Rip wrote:Well along with the new sanctions I noticed this.
U.S. President Barack Obama on Thursday announced more sanctions on people and one bank in response to Russia's annexation moves, as well as a new executive order that authorizes possible further sanctions on what he called "key sectors" of the Russian economy.
SO you guys can quit asking me if that would be legal. It's an executive order that as we all know throws legality out the window. I would imagine we can sanction/seize pretty much whatever we like now.
I'm not sure how you get that we can legally seize any assets we want. It mentions sanctions against sectors of the Russian economy but that's totally different from seizing the assets of private individuals and Russian companies that have nothing to do with the Crimean annexation.
I know the US can target sanctions at certain individuals and govt entities and govt related companies/banks. It's not clear to me that we can seize the assets of an individual Russian citizen or a Russian company with no links to the issue. If you can show me that, fine. But so far you've still shown nothing.
Every Russian citizen/company that has substantial assets we could get to is associated with the Russian government. If they weren't they wouldn't have those assets for very long. There is no such thing as a wealthy Russian person/company that is anti-Russian government.
Isgrimnur wrote:Seeing as the executive order cite the legal justification on which they are based, anyone that could prove standing should have plenty of justification to challenge said orders in court.
Isgrimnur wrote:Seeing as the executive order cite the legal justification on which they are based, anyone that could prove standing should have plenty of justification to challenge said orders in court.
Federal courts have plenty of jurisdiction. The DC Court of Appeals invalidated 12954, and Truman's fight over nationalizing the steel industry started in the DC District Court.
Isgrimnur wrote:Federal courts have plenty of jurisdiction. The DC Court of Appeals invalidated 12954, and Truman's fight over nationalizing the steel industry started in the DC District Court.
Still ended at SCOTUS, like I said the only court that would have any luck rejecting an executive order is SCOTUS. It could start somewhere else but is certain to end up at SCOTUS and there is no way in hell they override this one.
Rip wrote:
No I am saying that in practice an executive order is above the law and makes any discussion about whether actions it takes are legal or not mute.
Really? No one is going to call him on it? And you call yourselves language nazis? I can hear Fret's forehead veins popping from here.
And I don't want to hear about how the discussion was muted so it makes perfect sense.
Rip wrote:Well along with the new sanctions I noticed this.
U.S. President Barack Obama on Thursday announced more sanctions on people and one bank in response to Russia's annexation moves, as well as a new executive order that authorizes possible further sanctions on what he called "key sectors" of the Russian economy.
SO you guys can quit asking me if that would be legal. It's an executive order that as we all know throws legality out the window. I would imagine we can sanction/seize pretty much whatever we like now.
I'm not sure how you get that we can legally seize any assets we want. It mentions sanctions against sectors of the Russian economy but that's totally different from seizing the assets of private individuals and Russian companies that have nothing to do with the Crimean annexation.
I know the US can target sanctions at certain individuals and govt entities and govt related companies/banks. It's not clear to me that we can seize the assets of an individual Russian citizen or a Russian company with no links to the issue. If you can show me that, fine. But so far you've still shown nothing.
Every Russian citizen/company that has substantial assets we could get to is associated with the Russian government. If they weren't they wouldn't have those assets for very long. There is no such thing as a wealthy Russian person/company that is anti-Russian government.
It's not a matter of being pro or anti Russian govt. It is a matter of having a direct connection to the govt and what it is doing. Look, quit just making up stuff that you don't know what are talking about. If you really think the US govt can seize the assets of any Russian citizen or company, then prove it. Find us some relevant links that actually show the US govt can do this. Up to now, all you've done is keep giving your opinion, which not worth a pile of snot (any more than mine is). I'm kind of getting tired of the go around where you just keep asserting the same thing wiithout any proof, as if I should just take your word.
Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions. – G.K. Chesterton
Isgrimnur wrote:Federal courts have plenty of jurisdiction. The DC Court of Appeals invalidated 12954, and Truman's fight over nationalizing the steel industry started in the DC District Court.
Still ended at SCOTUS, like I said the only court that would have any luck rejecting an executive order is SCOTUS.
No, that's not what you said. You said the only court that could challenge an executive order is SCOTUS which is clearly not true. Either you need to be more precise in your language or quite changing your argument when you've been proven wrong.
Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions. – G.K. Chesterton
President Obama's National Defense Resources Preparedness Executive Order of March 16 does to the country as a whole what the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act did to the Constitution in particular -- completely eviscerates any due process or judicial oversight for any action by the Government deemed in the interest of "national security." Like the NDAA, the new Executive Order puts the government completely above the law, which, in a democracy, is never supposed to happen. The United States is essentially now under martial law without the exigencies of a national emergency.
