Ukrainian Government Acknowledges that Some of Its Leaders Are Nazis

a reply to: YouPeople

I don't have an obsession - you are the one called it BS and asked for a source for it - I gave the source - nothing more or less.

You were wrong.

Again.

No they didn't your wrong Russian deal fell through

I didn't write that -please get your attributions right.

However your contention that the deal didn't "fall through" because the revolution happened is patent nonsense - "fell through" doesnt' say anything about why it failed - and the deposition of Yanukovych and subsequent collapse of the agreement certainly looks like "falling through" in the normal English sense of the phrase to me.

a reply to: YouPeople

I don't see anything that says that the Russian deal "fell through". It didn't. It was put into effect up until the coup happened.

But the deal could not be legally implemented until it was ratified; the opposition prevented that, therefore the implementation was illegal and the coup was on the part of Yanukovych.

a reply to: Aloysius the Gaul

I don't have an obsession - you are the one called it BS and asked for a source for it - I gave the source - nothing more or less.

Are you trying to confuse things on purpose? I didn't ask for a source, I asked dragonridr to back up his claim that the deal fell through. Nothing more nothing less.

Is it very confusing to you?

I didn't write that -please get your attributions right.

That is the part of the post that you just linked, that I was calling BS.

Did I say you wrote it?

However your contention that the deal didn't "fall through" because the revolution happened is patent nonsense -

Not it is not. I said the deal went into, and was in, effect up until the coup happened. Before that Russia made two payments of the total 15 billion. Are saying this did not happen?

"fell through" doesnt' say anything about why it failed - and the deposition of Yanukovych and subsequent collapse of the agreement certainly looks like "falling through" in the normal English sense of the phrase to me.

The claim was that it fell through because it did not get ratified, at least that was what I was conteting in the post he responded to.


All in all you weren't able to get any aspect right. Maybe you should stop talking for other people if you have such big problems with determining the proper context of a reply.

a reply to: YouPeople

Go and have a look at your own post.

a reply to: DJW001

But the deal could not be legally implemented until it was ratified; the opposition prevented that, therefore the implementation was illegal

Lol, you guys.....

Where does it say the deal was not ratified? What was said is that the opposition blocked parliament in an attempt to DEFER the ratification.

It was ratified and payments were made. Are you going to contest this?

And how legal is the action of trying to stop a legitimate government, which has the majority, from ratifying the decision they made, by the minority who is not in the government, and legally doesn't have a say in it?

originally posted by: YouPeople
a reply to: dragonridr


"
No they didn't your wrong Russian deal fell through in fact it was one of the major causes of maiden. Several saw Russians offer as a trap. “I know of only one place where you can find free cheese – and that’s in a mouse-trap,” said Arseniy Yatsenyuk."


Complete BS. Back up your claim.

Can't do nested quotes so the original is in quote marks.

The last thing in the quote is Yatesenyuks comment and then you said it is BS. In common English the closest comment is the one being replied to.

If you meant otherwise then you should have formatted your reply differently.

originally posted by: YouPeople
a reply to: DJW001


Where does it say the deal was not ratified? What was said is that the opposition blocked parliament in an attempt to DEFER the ratification.

It was ratified and payments were made. Are you going to contest this?

Payments were certainly made. When was it ratified?

a reply to: Aloysius the Gaul

I just did, and opposite to your post, it was completely on point. Sounds like you don't have much to add to it.

Aloysius buddy.

Btw, how nice that the whole team could join tonight.

Remember what I said before? On any given Sunday.

Now do a little dance for me.

a reply to: YouPeople
I have looked at your last several posts and see no source given for ratification.

a reply to: Aloysius the Gaul

If you meant otherwise then you should have formatted your reply differently.

Had you been able to read proper context from the previous discussion you would have understood what I was responding to. I also wasn't talking to you....

a reply to: Aloysius the Gaul

I see no source saying it wasnt ratified.

originally posted by: Aloysius the Gaul

originally posted by: YouPeople
a reply to: DJW001


Where does it say the deal was not ratified? What was said is that the opposition blocked parliament in an attempt to DEFER the ratification.

It was ratified and payments were made. Are you going to contest this?

Payments were certainly made. When was it ratified?

Russia didn't buy the bonds. Are you I sane that was part of the bail out package in 2014 from the imf. See Russia offered to buy the bonds of the 15 billion coming due in 2014. But they didn't why by the time the Victor ran it was pointless. Instead Russia demanded repayment of a 3 billion dollar loan from gazprom. That's not exactly a bail out would you say?

As far as the rada they never voted on a trade deal over the 15 billion because it was still I def negotiation and later went from Russia buying bonds to a group of concessions they were willing to make including prolonging that loan gasp rom made to ukraine.

But let's make this simple please show me where Russia picked up any of the 15 billion in bonds that were maturing. By the way same thing in 2015 another 15 billion in bonds maturing and Ukraine threatened default.

a reply to: YouPeople

You said it was ratified - I asked you for the source of that statement. If you do not have a source then why not just say so.

The only information I do know is that the opposition parties in the Duma blocked it on

Dragonrider - according to the wiki article on the agreement Russia did buy $3 billion in Ukrainian Eurobonds as per this news report as a source.

a reply to: YouPeople

It is Monday morning.

originally posted by: Aloysius the Gaul
a reply to: YouPeople

It is Monday morning.

The euro bonds were purchased as part of the imf loan. People forget Russia is part of the imf. It was Ukrainian bonds they had planned to purchase they didn't.

a reply to: dragonridr

Not that I can see from the links above - they refer to Russia buying "the first tranche" of Ukrainian Eurobonds, and there is reference to a $2 billion second tranche that was never paid.

Ukraine got the first $3 billion tranche and is waiting for $2 billion more “in the nearest future,” Serhiy Arbuzov, who replaced Azarov as acting premier and will lead the cabinet until Yanukovych names a new one, told a government meeting.

Ukraine needs the funds to repay more than $1 billion to the International Monetary Fund by Feb. 12, the Washington-based lender’s data show.

There was talk of a $4 billion loan from the IMF in December 2013 - about the same time.......but nothing I can see about Russia issuing that loan, and nothing in the IMF news archive about a loan being made.

all the info I can see points to $3 billion being the first part of the $15 billion - happy to be shown otherwise, but you do need sources

originally posted by: Aloysius the Gaul
a reply to: dragonridr

Not that I can see from the links above - they refer to Russia buying "the first tranche" of Ukrainian Eurobonds, and there is reference to a $2 billion second tranche that was never paid.

Ukraine got the first $3 billion tranche and is waiting for $2 billion more “in the nearest future,” Serhiy Arbuzov, who replaced Azarov as acting premier and will lead the cabinet until Yanukovych names a new one, told a government meeting.

Ukraine needs the funds to repay more than $1 billion to the International Monetary Fund by Feb. 12, the Washington-based lender’s data show.

There was talk of a $4 billion loan from the IMF in December 2013 - about the same time.......but nothing I can see about Russia issuing that loan, and nothing in the IMF news archive about a loan being made.

all the info I can see points to $3 billion being the first part of the $15 billion - happy to be shown otherwise, but you do need sources

I'll check perhaps I misread it. I know Russia at the time was trying to push through the imfloan so they could get the 3 billion owed gazprom.

a reply to: Aloysius the Gaul

You said it was ratified

The initial claim was made by one of your team members, saying it didn't get ratified. I asked for the source of that statement. If you do not have a source then why not just say so.

Btw, whoever it was, thanks for the support!