sutinku  kazkokie pazadai nieko nereiskia. 
Kazkada kazkoks Chrusciovas leido Kryma priskirt Ukraina. Kryma , kuris buvo Rusijos jau daugiau nei simta metu!  Ar klause kas krymieciu? Kita vertus: koks skirtumas  darnioje seimoje, kurio sutuoktinio VMI deklaracijoje iforminamas vyro turetas deimantas? Bedos prasideda, kai isiskiriant pamirstama, kas buvo to deimanto savininkas ir kodel jis buvo irasytas zmonos deklaracijoje.
Primenu-kai Krymas perejo Ukrainos zinion, tenais gyvenantiems zmonems tai  nieko daug nepakeite. Tie patys pasai, galimybe naudot rusu kalba, nebuvo sienu. Viskas pasikeite, kai sutuoktiniai issiskyre :) 


"RaR" <RaR@lt.lt> schrieb im Newsbeitrag news:lhhfh8$b4r$1@trimpas.omnitel.net...
> Tai aišku kad priklausė. O ką tie kažkokie pažadai reiškia - kad koks 
> nors Klintonas kažką leptelėjo kokiam nors Jelcinui? Juk net tokios 
> sutarties dėl to nestojimo nebuvo, o ir, manau, negalėjo būti, nes jokia 
> trečia šalis negali uždrausti kitoms sudaryti kažkokias joms naudingas 
> sutartis. O Rytų Europos šalių įstojimas į NATO atitiko tiek JAV, tiek 
> tų šalių interesus, tiek ir vakarietiškos demokratijos plitimo pasaulyje 
> idealus. Neabejoju, kad tai atitiko ir visų NATO senbuvių interesus, nes 
> visada saugiau laikyti neprognozuojamą žvėrį toliau nuo savęs. Ir, 
> manau, buvo padaryta klaida atidėjus Gruzijos bei Ukrainos stojimo į 
> NATO procesą (beje, pagrinde tos pačios Vokietijos pastangomis) - rusai 
> iš karto pradėjo ten lįsti, nes sumažėjo tikimybė kad gaus per galvą. 
> Šiaip jau Vokietijos reiškimasis tarptautinėje arenoje paprastai tik 
> sukeldavo saugumo problemų, o ne jas išspręsdavo, tad galėtų jie dar 
> kurį laiką aktyviai nesireikšti, kad ir su savo sugalvota "realpolitik", 
> t.y. iš esmės makiaveliška politika be jokių pamatinių vertybių ir principų.
> 
> 
> 
> 2014.04.02 17:17, Gintas rašė:
>> Tik nesakyk, kad Lietuvos istojimas i NATO nepriklause nuo JAV poziurio i si reikala. O jei priklause, tai JAV galejo vykdyti savo pazada ir nepritarti Lietuvos stojimui i NATO. Galejome istinti is to noro, bet butume neistoje, jei JAV butu nesutikusi :)  Suma sumarum-JAV netesejo duoto pazado del NATO pletimosi i rytus.
>>
>> "RaR" <RaR@lt.lt> schrieb im Newsbeitrag news:lhh51s$5v4$1@trimpas.omnitel.net...
>>> Tipiškas didelės valstybės atstovo mąstymas, neturinčio esminių vertybių
>>> ir nelabai suprantančio vykstančių procesų. Visko net neperskaičiau, bet
>>> tokie "pragmatiškų vakariečių", beje, dažniausiai vokiečių, pamąstymai
>>> jau daugybę kartų girdėti. Keletas momentų.