Since executive orders have been challenged in court before, I don't think this proves anything. You'd have to have this go through the courts to see if it would stand. It's just words on paper right now.
Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions. – G.K. Chesterton
President Obama's National Defense Resources Preparedness Executive Order of March 16 does to the country as a whole what the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act did to the Constitution in particular -- completely eviscerates any due process or judicial oversight for any action by the Government deemed in the interest of "national security." Like the NDAA, the new Executive Order puts the government completely above the law, which, in a democracy, is never supposed to happen. The United States is essentially now under martial law without the exigencies of a national emergency.
Since executive orders have been challenged in court before, I don't think this proves anything. You'd have to have this go through the courts to see if it would stand. It's just words on paper right now.
I don't think you get it, Grif. The United States is now under MARTIAL LAW. Did you see who wrote that Huffington Post story? The president of WISDOM UNIVERSITY. Basically the world's wisest person, by definition.
Doesn't much matter, I haven't heard anyone suggesting they intend to challenge the executive order.
Also let me give a partial atta boy to Obama for at least getting some action going. Still not enough, but it is a start.
Oh, and FU Putin for making Mary Landrieu one of the ones you sanction. We have her ass on the ropes and you go and give her a badge of honor. Asshole!
Doesn't much matter, I haven't heard anyone suggesting they intend to challenge the executive order.
Also let me give a partial atta boy to Obama for at least getting some action going. Still not enough, but it is a start.
Oh, and FU Putin for making Mary Landrieu one of the ones you sanction. We have her ass on the ropes and you go and give her a badge of honor. Asshole!
President Obama's National Defense Resources Preparedness Executive Order of March 16 does to the country as a whole what the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act did to the Constitution in particular -- completely eviscerates any due process or judicial oversight for any action by the Government deemed in the interest of "national security." Like the NDAA, the new Executive Order puts the government completely above the law, which, in a democracy, is never supposed to happen. The United States is essentially now under martial law without the exigencies of a national emergency.
Since executive orders have been challenged in court before, I don't think this proves anything. You'd have to have this go through the courts to see if it would stand. It's just words on paper right now.
I don't think you get it, Grif. The United States is now under MARTIAL LAW. Did you see who wrote that Huffington Post story? The president of WISDOM UNIVERSITY. Basically the world's wisest person, by definition.
MARTIAL LAW.
WISDOM.
Indeed! He is certainly drinking deep of the fountain of wisdom. By god, encouraging an ever ongoing analysis of supply chain needs for national defense. THE MONSTER!!!!!!!!
So are we taking positions on whether Russia will invade Ukraine to grab some more or even Moldova which I hadn't even thought they would go after yet, but some in NATO seem to be concerned about?
NATO's top military commander expressed concern Sunday about the buildup of Russian forces on Ukraine's border, as Moscow's forces consolidated their control of Crimea over the weekend.
Supreme Allied Commander Europe Gen. Philip Breedlove said Russia had a large force on Ukraine's eastern border and that he was worried it could pose a threat to Moldova's separatist Trans-Dniester region.
"The (Russian) force that is at the Ukrainian border now to the east is very, very sizable and very, very ready," Breedlove, a U.S. Air Force general, said.
"There is absolutely sufficient force postured on the eastern border of Ukraine to run to Trans-Dniester if the decision was made to do that, and that is very worrisome."
I think he will go after something, no reason not to at this point.
He will not grab Trans-Dneister unless he can also secure a land corridor to it through a part of Ukraine that would not take kindly to that. Which he might go for, I don't know. My sketchy knowledge of T-D came from this article.
My hunch still says that Putin will stop with Crimea, but I wouldn't lay money on it.
Interim Ukrainian President Oleksandr Turchynov ordered the withdrawal of armed forces from Crimea Monday, citing Russian threats to the lives of military staff and their families.
Russian troops have seized most of Ukraine's bases in the peninsula, including a naval base at Feodosia on Monday.
...
On Saturday, six Russian special forces armored personnel carriers broke through the gates of Belbek air base, firing warning shots into the air. In separate incidents, pro-Russian self-defense forces stormed the Novofederoskoe military base as well as a Ukrainian ship, the Slavutych.
President Barack Obama and other world leaders have decided to end Russia's role in the group of leading industrialized nations, the White House said Monday.
The move to suspend Russia's membership in the G8 is the latest direct response from major countries allied against Russia's annexation of Crimea.
After this winter, Rip is ready to return to a Cold War.
