5 ms·

> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_Euromaidan https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_Euromaidan : After a small group of protesters attempte

> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_Euromaidan https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_Euromaidan : After a small group of protesters attempted to storm the Government Building, police used tear gas to disperse them. Protesters also used tear gas and some fire crackers (according to police protesters were first to use them). According to the General Prosecutor's Office, more than 400 people were injured from 24 November to 13 December, including 200 policemen and 18 students. The US proclaimed this kind of events on their territory as "January 6 attempted coup", and people involved are now being prosecuted by the US authorities. > but that doesn't even come close to a Russian puppet president they had in the past The so-called puppet president didn't break state laws when he suspended preparations for signing of the Association Agreement, yet the coup happened anyways. His prior election was also recognized and endorsed as being fair and an accurate reflection of voters' intentions by all international agencies observing the election including the OSCE and PACE [1], yet he was ousted out of the country by the armed mob who didn't care about legitimacy of their actions. Meanwhile the US Assistant Secretary of State and the US Ambassador to Ukraine were deciding who would take what roles in the new Ukrainian government. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_Ukrainian_presidential_election#Results https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_Ukrainian_presidential_el...

hbrn 4y ago
> The US proclaimed this kind of events on their territory as "January 6 attempted coup", and people involved are now being prosecuted by the US authorities. Yep. And if democrats were to provision laws like that in response: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-protest_laws_in_Ukraine#Provisions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-protest_laws_in_Ukraine#P... you would not be describing this coup as "attempted" today. > The so-called puppet president didn't break state laws Not sure why that's relevant. As you said it yourself, he was ousted by protesters, not by Supreme Court. Breaking state laws is not the only reason for people to be upset.
- ghostwriter 4y ago
  > Breaking state laws is not the only reason for people to be upset. Proven violation of state laws is a mandatory pre-requisite for a legitimate president expulsion from his office, "people get upset" isn't the same as the opportunistic power grab where democratic process wasn't held and due process wasn't respected. The US representatives were involved in the process to a degree, and yet you claim that it was the pro-russian puppet president at fault.
  - hbrn 4y ago
    People got upset and president fled from the country. How would you suggest it should be handled? I think Ukraine handled it almost perfectly: A temporary government was formed. Two democratic elections were held since. Each resulted in a new president being elected. You could echo Russian talking points and call it undemocratic coup. But Ukraine undeniably returned back to stable democracy within a year. For a corrupt ex-soviet country, that's pretty damn impressive.
    - yucky 4y ago
      The President fled when his life was threatened after the coup. Him fleeing might be cowardly but it doesn't make it not a coup. And the Ukraine Constitution was then changed, so elections after that aren't considered legitimate by everyone as a result. I mean we consider it legit because now our guys are running things.
      - hbrn 4y ago
        > And the Ukraine Constitution was then changed, so elections after that aren't considered legitimate by everyone as a result So unlawfully changing the constitution voids the election results? Because that's exactly what the pro-russian president did, reverting changes that turned Ukraine into premier-presidential system, gaining way more power than he used to have. Imagine this: a president gets elected and immediately discovers that changes that stripped presidents of power 6 years ago (!) were unconstitutional. What a lucky coincidence. You can read about it here: https://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/?pdf=CDL-AD(2010)044-e https://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/?pdf=CDL-AD(20... And the changes you are talking about didn't "change" the constitution, they reverted it back to previous commit. But for the sake of the argument we can skip the details. Let's say you're right, the constitution was changed, and from now on elections are illegitimate. Are you suggesting to treat them illegitimate forever? Is there a process to make them lawful again? Because if there is, my bet is that Ukraine has followed it: they reverted constitution back to the most stable commit, and held two elections afterwards. Those elections were recognized by everyone in the world, including Russia. Do you have a better process in mind?

hbrn 4y ago

> The US proclaimed this kind of events on their territory as "January 6 attempted coup", and people involved are now being prosecuted by the US authorities. Yep. And if democrats were to provision laws like that in response: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-protest_laws_in_Ukraine#Provisions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-protest_laws_in_Ukraine#P... you would not be describing this coup as "attempted" today. > The so-called puppet president didn't break state laws Not sure why that's relevant. As you said it yourself, he was ousted by protesters, not by Supreme Court. Breaking state laws is not the only reason for people to be upset.

ghostwriter 4y ago
> Breaking state laws is not the only reason for people to be upset. Proven violation of state laws is a mandatory pre-requisite for a legitimate president expulsion from his office, "people get upset" isn't the same as the opportunistic power grab where democratic process wasn't held and due process wasn't respected. The US representatives were involved in the process to a degree, and yet you claim that it was the pro-russian puppet president at fault.
- hbrn 4y ago
  People got upset and president fled from the country. How would you suggest it should be handled? I think Ukraine handled it almost perfectly: A temporary government was formed. Two democratic elections were held since. Each resulted in a new president being elected. You could echo Russian talking points and call it undemocratic coup. But Ukraine undeniably returned back to stable democracy within a year. For a corrupt ex-soviet country, that's pretty damn impressive.
  - yucky 4y ago
    The President fled when his life was threatened after the coup. Him fleeing might be cowardly but it doesn't make it not a coup. And the Ukraine Constitution was then changed, so elections after that aren't considered legitimate by everyone as a result. I mean we consider it legit because now our guys are running things.
    - hbrn 4y ago
      > And the Ukraine Constitution was then changed, so elections after that aren't considered legitimate by everyone as a result So unlawfully changing the constitution voids the election results? Because that's exactly what the pro-russian president did, reverting changes that turned Ukraine into premier-presidential system, gaining way more power than he used to have. Imagine this: a president gets elected and immediately discovers that changes that stripped presidents of power 6 years ago (!) were unconstitutional. What a lucky coincidence. You can read about it here: https://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/?pdf=CDL-AD(2010)044-e https://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/?pdf=CDL-AD(20... And the changes you are talking about didn't "change" the constitution, they reverted it back to previous commit. But for the sake of the argument we can skip the details. Let's say you're right, the constitution was changed, and from now on elections are illegitimate. Are you suggesting to treat them illegitimate forever? Is there a process to make them lawful again? Because if there is, my bet is that Ukraine has followed it: they reverted constitution back to the most stable commit, and held two elections afterwards. Those elections were recognized by everyone in the world, including Russia. Do you have a better process in mind?