>>>
>>> Krymo atvejo lyginimas su Kosovu, Libija ar Sirija yra visiškai ne
>>> vietoje. Kosove JAV įsikišo labai nenoriai, kai vyko albanų genocidas ir
>>> visi trimitavo kad reikia kažką daryti, bet nebuvo kam. Libijoje irgi
>>> įsikišo tik tada, kai žudynės vyko pilnu tempu. Sirijoje neįsikišo net
>>> tada, kai buvo peržengta iš anksto nubrėžta raudona linija - panaudotas
>>> cheminis ginklas. Ir apskritai sakyti, kad  JAV siekė nuversti sau
>>> neparankius režimus galima tik Afganistano ir antrojo Irako karo atveju,
>>> bet tuomet buvo baisus įsiutis dėl 9/11 ir Bušas turėjo kažkam smogti -
>>> nesvarbu kam. Visais gi arabų pavasario atvejais JAV tiesiog palaikė
>>> demokratines permainas, nesvarbu, kad daugumoje atveju ten buvo JAV
>>> palankūs diktatoriški režimai ir grasino ateiti ne tokie palankūs,
>>> musulmoniški, ypač taip buvo Egipto atveju.
>>> Be to JAV nieko neaneksavo ir nesiruošia aneksuoti, nebent pabando
>>> sukurti demokratiją, bet aišku, nepriaugusiose iki to visuomenėse tai be
>>> galo nedėkingas užsiėmimas - Artimuosiuose Rytuose daug sunkiau nei
>>> Japonijoje ar Pietų Korėjoje. Putinas gi be jokių skrupulų, visiškai
>>> ciniškai užgrobė ir aneksavo kitos šalies teritoriją, visiškai be jokio
>>> preteksto.
>>>
>>> Dėl NATO plėtimosi. Laimei, kad vokiečiai to nesprendžia, nes daugelio
>>> tokių "pragmatikų" požiūriu mes iki šiol turėtume tupėti SSSR idant
>>> negriautume vakarams palankaus Gorbačiovo režimo. O jeigu šiuo metu
>>> nebūtume NATO, mus, tikriausiai, jau būtų ištikęs Krymo likimas. Tie
>>> "pragmatikai" niekaip negali suprasti, kad kai kurie procesai tiesiog
>>> vyksta šalių viduje nepriklausomai nuo galingųjų šalių norų ir
>>> susitarimų - jeigu tauta nori eiti tam tikru keliu, ji juo ir eina
>>> atsiradus menkiausiai progai, nepaisant pasaulio galingųjų
>>> išskaičiavimų. Mes norėjome nepriklausomybės, ir ją paskelbėme bei
>>> išsikovojome nepaisant visų "pragmatikų" raginimų to nedaryti,
>>> galiausiai tas pats buvo ir su stojimu į NATO. Ukrainiečiai nebegalėjo
>>> pakęsti Janukovičiaus režimo ir jį nuvertė nepaisant kažkokių ten
>>> pozicijų - opozicijų susitarimų.
>>>
>>> O Putinui reikia ne nuolaidžiauti, o jį spausti - mažos pergalės kelia
>>> jo populiarumą, o tegu ir maži pralaimėjimai galėtų padėti atsikvošėti
>>> rusų tautai ir privesti iki režimo žlugimo. Mano nuomonė aiški jau nuo
>>> pat Putino pasirodymo didžiojoje politikoje - tai baisus žmogus, ir kuo
>>> jis įgis daugiau galios, tuo daugiau problemų gali pridaryti pasauliui.
>>> Čia tas vokiečių politikierius galėtų prisiminti 1938 m. ir Čemberleną,
>>> kuris, mojuodamas sutartimi su Hitleriu, praktiškai atidavusia šiam
>>> Čekoslovakiją, jautėsi didvyriu, išgelbėjusiu šalį nuo karo, beje,
>>> didelė dalis visuomenės jam tuomet pritarė.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 2014.04.02 02:30, abc rašė:
>>>> Nuobodu skaityti lietuvišką ir rusišką propagandą.
>>>> O ką iš tiesų mano Vakarai?
