" russki servicemen in the DPR.....here's a link you may find interesting.

https://youtu.be/1yNjuMHNekk

But I think they there on vacation),LOL.

 

Just to inform the uninformed, the Hague's decision on Kosovo said that people have a right to their self determination - And mind you, Kosovo and East Germany didn't even hold a referendum to establish that determination. In contrast the people of Crimea did, which makes it more legal than either one. Now for the humorous part, Kerry said that Kosovo was a different case since no one died in Crimea.

​

I'm singing now a wondrous song
To tell the world that right is wrong
and what you thought was naught before
was just a lie that you had bought. - Jeannette


​

 

What you described is not a democracy. Unlike majority of post USSR countries Ukraine is a true democracy as can be evidenced by numerous peaceful transfers of power between opposing political forces.
There is a legitimate Democratic way for Crimea to split with Ukraine - by having a national referendum where everyone in the country gets to tell their opinion on this, not just Crimea. If crimeans got a majority yes then Ukrainian government would set them free after obtaining proper split agreements and the property and debts are divided between two entities.

By the way, back in 1991 majority of Crimea residents voted to split from USSR and to stay with independent Ukraine. That’s a historic fact. The poll that Crimea had in 2014 didn’t have time for proper discussion, wasn’t transparent and was illegal because other Ukrainian citizens didn’t get their say.
When a region splits from another country all residents should have a say because of unified infrastructure and vested interest of everyone involved. Infrastructure is very expensive and involves the resources of the whole country - like Power grids, oil refineries, rail roads, roads, etc.
Crimea and Russia actually understood this when Ukraine stopped supplying power, natural gas and water into Crimea. Now the peninsula switched to ground water supply, which is finite and can result in major ecological implications in the future. Their crops are a fraction of what they used to be. Russia built a bridge to the peninsula, but I can’t see how they are planning to supply Crimea with water. The only real option is building desalination plants, which are extremely expensive.

 

Yes, I'm sure that the referendum was completely fair and honest.

--said the uninformed.

 

Not quite true, while there were problems with getting OSCE observers in and their were Russian troops overlooking the polling stations, OSCE was eventually allowed a few observers who mostly said the election accounted for the general will of the people of Crimea with the possible exception of Tartars.

Results of polls after the referendum by the Broadcasting Board of Governors, showed 83% of Crimeans felt the referendum reflected the will of the people and subsequent polls by organizations as diverse as Gallop, Pew and Ipsos-Reuters all showed 79.3%, 88% and 91% respectively support for Crimea leaving Ukraine to become part of Russia.

There is just no way around the fact that this is the will of the majority of the Crimean people with a few exceptions.

Where is the outcry and resistance from Crimea today? It is nowhere to be found outside Brussels, Washington and Kiev.

Same with Luhansk and Donbass. Why are all the refugees and displaced people heading to Russia and not Ukraine??? Hmmm..........

 

To be fair, Ukraine has only had 4 presidents since dissolution of the USSR. Yanukovich is not my favorite either but let's not forget that he was democratically elected - which the Maidan uprising overthrew.
So, honest question. Do you think the Maidan process was a fair transfer of power with no outside interference and that that transfer of power was legit democracy?

But how would that reflect the will of the people of Crimea if their legitimate claims to sovereignty are overwhelmed by the Ukrainian majority and their western backers? This is exactly what is happening in the Eastern provinces and you can see the result of not allowing self-determination - violence and conflict.

And don't forget that Ukraine is a practically bankrupt oligarchy and that Russia is the source of much of the assets and infrastructure including the Black Sea naval facilities. Why should Ukraine be able to make off with assets Russia paid for?

I do agree that their were irregularities with the 2014 referendum but I do maintain that according to subsequent polls allowed by western news organizations, the results reflect the will of the vast majority of The Crimean population.

Not sure about power and natural gas. I think Crimea could actually be a sources for this. An article in the "fake news" (sarc) about energy in the peninsula:

https://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/18/...crimea-putin-gains-a-sea-of-fuel-reserves.htm

But yeah, Russia supplies natural gas and heat to Ukraine and what do they do in return - cut off the water. Nice.

 

Zelensky is also for ending the war against the eastern separatists and negotiating with Russia.

In other words, the exact opposite of what you believe.

Funny how people like you have been pretending to speak for the "Ukrainian people" when they've been against you the entire time.