andruha123 wrote:ZSM-5 wrote:Может я чего-то пропустил, но я понимаю "нейтральность" как не-состояние (млин, звучит по-идиотски, но как сказать лучше - думать лень) в любом из военных блоков. Как Швеция, или Швейцария. Кстати, обе не особо жалуются.
Вот пусть президент нам всем тогда и обьяснит, где плюсы вступления в НАТО. Ну далее по списку. А пока все это вилам по воде писано. Опять же и НАТО против.
Объяснит
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases ... 401-1.html
Q The question to President Yushchenko -- please, Mr. President, say, if the positive decision is not taken in Bucharest on Ukraine, what are the next steps of Ukraine then?
PRESIDENT YUSHCHENKO: (As translated.) If not, I'm sure that we will win because the arguments that were just mentioned by Mr. President and the positions that Ukraine is standing with, within the framework of the international debate on this issue, we are every day approaching to the positive final result. This is a colossal international work, and I would like to thank you all -- in your presence, I would like to thank President Bush for the work that's been done and that will be done in both public and nonpublic way.
And we fully understand the value of the issue and its importance. Of course, we still have a lot of effort forward to receive a positive answer. I have very good belief that the position of our friends in the EU will play a very important role for tomorrow's decision, and I hope that we will be able to convince those states that still have an opportunity -- that will have an opportunity to get more information about it and eliminate all the doubts.
Frankly speaking, I don't see any other way for Ukraine, no other alternative maybe -- emotionally, I would like to say that for the nation, for the political forces, should be more devoted to this way and the issue of whether Ukraine joins or not the MAP is not the complete target, the final target that we have in the Ukrainian society.
And I'm sure that in order to avoid speculations on an international level, when somebody refers to the fact that the Ukrainian nation has not decided yet -- I'm sorry, we have decided already. We're not speaking about joining NATO. We are only speaking about MAP.
Why Ukraine should be deprived of that sovereign right is -- there is a principle of open doors, which is the basic principle for NATO -- why can't we join MAP?
And then let's have a meeting in a year or two, when we explain to the nation what the NATO mission is and what the collective security mission is, and then how important a response for Ukraine it is, and why there is no alternative answer for us. If any politician is troubled about this nation and is worried about this future, I am sure that the Ukrainian nation is very wise and it will make positive decision, in the course of the referendum that we going to have regarding Ukraine to join NATO.
I recall when, three years ago, we started this discussion, I think from 17 percent of those who are for and who supported the Alliance integration -- a year ago we were supported by 33 percent. During the last live debates, we've seen analytics that raised up to 40 percent and we haven't started our work yet -- I mean, the profound work. So this is quite a situation -- I mean, the attention to this issue in the parliament for the last two months just made that big progress, and the nation started knowing better what NATO is and what its concept is.
So I think everything will be fine. Thank you.
"У нас есть домашние заготовки - и мы знаем, что мы будем делать." В. В. Путин
Ведь появляется такой замечательный шанс импичнуть Ющенко..... Значит, наверно, не все так просто.... Может, тут есть специалисты по Украинской Конституции и вообще законодательству, которые могут обьяснить?
Нечего ставить телегу впереди лошади.