>>>>
>>>> American Perspective
>>>>
>>>> http://www.institutionalinvestor.com/blogarticle/3315726/Blog/Will-Russia-Go-to-War-Over-Ukraine-Dont-Bet-on-It.html?LS=Twitter
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> German Perspective
>>>>
>>>> "The leader of the opposition, Gregor Gysi, will speak now:
>>>>
>>>> Mr. President, ladies and gentlemen. Putin wants to solve the whole
>>>> crisis in Ukraine militarily. He has not understood that the problems of
>>>> humanity can neither be solved by soldiers, nor by weapons. On the
>>>> contrary. Also Russia’s problems cannot be solved this way. His thinking
>>>> and his actions are wrong and we condemn them explicitly. Yet, it is the
>>>> same thinking that was and is present in the west for Yugoslavia,
>>>> Afghanistan, Iraq and Lybia. System confrontations were replaced by the
>>>> opposing interests of the USA and Russia. The Cold War is over, but such
>>>> opposing interests can lead to very similar traits. The USA want to gain
>>>> more influence and defend existing influence and Russia wants to gain
>>>> more influence and defend existing influence. When talking about Russia,
>>>> I shall only mention Georgia, Syria, Ukraine.
>>>>
>>>> Even when one condemns Putin’s actions, one must also look at how the
>>>> whole confrontation and intensification came to be. And I shall tell it
>>>> to you very clearly: Everything that the NATO and the EU could have done
>>>> wrong, was done wrong.
>>>>
>>>> I begin with Gorbachev in the year 1990. He suggested to form a common
>>>> European house: Dissolving of the NATO and the Warsaw Pact and finding a
>>>> common security with Russia. This is what the NATO denied. They said:
>>>> Dissolving the Warsaw Pact: Yes. The NATO stays… And from the defending
>>>> alliance was made an interventional alliance. The second error: With the
>>>> creation of German unity, the US foreign minister and the German foreign
>>>> minister of the time, Genscher, and other foreign ministers told
>>>> Gorbachev: No eastwards extension of the NATO will take place. This
>>>> promise was broken. There was a radical extension of the NATO towards
>>>> Russia. And the former US foreign minister Robert Gates described the
>>>> rapid inclusion of the East European states into the NATO as a grave
>>>> mistake and the attempt of the West to include Ukraine into the NATO as
>>>> grave provocation - that’s not what I said, this was said by the former
>>>> US foreign minister! Then, third, the decision was made to station
>>>> rockets in Poland and the Czech Republic. The Russian government said:
>>>> This concerns our security interests, we do not want this. The West
>>>> couldn’t care less and it was done anyway. And finally, the NATO gravely
>>>> and repeatedly violated international law in the Yugoslavian war. This
>>>> is meanwhile even confirmed by former German chancellor Schröder. Serbia
>>>> had not attacked another state and there was no decree of the UN
>>>> Security Council. And yet, bombs were dropped, and for the first time
>>>> since 1945 with German involvement. The citizens of Kosovo were allowed
>>>> to decide for the separation from Serbia in a plebiscite.
>>>>
>>>> Back then, I heavily criticised these violations of international law
>>>> and I have told you for the case of Kosovo that a Pandora’s Box is being
>>>> opened. Because if this is allowed in Kosovo, then you must also allow
>>>> it in other regions. You insulted me. You did not take it seriously. And
>>>> you did this because you thought you were such victors of the Cold War
>>>> that all old measures were not applicable to you anymore. I tell you:
>>>> The Basks ask why they can’t have a plebiscite that asks whether they
>>>> want to belong to Spain or not. The Catalans ask why they can’t have a
>>>> plebiscite that asks whether they want to belong to Spain or not. And so
>>>> do the citizens of Crimea. And through violation of international law,
>>>> through habitual law, you can create new international law, you know
>>>> that. Yet, my opinion stands that the detachment of Crimea would be
>>>> violating international law - as was the detachment of Kosovo.
>>>>
>>>> I knew that Putin would refer to Kosovo and that is just what he did.
>>>> And now you, Ms. chancellor, tell me that this situation is totally
>>>> different. [Someone (Ms. Roth?) shouting “It is!”]. Yes, that may be…
>>>> But you disregard that international law violation is international law
>>>> violation. My dear Ms. Roth, why don’t you ask a judge if a theft of
>>>> noble motive is not a theft in comparison to a theft of non-noble
>>>> motive. He will tell you that it stays a theft. That is the problem!
