 |
| |
|
|
lord of the mark
|
 |
FUKCOV - Former United Kingdom Colony of Virginia
Dec 2000
time: 00:16
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Spiffor
.
LOTM, you were rightly prone to condemn Putin heavy support for Yanukovych. Why are you so shy to condemn the West heavy (and obvious) support of Yushchenko? |
Because the russian support has been massive including visits to rallies by Russian pols, and money that dwarfs the support given to Yuschenko. And because the Russians are screaming that our modest western support to Yuschenko is a coup, and virtually aggression, while ignoring their own much heavier support. And because they count as support what appears to be the honest monitoring of elections. What they have tried to do, and what you seem to have accepted, your friend apart, is the delegitimization of OSCE election monitors, with no particular basis, except that they OSCE election monitors have come up with results that are inconvenient. I mean if I thought the US and UK were nasty imposers of neoliberalism on the globe, Id be very unhappy about their ganging up on little Serbia, which certainly was defying globalization and neoliberalism, and the shift in Georgia toward neo-liberalism, and the UK-US alliance with neoliberal leaning states in east-central europe which threatens to make even the EU, the counterweight to neo-liberalism, into a neo-liberal bastion. Id then be very unhappy with people who found that say Milosevic was stealing an election, similarly in Georgia and Ukraine? BUT, alas, poor Spiffor, AFAICT its TRUE that there was vote fraud in all those places, massive fraud, and that the neoliberals in all those places actually won democratically. Even if it makes Blair and the neoliberals happy. (Just as I must accept that Chavez won, bastard though he is) Your only evidence is from two individuals whos debating techniques are to put it mildly, questionable, including groundless accusations and paranoia.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
BlackCat
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by GePap
So? the question is whether Yushenko can deliver- if he can't, those crowds won;t show up anymore. They will be desolutioned.
I have seen nothing that would indicate for me that significant change is in the air. maybe I am wrong, but I fail to see where the faith that Yushenko means much difference comes from. |
Nothing but the future can tell if Yushenko can deliver or not. He might be just a big nepotist as other new rulers in former soviet "republics", but he has a couple of things that may make him a decent president. First of all, it's 13 years ago since the soviet empire broke down, so the worst impacts of this has settled, second, he has an enourmous support from "democratic vigilanties" and if he want to keep this support, then he can't do crazy stuffs as in Belarus.
Of course, there are always the risk that it ends up in an Jeltsin disaster - he also had major support, but screwed up seriously.
Anyway, i still think a president elected without fraud is better than the opposite (no, i don't want to hear anything about Bush)
|
|
| |
|
|
|
BlackCat
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ned
This does raise the question, then, of how the EU would defend the Ukraine if it joined. Most of the EU relies on the US to defend it through NATO. But the Ukraine may be unique in that it will not be part of NATO, but be highly prone to attack by a powerful neighbor. |
If Ukraine isn't a NATO member, then it's a UN matter, not a NATO, but why do you think that Belarus wants to attack Ukraine ?
If Ukraine becomes a NATO member, then NATO (not EU) has the obligation to protect it just as every other member of NATO. If they don't, then NATO is dead.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Ned
|
 |
of Aptos, CA
Oct 1999
time: 21:16
|
|
Yushchenko may do something about stolen Catholic property. Here is a story from 2001.
By Ukrainian affairs analyst Stephen Dalziel
Despite his mild manner, Pope John Paul II has never tried to avoid political rows when planning the 93 foreign visits which he has made in over 20 years as the head of the Roman Catholic Church.
But his trip to Ukraine could be the most controversial yet.
Within a year of becoming Pontiff, John Paul risked the wrath of the Communist authorities then in power in both his native Poland and the Soviet Union, by visiting his homeland.
On other visits, he has embraced Jews and Muslims, despite protests by hardliners from both faiths.
Earlier this year, despite vociferous objections from Orthodox Christians, the Pope visited Greece.
The Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox churches have been in schism since Rome excommunicated the East in 1054.
In Athens, the Pope made the first apology to the Orthodox world for Catholic sins of the past, saying:
"For the occasions past and present, when sons and daughters of the Catholic Church have sinned by action or omission against their Orthodox brothers and sisters, may the Lord grant us the forgiveness we beg of him."
Moscow's voice
The Orthodox response, though, was lukewarm.
The day after the Pope's statement, the head of the Greek Orthodox Church, Archbishop Christodoulos of Athens, hightailed it to Moscow to confer with Patriarch Alexy II, the head of the Russian Orthodox Church.
The Pope's trips abroad have caused controversy
Patriarch Alexy has refused to consider a papal visit to Moscow, and has been highly critical of the visit to Ukraine.
The two Orthodox leaders issued a joint statement, criticising Pope John Paul for not seeking the permission of Ukraine's main Orthodox Church - which is in communion with Moscow - before planning to visit Ukraine.
And they remained decidedly sceptical about the sincerity of the Pope's apology to Orthodoxy for past wrongs.
Ukrainian rifts
The majority of Ukraine's roughly 50 million population are nominally Orthodox, and most of them adhere to the line of the Moscow Patriarchate.
But there is also a significant minority, mainly in the west of the country, of five million Eastern-rite Catholics, who represent the main reason for the papal visit.
Although the form of their worship is akin to Orthodoxy, and they allow married clergy, they recognise the authority of the Pope.
There are also around 150,000 to 300,000 Latin-rite Catholics.
The Orthodox Church was unconvinced by the Pope's apology
One of the bitterest disputes between the Orthodox Church and the Eastern-rite Catholics, concerns church property.
In 1946, the Soviet authorities outlawed the Eastern-rite Catholics, and gave all of their property over to the Orthodox Church.
But after the Catholics were granted legal recognition again, in 1989, during the era of reforms inspired by the then Soviet leader, Mikhail Gorbachev, a battle has ensued over the property.
The peculiar set-up, whereby the Ukrainian Orthodox Church is an independent church, but in communion with the Moscow Patriarchate, means that the louder protests over the Pope's visit to Ukraine have come from Moscow.
Geopolitics
This reflects wider political concerns.
The Kremlin is opposed to Ukraine's attempts to become more closely integrated with the West.
Moscow insists that Kiev should look eastwards, to its Slav Russian brothers for its true friends.
The Slav question adds a deeper element to the papal visit to Ukraine; because, as a Pole, John Paul is a brother Slav.
But, for Orthodox Slav Christians, their Catholic Polish brothers represent members of a divided family - with all of the tensions and bitterness such family rows produce.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:16.
Apolyton Time is 00:16. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
28-12-2004 18:35
I don't think you guys are right on everything, far from it, but you know things that I don't, things that are certainly not broadly known in the West. And it excites my curiosity.
|