I suggest that you get updated that treaty is no longer valid. That treaty was valid when Russia and Ukraine were allies until 2013 but not anymore thanks to our CIA and MI6 friends.

Why not nominee Al Green or Al Gore? those guys are good possible candidates. Also, Joe Biden or Bill Clinton can win against Trump or other Republican candidates.

I believe that Bernie Sanders could have won against Trump but he was threatened and he backed off

Can you give us a link to that document or "treaty"... For me is like Mexicans trying to claim that the Gulf of Mexico and other territories lost to the U.S.A are theirs. There is nothing we can do about it.. peace out

The Russian Federation and Ukraine, hereinafter referred to as the Parties,

guided by the relations of friendship and cooperation between the peoples of Russia and Ukraine, historically fraternal bonds between them;

Guided by the provisions of the Treaty of Friendship, Cooperation and Partnership between the Russian Federation and Ukraine of May 31, 1997, as well as the Treaty between the Russian Federation and Ukraine on the Russian-Ukrainian state border of January 28, 2003;

Noting the importance of the Sea of ​​Azov and the Kerch Strait for the economic development of Russia and Ukraine;

Convinced that all issues relating to the Sea of ​​Azov and the Kerch Strait should be resolved only by peaceful means jointly or with the consent of Russia and Ukraine;

based on the need to preserve the Azov-Kerch water area as an integral economic and natural complex used in the interests of Russia and Ukraine:

Agree on the following:

Article 1

The Sea of ​​Azov and the Kerch Strait are historically the inland waters of the Russian Federation and Ukraine.

The Sea of ​​Azov is delimited by the state border line in accordance with the agreement between the Parties.

Settlement of issues relating to the water area of ​​the Kerch Strait, is carried out by agreement between the Parties.

Article 2

1. Merchant ships and warships, as well as other state ships under the flag of the Russian Federation or Ukraine, operated for non-commercial purposes, enjoy freedom of navigation in the Sea of ​​Azov and the Kerch Strait.

2. Trade ships under the flags of third countries may enter the Sea of ​​Azov and pass through the Kerch Strait if they are sent to or returned from the Russian or Ukrainian port.

3. Warships and other state vessels of third states, operated for non-commercial purposes, may enter the Sea of ​​Azov and pass through the Kerch Strait if they are sent on a visit or business call to the port by one of the Parties at its invitation or permission agreed with the other Party .

Article 3

Russian-Ukrainian cooperation, including joint activities in the field of shipping, including its regulation and navigation and hydrographic support, fisheries, protection of the marine environment, environmental safety, as well as search and rescue in the Sea of ​​Azov and the Kerch Strait, and concluding, as appropriate, new arrangements.

Article 4

Disputes between the Parties related to the interpretation and application of this Agreement shall be resolved through consultation and negotiation, as well as other peaceful means chosen by the Parties.

Article 5

This Treaty is subject to ratification and shall enter into force on the date of the exchange of the instruments of ratification of the Parties.

Changes and additions to this Agreement are drawn up in separate protocols, which enter into force in accordance with the procedure described in paragraph 1 of this Article.

Done in the city of Kerch

"December 24, 2003,

in duplicate, each in the Russian and Ukrainian languages, both texts being equally authentic.

The Parties, proceeding from the necessity of conservation of the Azov-Kerch defined area of water as integral economic and natural complex, to be used in the interests of the Russian Federation and the Ukraine, have agreed as follows: 1) The sea of Azov and the strait of Kerch are historically internal waters of the Russian Federation and the Ukraine. 2) The sea of Azov must be delimited by the state border in accordance with the Agreement signed by the Parties. 3) Dispute settlement regarding the issues pertaining to the defined area of water of Kerch must be regulated by agreement between the Parties. 4) Mercantile vessels and other state non-commercial vessels flying the flags of the Russian Federation and the Ukraine have free navigation in the sea of Azov and the strait of Kerch. 5) Russian-Ukrainian cooperation in the spheres of navigation, fisheries, protection of marine environment, ecological safety and life-saving in the sea of Azov and the strait of Kerch must be implemented on the basis of existing international agreements and by conclusion, in respective cases, of the new ones.

That's right! They have a joint treaty over a SHARED waterway, where at some point, the Ukrainian border ends and the Russian border begins. They crossed the border as defined in that agreement.

Ukranian vessels were trespassing the waters of Russia so it was Ukrania that did an act of war. (I'm not pro Russia)Ukranian vessels were trespassing the waters of Russia so it was Ukrania that did an act of war. (I'm not pro Russia) I'm just saying that Ukrainians already lost some territories to Russia why try to recover it?

Finally, someone solved the mystery. Thank you for your work. I shall praise the FSM every day in thanks for saving us from the bad things that'd happen if we weren't pinned down to the ground.

American healthcare is run by companies who's sole reason to exist is to maximize profits...

The only sliver of truth here is the fact that the increase in popularity of HMOs that occurred after passage of the act (and its amendments) greatly expanded for-profit health care in America.

How losing a badly mannered and badly behaved customer who constantly reneges on payment obligations, spreads russophobia (better to say: trades in it) would cripple Russian economy, especially after Turkish stream already started?

European-United States global power grid - what is that? Buying Yamal gas on our Far North and delivering to Poland in tankers?
Or bringing Qatar gas and saying "it's American"?

I'll tell you a secret: that would be the least of Putin's concerns. A huge, rich neighbour buying natural gas and petrol at world prices, without trying to cheat every January, would be always good.
Even rocket launching sites on land would be not as bad: a rocket launched from land can be intercepted not far from the launching site.
The scary thing was NATO occupation of Crimea and uncontrolled military ships traffic in Black Sea because of that: a rocket launched from a ship has a chance to succeed.
So seriously speaking, when Odessa will fall, this direction of attack on Russia can be abandoned all together. Either fall of Odessa, or Turkey becoming outwardly anti-Ango-Saxon.
But there are 4 or 5 more directions. Question is, can US engage all or most of them at once.

Smoke weed, save lives!

Putin will prevent Ukraine being turned into a "shiny example of the capitalist way of development", like West Germany and South Korea after WWII? That turning into a shop window-pane has patently failed without him, during last 4 years.

This study by PERI researchers Robert Pollin, James Heintz, Peter Arno, Jeannette Wicks-Lim and Michael Ash presents a comprehensive analysis of the prospects for a Medicare for All health care system in the United States. The most fundamental goals of Medicare for All are to significantly improve health care outcomes for everyone living in the United States while also establishing effective cost controls throughout the health care system. These two purposes are both achievable. As of 2017, the U.S. was spending about $3.24 trillion on personal health care—about 17 percent of total U.S. GDP.  Meanwhile, 9 percent of U.S. residents have no insurance and 26 percent are underinsured—they are unable to access needed care because of prohibitively high costs. Other high-income countries spend an average of about 40 percent less per person and produce better health outcomes. Medicare for All could reduce total health care spending in the U.S. by nearly 10 percent, to $2.93 trillion, while creating stable access to good care for all U.S. residents.

Oh yeah.
For every 1 Donetsk and Lugansk militant killed, it was more like 10 Ukrainian soldiers lost in 2014-2015.
By international law, a Commander in Chief that faces such heavy losses has to capitulate to prevent further loss of population.
So after having lost around 40000 Poroshenko stopped his offensives.

Let me remind you that combat-related losses of Armed Forces of Russia, excluding various "private companies" and volunteers, are exactly 0 (zero) so far in and around Ukraine. So who has most to lose?