>>>> That is the problem! And Mr. Struck has explained a while ago that the
>>>> Federal Republic of Germany must defend its security at the Hindu Kush.
>>>> Now Mr. Putin explains Russia must defend its security at Crimea.
>>>> Germany, by the way, had no fleet at Hindu Kush and was considerably
>>>> further away. Still I say, both sentences were and are wrong.
>>>>
>>>> Yet, the following holds: When many international law violators blames
>>>> international law violator Russia to violate international law, this is
>>>> not particularly effective and trustworthy. That is the fact we are
>>>> facing. Obama spoke, like you, Ms. chancellor, of the sovereignty and
>>>> territorial integrity of the nations. But, these two principles were
>>>> violated in Serbia, Iraq and Lybia. The West thought it could violate
>>>> international law because the Cold War was over. Chinese and Russian
>>>> interest were heavily underestimated. You did not take Russia with
>>>> Yeltsin, who was often even drunk, serious anymore. But the situation
>>>> changed. Very lately, you now again reference the principles of
>>>> international law that were established in the Cold War. I am very much
>>>> in favour of them being valid again, but then for all! This is the only
>>>> way.
>>>>
>>>> Then there was the tug of war between the EU and Russia with Ukraine in
>>>> the middle. Both thought and acted the same. Barroso, head of the
>>>> European Commission, said EITHER customs union with Russia OR contracts
>>>> with us. He did not say BOTH. Either-or! And Putin said EITHER contracts
>>>> with us OR the EU. Both thought and acted alternatively in the same way.
>>>> It was a gigantic mistake from both sides. No EU foreign minister tried
>>>> to speak to the Russian government while even recognising the rightful
>>>> security interests of Russia. Russia is afraid that behind the EU, the
>>>> NATO will enter Ukraine. It feels more and more surrounded. But everyone
>>>> pulled at Ukraine. The EU and NATO foreign ministers completely ignored
>>>> the history of Ukraine. They never understood the importance of Crimea
>>>> to Russia. And Ukrainian society is deeply divided. Also this was not
>>>> recognised. This deep division already showed in WWII. And it shows
>>>> today. East Ukraine tends to Russia, West Ukraine tends to western
>>>> Europe. At this moment, there is no single Ukrainian political figure
>>>> that could represent both parts of society. That is a sad truth.
>>>>
>>>> And then there is the Council of Europe and the Organisation for
>>>> Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) which you gravely neglected,
>>>> Ms. chancellor, Mr. foreign minister. The funding for these
>>>> organisations was cut more and more in the past because you thought they
>>>> were not important. Yet they are the only organisations in which both
>>>> Russia and Ukraine also take part. Thus we must strengthen these
>>>> organisations and not discuss over Russia’s exclusion. That is
>>>> completely missing the point.
>>>>
>>>> Then we saw a massive intensification on Maidan. Then we saw snipers and
>>>> many deaths. There are various rumours. In such situations, people lie a
>>>> lot. And that is why, in such situations, we propose an international
>>>> investigation committee. We and the Ukrainians have a right to know what
>>>> happened there, who is responsible… And I am happy that you support
>>>> this, Ms. chancellor. On Maidan, there were many democratic forces. But
>>>> also fascists. The west was directly and indirectly involved. And then
>>>> foreign minister Steinmeier, the French and Polish foreign minister
>>>> signed a contract with Janukovych and the opposition. And now you say,
>>>> Mr. foreign minister, Janukovych dissolved the contract through his
>>>> fleeing. That is wrong. The people on Maidan rejected this contract with
>>>> great majority. And you, Mr. foreign minister, also did not advertise
>>>> for this contract on the site. And only after the rejection, Janukovych
>>>> left Kiev. Then, parliament had a meeting, and they voted him out of
>>>> office with 72.88%. Yet, the constitution dictates 75%. Now Mr. Röttgen
>>>> and others say, well, during a revolution you can’t take the
>>>> constitution to the letter, what are a few percentiles more or less?…
>>>> But Putin references this and says there was no constitutional majority
>>>> to vote him out of office, and refers to documents received from
>>>> Janukovych. By the way, during the poll, armed soldiers were present.
