Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Jihadin wrote:
Walrus I'm with you but what started out as Putin securing his Naval Base he invested in snowballed into what we have currently. Yet the Ukraine, US/EU, and/or Russia has even brought up that subject matter. US/EU leaped before they looked without even looking at the map of his initial troop movements. Now I've a feeling that Obama trying to save face along with Kerry and Putin letting them twist in the wind. So what happens when eastern Ukraine breaks off?

I actually heard something interesting on that note, legally, to break away, the referendum that Crimea is making has to be voted on by the entire country, not just Crimeans to be valid.

Crimea local government though does not recognize the new government...

 Jihadin wrote:
Crimea local government though does not recognize the new government...

No, I mean legaly even before this. I might be wrong though, I did just here this on the radio (and everything that's reported is true right! ).

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 Jihadin wrote:
It favors Putin so its the wrong type of democracy.

It has one of the belligerents "guaranteeing" the freedom of the vote. That's sketchy at best.

Just as a note, I say let the Crimeans have their voice heard on the issue, but it's rather poor form to have one side in complete military control of the place that's voting about whether or not to join that side.

Hey now, I'm sure Putin will make the elections exactly as free, fair and open as Russian elections are...


That said, if someone invaded Hawaii, then demanded they have an immediate referendum on independence while under military occupation, citing various independence movements as their justification... I'm sure everyone would be just fine and dandy with that.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 Jihadin wrote:
Walrus I'm with you but what started out as Putin securing his Naval Base he invested in snowballed into what we have currently. Yet the Ukraine, US/EU, and/or Russia has even brought up that subject matter. US/EU leaped before they looked without even looking at the map of his initial troop movements. Now I've a feeling that Obama trying to save face along with Kerry and Putin letting them twist in the wind. So what happens when eastern Ukraine breaks off?

I actually heard something interesting on that note, legally, to break away, the referendum that Crimea is making has to be voted on by the entire country, not just Crimeans to be valid.

you mean like voting on an elected leader like the one who was just run out of town?

seriously, you cannot claim legitimacy over crimea just because the parts of ukraine that are not crimea dont want it to go... tyranny of the majority and all that.

Plenty of states and even one of the provinces have had legal secession proceedings, its not an illegitimate practice at all.

You are saying that violent revolutionaries putting unelected people in power (some of whom are neo nazis) is more legitimate then a province holding a vote on what it as a people wants to do.

so in your opinion violent overthrow = democracy , having votes = oppressive violence/invasion/war.

so far, the use of force so far has been far more deaths on the side of the revolutionaries and none on the russians.


deal with it, CRIMEA and CRIMEANS get to decide their own fate... that is democracy, not the rest of Ukraine forcing them to stay when they done want to, and fairly dont recognize the appointed leaders of the recent violent revolution.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Maddermax wrote:


Hey now, I'm sure Putin will make the elections exactly as free, fair and open as Russian elections are...

you say that like you think american elections are free, fair, and open...

you say that like you think american elections are free, fair, and open...

HEY!!!..wait..I...um...wait..let me think....

Dangit..all that comes to mind was whathisnutsname that went around like a week ago asking people what their thoughts were on President Roosevelt who died the day earlier...

I seem to recall you yanks pulling one of those "illegitimate" cessations back in 1812... as I recall we burnt down your white house for it.

Uppity colonies, always trying to leave the empire... OK i reverse my position, force crimea to stay AT ALL COSTS! send in the troops! once more for the light brigade, TALLY HOOOOOOOO

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 Jihadin wrote:
Crimea local government though does not recognize the new government...

No, I mean legaly even before this. I might be wrong though, I did just here this on the radio (and everything that's reported is true right! ).

It is true, according to the Ukrainian constitution, Crimean independence should be voted over by the whole of the Ukraine. But according to the same Ukrainian constitution it was illegal for the opposition to take over power in Kiev. Also according to the Ukrainian constitution, the new regime was not allowed to change many things they have changed (like the constitution itself).
And besides that, the whole constitution is pretty much irrelevant now because the Crimean government does no longer recognise the government in Kiev or the constitution.

If all of the Ukraine gets to vote in any referendum on Crimean independence, then shouldn't all of the UK get to vote on Scottish independence?