"If the facts don't fit the theory, change the facts." - Albert Einstein "I don't stand by anything." - Trump “Bad men need nothing more to compass their ends, than that good men should look on and do nothing.” - John Stuart Mill, Inaugural Address Delivered to the University of St Andrews, 2/1/1867 “It is the impractical things in this tumultuous hell-scape of a world that matter most. A book, a name, chicken soup. They help us remember that, even in our darkest hour, life is still to be savored.” - Poe, Altered Carbon
After dealing with unclear directions, the Ukranian Defense Minister has resigned:
Lawmakers in Ukraine accepted the resignation of the defense minister Tuesday as thousands of troops began withdrawing from the Crimean Peninsula, now controlled by Russia.
In an address to parliament, Igor Tenyukh said he rejected criticism that he had failed to issue clear instructions to troops, but that he reserved the right to step down. Lawmakers initially refused his resignation, but later accepted it. A majority then voted to appoint Col. Gen. Mikhail Kovalyov as his replacement.
Authorities in Ukraine have come under criticism for their often-hesitant reaction to Russia's annexation of Crimea, which was formalized following a hastily organized referendum this month.
Oh, and you know that cut-rate deal the Ukraine has been getting for gas?
Officials in Moscow, meanwhile, are warning Kiev that the country's new government may have to pay more for Russian gas, which is the main part of Ukraine's energy mix.
President Vladimir Putin's spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on Tuesday that the gas discount was linked to the lease deal for the Russian Black Sea fleet's presence in Crimea. Now that Crimea is part of Russia and Moscow does not have to pay for the lease, Russia sees "no reason for the discount," Peskov said, quoted by Russian news agencies.
But he added that it is up to gas company Gazprom to set the price for Ukraine.
Have to give President Obama props again, as far as talking goes that was a pretty damn good speech in Brussels today. Probably the best I have seen him make.
Was thinking today, which is of course dangerous. I was wondering how big is the Russian vodka market in the US. My google-fu is weak and did not discover the answer, but it did bring up many hits from people talking about boycotting Russian vodka... for Russia's treatment of homosexuals before the Olympics. There is little to nothing about people boycotting Russian products now.
So why can people muster themselves to boycott Russian vodka to stand up for gay rights but not do so for, well, human rights?
A consumer boycott of Russian vodka would be symbolic at best, just a tiny fraction of a point of GDP. (Last year's "Boycott Stoli" movement eventually stumbled over the discovery that Stolichnaya is actually produced in Latvia.)
More serious pressure will require Europe to revise its energy policy, but we know how hard that is.
I was wondering what Russian-produced products I actually buy, and I realized that 777 (Rise of Flight, IL-2 Battle of Stalingrad) and Eagle Dynamics (DCS A-10C) are both Russian companies. Will tensions with Russia mean the end of great flight sims?
Holman wrote:A consumer boycott of Russian vodka would be symbolic at best, just a tiny fraction of a point of GDP.
Right. The point I'm making is about the enthusiasm to boycott Russian products because of its anti-gay stance and the seeming lack of enthusiasm over its anti-neighbor stance.
Defiant wrote:Controversial, I know, but some of us gays like to consider ourselves human.
Shrug. Who knows what grabs the public imagination. There are a billion worthy causes at any particular moment. There are thousands of human rights violations happening every day. You would think given the media attention Crimea would be prominent in peoples' minds, but I don't understand mass psychology.
It might be as simple as it being easier to relate to your neighbour/co-worker/friend who's gay than to strangers in a far away land being manhandled by their Russian neighbours.
We all have close proximity to marriages and what it entails. I suspect not many (percentage-wise) have a lot of experience with being annexed by their neighbour or what that involves.
cheeba wrote:
Right. The point I'm making is about the enthusiasm to boycott Russian products because of its anti-gay stance and the seeming lack of enthusiasm over its anti-neighbor stance.
Keep in mind Russia's anti-gay stance has been around for a long long time and even the recent legal bans have a legislative history that goes back years, and then it was highlighted by the Olympics, while Crimea goes back weeks or months.
And there have been videos and photos of graphic violence against Russian gays, while, AFAIK, there's been very little violence in Crimea. As yet, anyway. (I would hope that maybe Russia would avoid any egregious human rights violations in Crimea because the world is watching, or that those Crimeans that would be targets of those violations have the freedom to leave Crimea to go to western Ukraine. But we'll see.)
I think if I were the former Ukranian defense minister, I'd be listening very closely to rumblings in the new government about bringing me up on charges and making plans to find a new country in which to hang my hat.
In a phone conversation with German Chancellor Angela Merkel on Monday, Russian President Vladmir Putin said he had ordered a partial withdrawal of Russian troops from his country's border area with Ukraine, according to Merkel's office.
A Kremlin press release about the call did not mention a withdrawal, but said Putin and Merkel discussed Ukraine, including "possibilities for international assistance to restore stability."
.