>>>> Not very democratic. During the plebiscite in Crimea on Sunday, there
>>>> will also be armed soldiers. Also not very democratic. Interesting is
>>>> also that you, Ms. chancellor, say, that such a plebiscite is forbidden
>>>> by the Ukrainian constitution. So when is the constitution to be upheld,
>>>> and when not? When electing the president out of office it is not and
>>>> for the plebiscite in Crimea it is? You should decide whether you accept
>>>> the constitution as a whole or only in specific cases when you feel like
>>>> it. The latter is the way I have seen and don’t like.
>>>>
>>>> Then a new government was formed. Directly accepted by president Obama,
>>>> also by the EU, also from Germany. Ms. Merkel! This government’s vice
>>>> premier minister, the defence minister, the agricultural minister, the
>>>> environmental minister, the Attorney General… are fascists! The head of
>>>> the national security committee was co-founder of the fascist Swoboda
>>>> party. Fascists have important positions and dominate, for example, the
>>>> security sector. And never have fascists voluntarily given up power once
>>>> they had conquered a part of it. At least Germany should have drawn the
>>>> line here, especially because of our history. When Haider’s FPÖ joined
>>>> the government in Austra, there were even contact barriers! And with the
>>>> fascists in Ukraine we do nothing?! Swoboda has close contacts to the
>>>> NPD and other nazi parties in Europe. The chairman of this party, Olek
>>>> Tjahnybok, has stated the following. I am going to quote him now. You
>>>> need to grasp this, what he has said literally: “Grab your weapons.
>>>> Fight the Russian pigs, the Germans and the Jew swines and others
>>>> pests”. End of quote. I repeat. This man has said “Grab your weapons.
>>>> Fight the Russian pigs, the Germans and the Jew swines and others
>>>> pests”. Attacks on jews and left-wingers are now common and to all this
>>>> you say nothing? You talk with these Swoboda people? I think this is a
>>>> scandal. I have to tell you this clearly.
>>>>
>>>> Now you want, as you said, to impose sanctions, if all else fails. But
>>>> they will not impress Putin. They will only make the situation worse.
>>>> Kissinger, the former US foreign minister, is right. He says sanctions
>>>> do not express a strategy but the lack of a strategy. That also holds
>>>> for the escalating military flights over Poland and the Baltic states:
>>>> What’s the point? Accounts of Janukovych and his supporters are blocked
>>>> because they contain stolen state funds. My question: You did not know
>>>> this? Second question: Why only their accounts? What is with the
>>>> billions of oligarch money to support others, why aren’t you interfering
>>>> there? Why is this going so one-sided?
>>>>
>>>> There is only the way of diplomacy! First: The West must recognise the
>>>> legitimate security interests of Russia on Crimea, which is by the way
>>>> also how US foreign minister Kerry sees it. We must find a status for
>>>> Crimea with which Ukraine, Russia and we can live. We have to guarantee
>>>> Russia that Ukraine will not become a NATO member. Second: The
>>>> perspective of Ukraine lies in a bridge function between the EU and
>>>> Russia. Third: A process of understanding between east and west must be
>>>> initiated in Ukraine, maybe through a federal or confederal status,
>>>> maybe even through two presidents. What I accuse the EU and the NATO of:
>>>> Until today, no relationship to Russia has been searched or found. This
>>>> has to change dramatically. Security in Europe is not possible against
>>>> or without Russia but only with Russia. And if the crisis is overcome
>>>> one day, one advantage could be that international law is finally
>>>> recognised by all sides again. Thank you. "
>>>>
>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pXLy0NGW9sM