As a proud Brit and Englishman, I demand the right to vote on Scottish independence! Just who do they think they are anyway, daring to breaking away from our benevolent rule? They should know their place and stop complaining. [/sarcasm]

I think West Ukraine threw away the moral high ground on legitimacy and internation law when they decided to overthrow the elected government in favour of an unelected motley crew of violent Neo Nazis and pro-west demagogues. They can hardly complain of illegitimacy and international law when the pro-Russia east decides they don't want to be a part of this new Ukraine.

 motyak wrote:
Oh Patrick Stewart, stay awesome.

To top it off, we need God (aka, Morgan Freeman) sitting there with his arms crossed (no phone, as he dont need that)

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
If all of the Ukraine gets to vote in any referendum on Crimean independence, then shouldn't all of the UK get to vote on Scottish independence?

As a proud Brit and Englishman, I demand the right to vote on Scottish independence! Just who do they think they are anyway, daring to breaking away from our benevolent rule? They should know their place. [/sarcasm]

Who says they wouldn't .

With respect to the neo-nazi... methinks is simply thick with propaganda...

The pro-Russian Global Research Center accused the opposition of including neo-Nazi thugs. They even included a photo with their report.


EDIT: to be fair... I don't trust both sides...

 whembly wrote:

Sorta escalating the events eh?

Yes. But, as Frazzled said, we should stay away as we have nothing to gain.

I'm fine with humanitarian aid, though.

 Ketara wrote:
That depends on your perspective. Global politics have a habit of flipping on their head every thirty years or so. The wheel turns, the historical dialectic comes into play, and systems and influences shuffle back and forth. I'm not convinced that this is necessarily, 'the end of of Russia's political influence' on Ukraine, regardless of the Crimea.

Sure, by no means is this a sign of a permanent end to Russian influence. I didn't mean to suggest that it was.

Merely that is reflective of a decline in power right now. Not even a decline based on anything permanent, possible just one of those fluctuations that happen, when for instance a really corrupt Russian backed leader is ousted from power and exposed. But the point is that Russia's move isn't part of some long game, it's a reaction to secure what is important to them when they weren't, for the time being, able to secure it through influence alone.

I would not be surprised if, for example, the US and EU made lots of very nice speeches about supporting the Ukraine economically over the next week, and then only followed through with the most token support.

It's all about joining NATO or not, really.

'Tis but a matter of opinion though. Time will tell.

Absolutely. People who are confident that they know how this is going to turn out don't know enough to know how little they know, if you get my meaning.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Jihadin wrote:
Going going going GONE...Mid March...(single hit home run)

Maybe. The question is whether Russia wants it, as the Crimea would is a money pit (though Russia is fairly used to those), and it would mean losing a strong block of pro-Russian votes to influence Ukrainian politics.

Russia already has a vested interest in Crimea.Putin poured in quite of bit of funds upgrading/expanding the naval base that he has an agreement with the old Ukraine government that the new Ukraine government not recognizing or they forgot about it

 OneManNoodles wrote:

Just the members of the Scottish assembly government getting together and then saying "Scotland is now independent".

Sure. But let me make this scenario remotely accurate. It'll have slight holes in, but will be as close as we can get using the UK as an example.

UK Scenario wrote:Assume that the democratically elected Lib/Con government in Westminster has been violently overthrown by an unelected coalition of UKIP, the BNP, and New Labour. Then Ireland bloodlessly stations troops all throughout Northern Ireland and says that they're going to hold a referendum.

Meanwhile, the BNP/UKIP/Labour coalition, insist hysterically that this is totally against the law in Britain, and that the Irish should butt out. All Northern Irish MP's take a vote for integration with mainland Ireland, and unanimously agree in favour. The new coalition in London says that this is an outrage, and that the entire United Kingdom should now vote on the secession of Northern Ireland. Then the US and EU declare trade sanctions against Ireland.

Does that seem quite so clear cut as the other situation? Because it's more or less identical, the only thing its missing is the tanks that gathered on the Ukrainian border temporarily. Would you be in favour of sanctions on the Irish in this scenario? If so, congratulations on consistency. I disagree with your opinion, but respect it. If not? Then I'm less inclined to pay attention.

 Jihadin wrote:
Russia already has a vested interest in Crimea.Putin poured in quite of bit of funds upgrading/expanding the naval base that he has an agreement with the old Ukraine government that the new Ukraine government not recognizing or they forgot about it

The lease on the naval base was never that politically safe, even under the old government. The renewal of the lease caused quite a storm in the Ukraine a couple of years ago.

