IMF to Kiev - fight for eastern Ukraine or die
POSTED BY: SIGNYM
UPDATED: Tuesday, June 2, 2026 17:17
VIEWED: 24929
PAGE 3 of 21
Quote:
How did the Ukraine get an acting president? Well, it turns out that the previous democratically elected president - in elections praised by international observers for fairness, access and transparency - was ousted in a coup.
The previous president was grotesquely corrupt, and was overthrown by popular uprising after slaying dozens of protesters with his security services. He was ousted by vote of the Ukrainian parliament - as is their constitutional right. And the Ukrainian parliament overwhelmingly backed the current interim government - as is their constitutional right. The current Kiev government was not elected but elections for a new democratically-elected government have been brought forwards. All in all we've seen the popular overthrow of a corrupt tyrant and the bringing forwards of elections - hardly a step backwards for democracy.
Quote:
As for Russia 'annexing' Crimea - perhaps you didn't know that the Kiev government had passed a law making speaking Russian illegal.
Wrong on two points. The bill was to downgrade the Russian language's official status, not to outlaw its use, and the bill was never passed, it was vetoed by the acting president (your so-called reich wing selectee): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legislation_on_languages_in_Ukraine
Quote:
That paramilitary groups were dragging Russians out of their homes, beating them and setting fire to the buildings ...
In Crimea? I'd like to see the evidence either way.
It's not personal. It's just war.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by kpo:Quote:
How did the Ukraine get an acting president? Well, it turns out that the previous democratically elected president - in elections praised by international observers for fairness, access and transparency - was ousted in a coup.
The previous president was grotesquely corrupt, and was overthrown by popular uprising after slaying dozens of protesters with his security services. He was ousted by vote of the Ukrainian parliament - as is their constitutional right. And the Ukrainian parliament overwhelmingly backed the current interim government - as is their constitutional right. The current Kiev government was not elected but elections for a new democratically-elected government have been brought forwards. All in all we've seen the popular overthrow of a corrupt tyrant and the bringing forwards of elections - hardly a step backwards for democracy.Quote:
As for Russia 'annexing' Crimea - perhaps you didn't know that the Kiev government had passed a law making speaking Russian illegal.
Wrong on two points. The bill was to downgrade the Russian language's official status, not to outlaw its use, and the bill was never passed, it was vetoed by the acting president (your so-called reich wing selectee): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legislation_on_languages_in_UkraineQuote:
That paramilitary groups were dragging Russians out of their homes, beating them and setting fire to the buildings ...
In Crimea? I'd like to see the evidence either way.
It's not personal. It's just war.
The Ukrainians suggested they took taking a vote out of anger banning the Russian language while they were having problems with Russia annexing Crimea. They then apologized for it. The fact that they broached the subject two years ago also only means a sovereign nation took a position another nation didn't agree with. Perfectly within Ukraine's rights. That would be like the US evading Mexico for declaring Spanish the national language. Pretty absurd huh?
Read what it says ass, your link doesn't imply what you are saying.
Here is what your link says.
Legislation on languages in Ukraine is based on its Constitution, international obligations and 2012 law "On the principles of the state language policy" (before 2012, the 1989 law "On the languages in the Ukrainian SSR" was in force).
The law "On the principles of the state language policy" was aimed at giving Russian or any other minority language the status of a "regional language"; approving its use in courts, schools and other government institutions in areas of Ukraine where the percentage of representatives of national minorities exceeds 10% of the total population of a defined administrative district.[1][2] In practice this was mostly the case in the country's predominantly Russian-speaking southern and eastern regions.[2] Ukrainian remains the country's only official country-wide language.[2] The bill was adopted amid fistfights in the Ukrainian Parliament building on 3 July 2012. The law came into force on 10 August 2012.[1] Since then various cities and regions of Ukraine declared Russian a regional language in their jurisdictions.[3] Three minor settlements did the same for, respectively, Hungarian, Moldovan and Romanian.[4] A proposal to repeal the law was vetoed on 28 February 2014 by acting President Oleksandr Turchynov, who ordered drafting of a new law to "accommodate the interests of both eastern and western Ukraine and of all ethnic groups and minorities."[5][6]
Do you even understand what it is you are saying?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
MIKER... Do YOU understand what you're saying? Ukraine is far away and hasn't exactly been presented objectively in the press. So, here's the recap up to now:
Ukraine is geographically divided between the forested northwest and steppes in the southeast.
Northwest Ukraine had been part of Poland and Lithuania at one time, and southeast Ukraine part of Russia since about 1600. In some SE provinces, 80%+ of the people speak Russian. Overall, about 30% speak Russian. (I've posted about all of this before.) During the early part of revolutionary Russia, somewhere in the realm of 3-5 million Ukrainian small-holding farmers were starved to death in the Holdomor. Curiously, there doesn't seem to be much reference to the event in the current situation.
The USA has spent $5 billion to establish a pro-western group, which took root in NW Ukraine, near Kiev.
