White House: Russia has no right to send vehicles, persons into Ukraine.

[another_liberal]

Source: Yahoo News (Reuters)

EDGARTOWN Mass. (Reuters) - The White House said on Friday it could not confirm reports that Ukraine had disabled vehicles in a Russian convoy inside Ukraine and warned Moscow that any intervention into Ukraine without Kiev's permission was unacceptable.

"Even as we work to gather information, we reiterate our concern about repeated Russian and Russian-supported incursions into Ukraine," White House spokeswoman Caitlin Hayden said in a statement.

"Russia has no right to send vehicles, persons, or cargo of any kind into Ukraine, under any pretext, without the government of Ukraine's permission."

Ukraine said its artillery destroyed part of a Russian armored column that entered its territory overnight and said its forces came under shellfire from Russia on Friday in what appeared to be a major military escalation between the ex-Soviet states. Russia's government denied its forces had crossed into Ukraine.


Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/white-house-russia-no-send-vehicles-persons-ukraine-223344836.html

---

Looks like much of the heated reporting coming out of eastern Ukraine yesterday was not much more than wishful thinking on the part of some. At the very least, those reports have incorporated claims which now appear less than certainly true.

[ballyhoo]

1. Everything out of Ukraine is a lie anymore.

[warrant46]

36. warned Moscow

Wow scary

[rhett o rick]

2. WTF? Russia heard that the Ukraine had WMD. H. Clinton-Sachs called them

and gave her blessing for invading Iraq, er I mean Ukraine.

[7962]

4. "Clinton-Sachs" Ha!! Thats a good one.

[rhett o rick]

8. Looks like a marriage to me. Just sayin'. nm

[Rosa Luxemburg]

3. So why is the US in Iraq?

The US (we) invaded Iraq without its permission and are still there bombing.

[atreides1]

5. Simple

The US is on a humanitarian mission...the bombs being dropped are bringing love and peace to ISIL!

[Rosa Luxemburg]

7. I guess we are no better than Bush?

[rhett o rick]

9. Is that a statement or question. Of course we are better than Bush, at least a little. nm

[rhett o rick]

14. Of for criminy sakes. Do we have to explain that again? They had WMD's and were helping terists

of some group (I've lost track), they needed Democracy, and Darth Cheney wanted access to their oil.

[pampango]

6. And Israel has no right to send vehicles, persons into Syria. Kind of stating the obvious. n/t

[rhett o rick]

10. You act as if you've never heard of "American Exceptionalism."

I would like to say that we bomb for peace, but it's more likely that we bomb to make the MIC more profitable.

[pampango]

11. Oh, I've heard of it, but it is no more true than Russian exceptionalism or Israeli exceptionalism.

And I think there are Russian and Israeli politicians who believe in their respective "exceptioanlisms".

[rhett o rick]

12. There can only be one "Exceptionalism" and the biggest bully gets to claim it.

Psst - Watch out for China Exceptionalism.

[elias49]

13. You have to speak English

to be truly exceptional!!

[pampango]

19. Naw. It's a relative concept. Every country gets to thinks it's 'exceptional'. :)

You're right. I'm sure China has its version of exceptionalism, too.

[merrily]

31. The wall of China was built around 200 B.C.E. and can be seen from space.

That's exceptional. Plus, they were probably responsible for pasta.

http://www.theatlantic.com/china/archive/2013/08/the-history-of-noodles-how-a-simple-food-became-a-worldwide-staple/278637/

[former9thward]

15. "White House can not confirm"

BS. We have spy satellites over the area. The WH knows exactly what did or did not happen.

[another_liberal]

16. I wondered about that too . . .

Perhaps it was cloudy?


(sarcasm)

[Codeine]

18. Globalresearch is not a very good site to use

to back up your arguments, to put it mildly.

[McCamy Taylor]

20. Depends. Remember when W. would not let Castro send humanitarian aid to NOLA after Katrina?

[another_liberal]

21. The Republicans wanted to force the poor/black population of New Orleans to flee the city . . .

That's why FEMA trucks loaded with relief supplies were driving back and forth across the country instead of going to New Orleans where they were needed. George W. didn't want any aid, Cuban or otherwise, to reach those people. That's also why Louisiana bulldozed still usable housing projects in the city, so blacks would have nowhere to return to.

Republicans wanted the urban poor to scatter, so as to break the solid Democratic voting block in the Crescent City.

[merrily]

27. Driver of a truck loaded with water was found parked in Massachusetts,

sleeping behind the wheel, awaiting orders as to what to do next. IIRC, he was here a couple of days.

Collecting overtime..

Massachusetts, of course, had plenty of water at the time. People in NOLA were thirsty, though.

Your tax dollars (and humanitarianism) at work.

Homeland Security, my ass.

[another_liberal]

30. Right . . .

I remember hearing NPR stories about truckloads of ice moving all over the country instead of going straight to New Orleans, where that ice could have kept insulin and other medicines from going bad without electricity for refrigeration.

[merrily]

32. I either read or heard about a Republican woman

from elsewhere in the state who said, "We've prayed and prayed about New Orleans--and God sent Katrina."

I guess New Orleans stuck in the craw of a now largely Republican state. I remember the survivors being re-located to Texas. Barbara Bush said they'd be thrilled about that. Don't know about that, but, at that time, their votes were in no danger of helping elect a Democratic Governor or a Democratic U.S. Senator or a Democratic President.

Why there weren't riots after Katrina-Rita is beyond me. Everything that happened, as far as the weather and damage it would cause unless the city was better defended, had been predicted years earlier.

[bemildred]

22. Yeah, only the US can meddle in Ukraine, because we're the good guys.

[another_liberal]

23. Exceptionalism is as exceptionalism does.

To paraphrase: "The perception that a country, society or institution is "exceptional" in some way and thus does not need to conform to normal rules or general principles."

[bemildred]

24. And a very convenient assumption it is, too, but expensive to maintain. nt

[another_liberal]

25. Expensive . . .

And ultimately self-defeating.

If history has taught us anything it is that no one stays on top of the pile forever. Having set the bar so low for ourselves, we will have little standing to complain about what the next top dog might do to us.

[merrily]

26. The US has a right to do everything the US does?

[another_liberal]

28. Not hardly. We've been violating international law for years . . .

However, we are currently the World's only Super Power, so no one dares to try and, "Bell the cat."

[merrily]

29. Not quite no one.

The people we call terrorists dare.

[another_liberal]

33. Good point . . .

They do indeed.

[24601]

34. OK try this - Convince the UN General Assembly to vote that Ukraine, not Russia is the legitimate

permanent member of the UN Security Council - the vote originally assigned to the USSR.

That's all it took to replace ROC with PRC - a simple, administrative UNGA credentials vote.

But then again, the votes probably aren't there.

But it sure would piss off Putin.

[another_liberal]

35. Seriously intended comment . . .

Or an attempt at humor?