With that lease was the discount to supply Ukraine with Natural gas. It was a agreement between both countries. Mind you the new government called on the old agreements made by the government they replaced for the US/EU to support them. The two brigades operating to secure that logistical lifeline was deemed "invasion" yet the new Ukraine never acknowledge Putin agreement and.I say again..called on US/EU to support them on old agreements. Why I mention earlier on this thread what would have happen if the new government informed Putin that his agreement was still in play and not ignore it.

The new government is screwing the pooch and continues to do so. Putin going to get Crimea and Eastern Ukraine I've a feeling the new government going to take that 1 billion dollar loan of ours and work it west to east.

 Iron_Captain wrote:

 OneManNoodles wrote:

-Shrike- wrote:Why is this referendum illegal and anti-constitutional, and the violent revolution in Kiev something to be proud of?

To answer your second point, why should the Americans be proud of the 4th of July or the French; Bastille day?

Because in a democracy a government serves the people, the people have the right and the duty to overthrow a government that fails its constitutional agreement.
A government does not have the right to murder its own people just because they have a different opinion on how things should be run.

For the Crimea, just look at what is happening in the UK with Scotland, if it suddenly decided overnight it was leaving the union WITHOUT a democratic vote of all the people within the regional geopolitical boundary that the local government represents.

Just the members of the Scottish assembly government getting together and then saying "Scotland is now independent".
Imagine the Anarchy if anyone who has any area of land can just declare it as independent!

Now lets also add that the vote took place with no independent witnesses and under armed Russian troops!

The referendum hasn't been yet...
It is now going to be held on 16 March, and all Crimeans will be able to vote on the question of joining Russia and reinstating the 1992 Crimean constitution.
The vote in the Crimean parliament has already voted to join Russia, but they will only do so if the population also agrees. The option which gets the most votes will be executed. That is democracy isn't it?

Democracy at the point of a gun is not Democracy, except in the glorious Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, er Russia. Now Vote Properly Comrade. Its very cold in Siberia.

Whats funny is Russia is a 3rd rate just this side of 3rd world country now.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 easysauce wrote:
I seem to recall you yanks pulling one of those "illegitimate" cessations back in 1812... as I recall we burnt down your white house for it.

Uppity colonies, always trying to leave the empire... OK i reverse my position, force crimea to stay AT ALL COSTS! send in the troops! once more for the light brigade, TALLY HOOOOOOOO

Well we settled that gak hard in 1814. My ancestors thoroughly enjoyed shooting the crap out of redcoats to prove that Southern hospitality is a blessed thing.

 easysauce wrote:
I seem to recall you yanks pulling one of those "illegitimate" cessations back in 1812... as I recall we burnt down your white house for it.

Actually, 1812 was an invasion not a cessation. And I thought those were British regulars who torched the Capitol, but it's been a while since I last read about it so perhaps one of our Brit posters can verify that.

Still, you went back 200+ years for that? Seriously?

 Breotan wrote:

 easysauce wrote:
I seem to recall you yanks pulling one of those "illegitimate" cessations back in 1812... as I recall we burnt down your white house for it.

Actually, 1812 was an invasion not a cessation. And I thought those were British regulars who torched the Capitol, but it's been a while since I last read about it so perhaps one of our Brit posters can verify that.

Brits don't study that part of history. It was British regulars though that did it. The force that sacked D. C. had just arrived from Europe.

 Frazzled wrote:

Democracy at the point of a gun is not Democracy, except in the glorious Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, er Russia. Now Vote Properly Comrade. Its very cold in Siberia.

Whats funny is Russia is a 3rd rate just this side of 3rd world country now.

The Soviet Union is long gone, but clearly not in your mind. Get over it and come back to the present.
The people in Crimea are not being forced to vote one way or another, the Russian troops are there to protect the Russian naval base and stop the illegitimate regime in Kiev from interfering. They are not threatening any civilians.

Your second comment is so full of gak and ignorance that I don't even know why I bother replying to it. Clearly you have never been to Russia nor an actual 3rd world country.
Maybe you should learn to think before you insult other nations.

It was but the units were raised from the Canadian population some of the soldiers that burned the capitol were even present during the sacking of York (Toronto) and for them it was good old fashioned pay back, Canadians did not identify themselves as Canadian until after the war of 1812, it was that war that gave us our identity as Canadian.

But before there is a referendum perhaps a general election should be held first to elect a new Ukrainian leader

 Iron_Captain wrote:

Your second comment is so full of gak and ignorance that I don't even know why I bother replying to it. Clearly you have never been to Russia nor an actual 3rd world country.
Maybe you should learn to think before you insult other nations.