Ukraine has experienced many political changes since the breakup of the Soviet Union. Since the Orange Revolution it has been ruled by oligarchs in BOTH the pro-Russian and Ukrainian camps. The gas contracts with Russia, for example, have been battled over for control by the various oligarchs. The most recent disasterous contract with Russia was negotiated, NOT by pro-Russian Yanukovich or other pro-Russians (as you might expect) but by Yulia Tymoshenko (she of the braided hair) who is, technically, an Orange Revolutionary (albeit one who is connected to the very wealthy). Much of Ukraine's debt is owed to Russia under this particular contract, the high prices of which were offest to the customer by a government subsidy ... so, goodonya, Yulia, for impoverishing the Ukrainian government!
In light of this debt, Yanukovich was faced with two competing trade agreements- (1) with Russia, which was willing to buy $15 billion of bonds (basically a loan), cut their gas price, in a non-exclusive arrangement and (2) with the EU, which was willing to loan them money but ONLY if they doubled their internal customer gas price, reduced pensions by half, and ONLY in exclusive arrangement with the EU/IMF.
Not suprisingly, Yanukovich accepted the better deal with Russia. This incensed the pro-western liberals in Kiev.
During the protests, Putin (once again) offered a tripartite deal in which the EU and Russia could both enter into trade agreements with the Ukraine, which was turned down by the EU in favor of an exclusive trade arrangement.
During the protests, a phalanx of molotov-cocktail-throwing neo-Nazis were deployed in the Maidan, with support from the EU and the USA... Victoria Nuland ("Fuck the EU") handing out cookies, John McCain routinely appearing in photo-ops with pro-Nazi Tyahnybok, and the rioters routinely described as "peaceful protesters" in the Western press.
Under pressure, Yanukovich restrained the riot police - who had only their shields and batons in the midst of the riots- offered early elections (elections were set to occur in 2015 anyway, one might ask what the urgent urgency was) and positions in the government to the rioters, who turned down the offer.
After the offer was made, the heat was turned up on the riots. People were killed by snipers - wrongly attributed to Yanukovich and most likely by the neo-Nazi provocateurs- and Kiev was taken by force, even thought early elections were on the table. (One has to wonder if the rioters had doubts about winning an election, and decided to avoid the risk of running for office.)
"Yats" - a banker by trade and Victori Nuland's first choice, was appointed as the new unelected Prime Minister, and a number of neo-Nazis from the Svoboda Party and one from Pracy Sektor were appointed to "internal security" positions in the new unelected government.
One of the first acts of the new unlected government was to remove Russia as an official language. This was quickly rescinded, but made all Russian-speakers stronlgy suspicious of the new appointed government. The people of Crimea voted overwhelmingl
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
KPO- Part of this is an outright lie,
Quote:and fits in the trashcan along with "Assad used chemical weapons" and "Saddam has WMD". I would expect you, of all people, to be more knowlegeable about actual events, and avoid repeating propaganda.
The previous president was grotesquely corrupt, and was overthrown by popular uprising after slaying dozens of protesters with his security services.
CURRENTLY
Quote:
The clip below, not for the faint of heart, shows anti-government protesters jumping from the burning Odessa trade unions house: it appears when Yanukovich was "killing" protesters in February, the west couldn't get up in arms fast enough screaming for the former president's overthrow. But now that the acting post-CIA funded coup government is doing the same thing to its own protesters, the radio silence is stunning.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-05-03/we-are-essentially-war-ukrain
e-admits-after-dozens-killed
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Feb 21, 2014 - The BBC reports Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych and opposition leaders have signed an agreement to hold early elections.
Apparently elections didn't have the guaranteed outcome the opposition wanted - democratic elections just weren't good enough. So - on with the violent revolt.
On 21 February an impeachment bill was introduced in Ukrainian parliament,[52] but no details were provided and the Ukrainian parliament did not vote to impeach Yanukovich according to the legal procedure.[53] On 21 February Yanukovich left for Kharkov to attend a summit of south-eastern regions, according to media reports. On 22 February, Parliament voted to declare that the chair of the President is vacant due to the fact that Yanukovich left Ukraine and no longer exercises his duties. An editorial in Der Spiegel argued that the vote was unconstitutional.[54] On 22 February, Parliament named its speaker Oleksandr Turchynov as interim president on 23 February.[1] A warrant for the arrest of Yanukovych was issued by the new government on 24 February.
Such is your 'democratic' process.
Meanwhile the Wash Post said this about the vote to remove Yanukovych "One caveat: It's not clear whether there were enough legislators present to meet a quorum"
But hey, it kinda looked like a democratic vote. That should be enough for the stupid masses.
And that's what you're promoting as democracy. Good on you.
OONJERAH - We are too dumb to live and smart enough to wipe ourselves out.
"You, who live in any kind of comfort or convenience, do not know how these people can survive these things, do you? They will endure because there is no immediate escape from endurance. Some will die, the rest must live."
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
ALSO, MIKER you have not answered the question
Quote:
"The ones you apparently support ..." Voted. Overwhelmingly. In large numbers. Freely and democratically. Hmmm ... how many other ways can I say that? Compared to what happened in Kiev, which happened at the point of a gun, what happened in Crimea truly was the will of the people. Why do you have a problem with that?