I see you've never seen Frazzled post before.

joking aside,

I find it extremely Ironic, that so many people, from a country FOUNDED by an "illegitimate" declaration of independance from their true leaders in the great bristish empire,

would decry other people, trying to make their own decisions via democratic vote.

If you are calling a violent revolution "legitimate" (hey some are) but are calling a democratic vote "illegitimate" you might just be a hyppocrate (read in jeff foxworthy voice)

 easysauce wrote:
joking aside,

I find it extremely Ironic, that so many people, from a country FOUNDED by an "illegitimate" declaration of independance from their true leaders in the great bristish empire,

would decry other people, trying to make their own decisions via democratic vote.

If you are calling a violent revolution "legitimate" (hey some are) but are calling a democratic vote "illegitimate" you might just be a hyppocrate (read in jeff foxworthy voice)

Oversimplify things much?

Yes... yes you do.

 djones520 wrote:

 easysauce wrote:
joking aside,

I find it extremely Ironic, that so many people, from a country FOUNDED by an "illegitimate" declaration of independance from their true leaders in the great bristish empire,

would decry other people, trying to make their own decisions via democratic vote.

If you are calling a violent revolution "legitimate" (hey some are) but are calling a democratic vote "illegitimate" you might just be a hyppocrate (read in jeff foxworthy voice)

Oversimplify things much?

Yes... yes you do.

It does oversimplify slightly, but it does get the heart of an issue that a lot of the 'anti-Russia' crowd here and elsewhere seem to want to dance around. Usually by:-

a) saying any vote in the Crimea will totally be rigged by the evil Russians,
b) saying just because one group breaks the constitution does not make it alright for everybody else to do so,
c) ignoring it.

 Ketara wrote:

 djones520 wrote:

 easysauce wrote:
joking aside,

I find it extremely Ironic, that so many people, from a country FOUNDED by an "illegitimate" declaration of independance from their true leaders in the great bristish empire,

would decry other people, trying to make their own decisions via democratic vote.

If you are calling a violent revolution "legitimate" (hey some are) but are calling a democratic vote "illegitimate" you might just be a hyppocrate (read in jeff foxworthy voice)

Oversimplify things much?

Yes... yes you do.

It does oversimplify slightly, but it does get the heart of an issue that a lot of the 'anti-Russia' crowd here and elsewhere seem to want to dance around. Usually by:-

a) saying any vote in the Crimea will totally be rigged by the evil Russians,
b) saying just because one group breaks the constitution does not make it alright for everybody else to do so,
c) ignoring it.

If your not a Scottish-freedom-person-thing (they have a name, I just forgot it), would you be OK with Scotland seceding and joining Ireland. Or for people from the US, Texas or Alaska. Or for people from Canada, Quebec. And on, and on. I think that's the point. It's not like America and Britain, or India and Britain (you guys really did control about half the world) where it's a foreign power. I think that's their point. I don't really have an opinion on this issue yet, but you have to admit, Russia is a hard country to agree with knowing what Putin has done.

 djones520 wrote:

Oversimplify things much?

Yes... yes you do.

no one reads the long dissertations, besides which,

the point is very valid, simple as it may be,

we have one group of people who violently over threw a democratically elected leader, who broke the constitution by the opposition appointing people (factually verifiable neo-nazis amoung the appointations), then changed the constitution through declaration, instead of the legal means, being called legitimate.

where as a distinct group of people, who wish to hold a vote, by themselves, and for themselves, and have had no violence enacted to do it are being called illegitimate.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
If your not a Scottish-freedom-person-thing (they have a name, I just forgot it), would you be OK with Scotland seceding and joining Ireland. Or for people from the US, Texas or Alaska. Or for people from Canada, Quebec. And on, and on. I think that's the point. It's not like America and Britain, or India and Britain (you guys really did control about half the world) where it's a foreign power. I think that's their point. I don't really have an opinion on this issue yet, but you have to admit, Russia is a hard country to agree with knowing what Putin has done.

by that same logic, new york shouldnt be able to elect a mayor that washington doesnt like... texas should have to run govenours by the other states ect ect.

same with the founding of the united states, totally illegal, come pick up your british citizenships and shut down your ilegal country immediatly

 easysauce wrote:
where as a distinct group of people, who wish to hold a vote, by themselves, and for themselves, and have had no violence enacted to do it are being called illegitimate.

Wasn't the parliament building stormed and the vote for a new PM took place in a room full of armed people?