Let's clear that up first. Why do you support a coup against a democratically elected government by small numbers of armed extremists, but not an overwhelmingly majority vote by citizens?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
OK, I got goaded into responding by the challenge posted by the woman who started this link and I have done so. I have shown her statements to be false and baseless. I no longer feel the need to keep shinning a light on her hurtful assertions against the west and the EU.
So to SYGNYM I say" THATS " WHAT ABOUT IT".
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Let's clear that up first. Why do you support a coup against a democratically elected government by small numbers of armed extremists, but not an overwhelmingly majority vote by citizens?
OONJERAH - We are too dumb to live and smart enough to wipe ourselves out.
"You, who live in any kind of comfort or convenience, do not know how these people can survive these things, do you? They will endure because there is no immediate escape from endurance. Some will die, the rest must live."
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
ALSO, MIKER you have not answered the questionQuote:
"The ones you apparently support ..." Voted. Overwhelmingly. In large numbers. Freely and democratically. Hmmm ... how many other ways can I say that? Compared to what happened in Kiev, which happened at the point of a gun, what happened in Crimea truly was the will of the people. Why do you have a problem with that?
Let's clear that up first. Why do you support a coup against a democratically elected government by small numbers of armed extremists, but not an overwhelmingly majority vote by citizens?
Last response, I don't. A coup is usually used to describe the overthrow of a government by it's military. Not the case here. No, this is about the people trying to take their country back from the control of a foreign power. Russia
I get it. You don't get it. Every link by you and your supporter 1KIKI doesn't say what you claim it does. After all this I am sure you will try and tailor your arguments and regroup, but the facts are that your premise is wrong and rooted in your anger against the west and EU.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
It seems clear to me that the USA, the EU, and NATO are doing everything they can to provoke a war with Russia. This includes providing political cover and cookies and photo-ops with John McCain for Ukraine’s neo-Nazis, personally insulting Putin, breaking negotiated agreements with Russia, endlessly threatening sanctions, and lying in the press (with fake photos, fake flyers, and false reports).
The latest entry into the “provoke a war” campaign is the IMF. The IMF seems intent on pitting Ukraine into a death-match with Russia by threatening their loan status: Fight, or else your loan conditions will be ‘renegotiated’. Since Ukraine’s economy is hanging on ONLY by this thread, the IMF’s statement is an existential threat to the Kiev government.
At this juncture, there’s no point in trying to figure who is behind all this. With the entry of the IMF (and for all I know, the remainder of the troika: the European Commission and the European Central Bank ECB) into the fray, this is clearly a well-coordinated plan, with the USA and the EU and the IMF alternately taking turns to push the project forward, creating no discernable division of interest between them.
Until recently, the Kiev government has been reluctant to mobilize its army because the army itself is probably divided; there have been reports of “security forces” defecting to the east. Instead, the Kiev government has been trying to create citizen militias… pro-Nazi groups and other irregular forces to take the place of the army.
Since the IMF has threatened to renegotiate the loan status, Turchinov, the unelected President of Kiev… oops, I mean Ukraine… has reinstated the draft. I can't imagine what liberal pro-western Ukrainians are thinking now... "Doubled gas prices? Halved pensions? And now the draft???"
----------------------------
Ukraine unrest: Kiev 'helpless' to quell parts of east
Ukraine's acting President Olexander Turchynov has admitted his forces are "helpless" to quell unrest driven by pro-Russian activists in the eastern regions of Donetsk and Luhansk. Mr Turchynov said the goal was now to prevent the unrest spreading.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-27222023
Ukraine crisis: Russian flags fill May Day rally
Thousands of protesters carrying Russian flags filled the street of Donetsk on Friday, as part of a May Day rally.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-27241740
IM F : $17 bn loan would need overhaul if Ukraine loses east
The IMF says its just-announced $17 billion rescue program for Ukraine would have to be overhauled if the country loses control of the economically important eastern region to pro-Russian separatists.
https://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/imf-17-bn-loan-overhaul-164648824.ht
ml
Ukraine crisis: Kiev reinstates conscription
Ukraine's acting President Olexander Turchynov has reinstated military conscription to deal with deteriorating security in the east of the country. The move, announced in a decree, came as pro-Russia militants seized the regional prosecutor's office in the eastern city of Donetsk.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-27247428
Posted by Miker in response:
Here is a quote from the first link you provided as proof of your delusion that the US and EU are instigating things in the Ukraine.
"The acting president of Ukraine said that the tens of thousands of Russian troops stationed just over the border meant that "the threat of Russia starting a war against mainland Ukraine is real". Russia, which annexed the Crimea region from Ukraine last month, has said it has no plans to invade the east". Annexed means invaded and stole in this case. Did the US and EU goad Russia into that. I am sure you can cut and paste far out opinions about that but it would still be bull.
The BBC article says nothing about The US or EU being responsible for this crises, only how they have offered support to Ukra
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME