Iron_Captain wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

 Iron_Captain wrote:

 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.

yea its a 3rd world nation. Brazil stomps it GDP wise.
If you think a fair election can be held when one side is sitting there with guns you're what we call crazy.

1. Brazil is also not a 3rd world nation.
2. GDP does not say anything about standard of living.
3. The standard of living of the average Russian is a lot higher than that of the average Brazillian.
4. Russia is ranked as 'high' on the Human Development index.
It seems you still don't know what a 3rd world country is.
And why so afraid of guns? It is not like they are threatening anyone with them. The Crimean people can do and vote whatever they want. It is not like they are being held hostage or forced to vote at gunpoint.
The Russians are there to guarantee the possibility of a referendum in the first place. Why is that so hard to understand? If the Russian soldiers hadn't been there, the regime in Kiev would have never allowed this referendum to be held.
Should the Crimeans vote to remain part of Ukraine, the Russian soldiers would withdraw to Sevastopol. But of course the Crimeans aren't going to choose to remain part of the Ukraine. Everyone who knows Crimea knows that by far the most people would rather be a part of Russia.
Why all this hatred towards Russia?

Sorry I'm not debating with a child over Russia.

 Frazzled wrote:
You're defending a dictator who has invaded another country and is joyously well along in his process of annexing it.

Pharoah would be proud.

So now you are calling Putin a dictator? Putin is a highly popular and democratically elected (in elections under international supervision) president. If you call Putin a dictator than you should call Obama also a dictator.

CONFIRMED: Russian forces storming Ukraine base near Sevastopol, home of anti-aircraft commander center #Crimea http://t.co/sUFx3sni7f

— Simon Shuster (@shustry) March 7, 2014

20 Russian troops inside, moving toward command post of Crimea base, guarded by 100 Ukrainian troops, reports @ukrpravda_news

— Simon Shuster (@shustry) March 7, 2014

Ukraine MoD spoxman confirms storm of air force base in Sevastopol. Russian troops already seized part of base. Says unaware of shots fired

— Simon Shuster (@shustry) March 7, 2014

Ukraine air force Colonel tells to TIME that Russian commander in charge of siege now demanding Ukraine forces lay down arms and surrender

— Simon Shuster (@shustry) March 7, 2014

In Sevastopol, the Russian soldiers stormed the Ukrainian military unit A2355.

This was reported by the agency " Interfax-Ukraine "of the assistant on duty.

According to him, the Russian military army broke through the gates KAMAZ military unit seized a nearby house, and now burst to the command.

On the territory of the pieces are about 100 Ukrainian military, on the number of attackers is not the spokesman said.

In turn, the Ministry of Defense of Ukraine said that at this time about 20 people stormed the tactical command post of the "Crimea" Ukrainian Air Force.

Among a group of attackers - "Cossacks", as well as local radicals with bits that throw stun grenades.

According to the information at this time commander and political officer got out of the command post and hold talks with the strikers. The personnel of the military unit barricaded himself in one of the barracks.

A military unit 2355 is located in Sevastopol Yuharinoy beam.

 MeanGreenStompa wrote:
So, Crimea, mainly Russian population since...? About 70 years ago.

Why so recent? Because the indigenous Tatar people were force-ably relocated by Uncle Joe Stalin, resulting in the deaths of around 50% of the relocated who were shipped off to the fringes to mine salt and uranium and enjoy the comfort of gulags.

So it's all Russian folks in Crimea now? No, there are still Tatars there, they are just now in the minority, but having seen many of their chums forced off to die in various frozen hells, these poor bastards aren't exactly thrilled with the prospect of being assimilated into Putin's new empire.




So... tell me why people who moved to the area 70 years ago at the behest of a great monster are being talked about like they really have any sort of claim to move the Crimea into the Russian sphere, whilst the Tatars, who've been there considerably longer, are to be overlooked, suppressed and reabsorbed back into a nation that did a fairly convincing job of making them an endangered species, should be told 'sorry mate, you're in the minority and that's how democracy works'.

If the Russians want to be in Russia, cross the effing border, you're family has been in the area for 70 years, that's less time than my grandparents have been alive, hardly a convincing claim to national dominance.

 Frazzled wrote:

 MeanGreenStompa wrote:
So, Crimea, mainly Russian population since...? About 70 years ago.

Why so recent? Because the indigenous Tatar people were force-ably relocated by Uncle Joe Stalin, resulting in the deaths of around 50% of the relocated who were shipped off to the fringes to mine salt and uranium and enjoy the comfort of gulags.

So it's all Russian folks in Crimea now? No, there are still Tatars there, they are just now in the minority, but having seen many of their chums forced off to die in various frozen hells, these poor bastards aren't exactly thrilled with the prospect of being assimilated into Putin's new empire.




So... tell me why people who moved to the area 70 years ago at the behest of a great monster are being talked about like they really have any sort of claim to move the Crimea into the Russian sphere, whilst the Tatars, who've been there considerably longer, are to be overlooked, suppressed and reabsorbed back into a nation that did a fairly convincing job of making them an endangered species, should be told 'sorry mate, you're in the minority and that's how democracy works'.

If the Russians want to be in Russia, cross the effing border, you're family has been in the area for 70 years, that's less time than my grandparents have been alive, hardly a convincing claim to national dominance.

MGS has the way of it.

 Ketara wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:
Right, because nobody dare vote against them.

They've successfully intimidated/cowed/brainwashed their populace into only voting for the party the government wants to stay in power. Dissenters better stay home.

Prove it. Seriously, prove that one. I haven't heard a single media report of a Crimean MP being forced to step down, a single report of Russian troopers threatening people to vote the right way, or even a single report of a Russian trooper beating someone up.

As for brainwashing, the Crimean media has not been subverted or taken over to the best of my knowledge. The educational system does not have Marxist re-educationalists kicking out the teachers and indoctrinating the children. What's more, it would have to be some pretty fast brainwashing to be done in two weeks on the majority of the population.

In other words, what you just said? Prove it. Substantiate your wild assertion of Russians 'brainwashing' and intimidating the Crimean populace.

 Grey Templar wrote:

 Ketara wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:
Right, because nobody dare vote against them.

They've successfully intimidated/cowed/brainwashed their populace into only voting for the party the government wants to stay in power. Dissenters better stay home.

Prove it. Seriously, prove that one. I haven't heard a single media report of a Crimean MP being forced to step down, a single report of Russian troopers threatening people to vote the right way, or even a single report of a Russian trooper beating someone up.

As for brainwashing, the Crimean media has not been subverted or taken over to the best of my knowledge. The educational system does not have Marxist re-educationalists kicking out the teachers and indoctrinating the children. What's more, it would have to be some pretty fast brainwashing to be done in two weeks on the majority of the population.

In other words, what you just said? Prove it. Substantiate your wild assertion of Russians 'brainwashing' and intimidating the Crimean populace.

The presence of active Russian military units is the intimidation.

Brainwashing is the fact that Crimea was still part of the USSR less than 40 years ago. Plenty of time for the Soviet brainwashing effects to still be around.

I've been to Russia, I've talked with Russians. Many of them still see the USSR in a very positive light. That attitude will still be around in Crimea. They'll have taught their children the same thing.

 Grey Templar wrote:
The presence of the Russian military taints the result of any election that Crimea takes.

I'm not saying the new Government in Kiev is any better. Its the choice between crap and crap.

At the very least the government in Kiev has more legitimacy, as legitimate as any revolutionary government can be.

MeanGreenStompa wrote:So, Crimea, mainly Russian population since...? About 70 years ago.

Why so recent? Because the indigenous Tatar people were force-ably relocated by Uncle Joe Stalin, resulting in the deaths of around 50% of the relocated who were shipped off to the fringes to mine salt and uranium and enjoy the comfort of gulags.

So it's all Russian folks in Crimea now? No, there are still Tatars there, they are just now in the minority, but having seen many of their chums forced off to die in various frozen hells, these poor bastards aren't exactly thrilled with the prospect of being assimilated into Putin's new empire.




So... tell me why people who moved to the area 70 years ago at the behest of a great monster are being talked about like they really have any sort of claim to move the Crimea into the Russian sphere, whilst the Tatars, who've been there considerably longer, are to be overlooked, suppressed and reabsorbed back into a nation that did a fairly convincing job of making them an endangered species, should be told 'sorry mate, you're in the minority and that's how democracy works'.

If the Russians want to be in Russia, cross the effing border, you're family has been in the area for 70 years, that's less time than my grandparents have been alive, hardly a convincing claim to national dominance.

Frazzled wrote:
This is why I'm not debating a child over Russia.

djones520 wrote:Russian troops attack a Ukranian military base.

http://www.haaretz.com/news/world/.premium-1.578553

Apologists justifying in 3... 2... 1...

 Grey Templar wrote:

The presence of active Russian military units is the intimidation.

Brainwashing is the fact that Crimea was still part of the USSR less than 40 years ago. Plenty of time for the Soviet brainwashing effects to still be around.

I've been to Russia, I've talked with Russians. Many of them still see the USSR in a very positive light. That attitude will still be around in Crimea. They'll have taught their children the same thing.

 Ketara wrote:

MeanGreenStompa wrote:So, Crimea, mainly Russian population since...? About 70 years ago.

Why so recent? Because the indigenous Tatar people were force-ably relocated by Uncle Joe Stalin, resulting in the deaths of around 50% of the relocated who were shipped off to the fringes to mine salt and uranium and enjoy the comfort of gulags.

So it's all Russian folks in Crimea now? No, there are still Tatars there, they are just now in the minority, but having seen many of their chums forced off to die in various frozen hells, these poor bastards aren't exactly thrilled with the prospect of being assimilated into Putin's new empire.




So... tell me why people who moved to the area 70 years ago at the behest of a great monster are being talked about like they really have any sort of claim to move the Crimea into the Russian sphere, whilst the Tatars, who've been there considerably longer, are to be overlooked, suppressed and reabsorbed back into a nation that did a fairly convincing job of making them an endangered species, should be told 'sorry mate, you're in the minority and that's how democracy works'.

If the Russians want to be in Russia, cross the effing border, you're family has been in the area for 70 years, that's less time than my grandparents have been alive, hardly a convincing claim to national dominance.

Just out of interest, would you say the same to any Northern Irish who want Irish integration? I know the situations are not exactly parallel, but I'm curious.

I'm of the opinion that it was seventy years ago, and whilst that sucks for the people who were deported, that's no reaosn to deny the right of self-determination to the mutliple generations born there of Russian heritage since. But that's my viewpoint, and solely a matter of opinion. I hate to be the one to be telling seventy years worth of people that they had no voice because of something a dictator did a long time ago though.

 Grey Templar wrote:
While there might be a little more fighting, I don't think there would be full on warfare.

The new Government really wouldn't be in much shape to take back Crimea even without the Russians there.


My take is the Russians should mind their own damn business. If the Crimea wants to come back you let them come to you, you don't just waltz in at the first sign of "we're gonna have a vote to go back to Russia"

 Grey Templar wrote:
Kazakhstan was also like that, despite the crumbling half finished buildings and general decay the Soviets left behind.

 MeanGreenStompa wrote:
So, Crimea, mainly Russian population since...? About 70 years ago.

Why so recent? Because the indigenous Tatar people were force-ably relocated by Uncle Joe Stalin, resulting in the deaths of around 50% of the relocated who were shipped off to the fringes to mine salt and uranium and enjoy the comfort of gulags.

So it's all Russian folks in Crimea now? No, there are still Tatars there, they are just now in the minority, but having seen many of their chums forced off to die in various frozen hells, these poor bastards aren't exactly thrilled with the prospect of being assimilated into Putin's new empire.




So... tell me why people who moved to the area 70 years ago at the behest of a great monster are being talked about like they really have any sort of claim to move the Crimea into the Russian sphere, whilst the Tatars, who've been there considerably longer, are to be overlooked, suppressed and reabsorbed back into a nation that did a fairly convincing job of making them an endangered species, should be told 'sorry mate, you're in the minority and that's how democracy works'.

If the Russians want to be in Russia, cross the effing border, you're family has been in the area for 70 years, that's less time than my grandparents have been alive, hardly a convincing claim to national dominance.

 MeanGreenStompa wrote:


The Russians turned the indigenous people of that area into a minority in living memory. They moved their own people into this desirable piece of real estate in living memory, the treatment of the Tatars didn't stop when Stalin was gone, they were continually treated as second class citizens throughout Russian Soviet ownership of the area. The issues of Northern Ireland are over 500 years old and not only not parallel but fairly totally unrelated. A fairer analogy would be Scotland claiming independence in the forthcoming referendum and then the English marching in to claim the lowlands and some strategic oil field ownership at the same time 5 years later because the english living in Scotland claimed they felt threatened.

What I'm really trying to illustrate here is the Crimean and Eastern Provinces are being portrayed as 'naturally Russian' when they aren't, they've received an influx of intentionally placed Russian people to these areas in the last 70 years, that's not enough to warrant cutting those chunks of Ukraine off and giving them to the Russians, unless you also want to cut out sizable parts of the city of Bristol and give it to Somalia or Poland.

If it sucked to be the people deported 70 years ago, perhaps today it sucks to be the Russian migrants living in Ukraine, without the whole force-able relocation to your likely death bit...

 Ketara wrote:

 MeanGreenStompa wrote:


The Russians turned the indigenous people of that area into a minority in living memory. They moved their own people into this desirable piece of real estate in living memory, the treatment of the Tatars didn't stop when Stalin was gone, they were continually treated as second class citizens throughout Russian Soviet ownership of the area. The issues of Northern Ireland are over 500 years old and not only not parallel but fairly totally unrelated. A fairer analogy would be Scotland claiming independence in the forthcoming referendum and then the English marching in to claim the lowlands and some strategic oil field ownership at the same time 5 years later because the english living in Scotland claimed they felt threatened.

What I'm really trying to illustrate here is the Crimean and Eastern Provinces are being portrayed as 'naturally Russian' when they aren't, they've received an influx of intentionally placed Russian people to these areas in the last 70 years, that's not enough to warrant cutting those chunks of Ukraine off and giving them to the Russians, unless you also want to cut out sizable parts of the city of Bristol and give it to Somalia or Poland.

If it sucked to be the people deported 70 years ago, perhaps today it sucks to be the Russian migrants living in Ukraine, without the whole force-able relocation to your likely death bit...

But I would say as someone who believes in democracy and freedom to choose, that ultimately, what is done is done. Repressing that sixty percent of the population today in favour of that ten percent does not make the events of seventy years past right. All it does it create a new wrong. And then the cycles of bitterness and genocide carry on through the generations, until nobody can even remember who oppressed who to begin with.

You don't have to agree with me on that one, and I'm not expecting you to. But I would oppose people who would suppress that sixty percent of the population, the vast majority of whom were not even alive at the time of the tartar population shift, let alone mature adults responsible for what occurred. By all means, punish those responsible for the shift. But I see no reason to punish and remove basic human rights from those who did nothing but get born into an area where a crime against humanity was committed half a century previously.

 Iron_Captain wrote:

1. Tatars are not the indigenous people. They replaced those who lived in Crimea before them (Pechenegs, Russians, Greeks) during the Middle Ages.
2. Russians had been living in Crimea before the Tatars came.
3. Russians have started moving towards the Crimea again from the 18th century onwards, not just the last 70 years.
4. Land changes hands all the time, it does not belong to any people by default.

 djones520 wrote:
Then, as Grey_Templar said, do it without the 30,000 Russian troops that are there.

You seem to think that the problem is the Crimea might vote to leave the Ukraine. That is not the issue. It's that it could do so under the sway of strongest military power in the region.

If this was Poland or somewhere, then yes, I wouldn't believe that the election would be free and fair, because there'd be no way that the Russians would win it without rigging it. But here? I honestly don't think they're going to rig it, simply because they don't have to. The majority of the locals want them there, and prefer them to the alternative choice (aka, the illegal anti-Russian coup government).

And that's what a lot of people don't seem to be able to grasp, that a region could democratically wish to join Russia. No, no, no. It must be those evil Russians, forcing people into the voting booths at gunpoint and ticking the boxes for them whilst holding revolvers to their heads.

And what human rights are being removed from the russian identifying majority who's parents moved into that area?

 Ketara wrote:

 djones520 wrote:
Then, as Grey_Templar said, do it without the 30,000 Russian troops that are there.

You seem to think that the problem is the Crimea might vote to leave the Ukraine. That is not the issue. It's that it could do so under the sway of strongest military power in the region.

The Crimea would never be democratically allowed to leave the Ukraine under the Ukrainian Constitution. What is more, the one body that could have legally authorised it has been removed by an illegal coup which now masquerades as the legal authority. In reality, it has no legal right or authority to tell the Crimean populace what it can and cannot do.

I think that in this particular case, the Russian troops are actually enabling them to have a vote they would not otherwise get to have. And no, I do not believe that the Russians are going to manipulate it. Mainly because they don't need to. To reprint:-

 whembly wrote:
Ketara... why have this referendum now then?

Why not wait till the new Ukrainian officials are elected?

Still looks like a potential Civil War is brewing there...

 djones520 wrote:

 Ketara wrote:

 djones520 wrote:
Then, as Grey_Templar said, do it without the 30,000 Russian troops that are there.

You seem to think that the problem is the Crimea might vote to leave the Ukraine. That is not the issue. It's that it could do so under the sway of strongest military power in the region.

The Crimea would never be democratically allowed to leave the Ukraine under the Ukrainian Constitution. What is more, the one body that could have legally authorised it has been removed by an illegal coup which now masquerades as the legal authority. In reality, it has no legal right or authority to tell the Crimean populace what it can and cannot do.

I think that in this particular case, the Russian troops are actually enabling them to have a vote they would not otherwise get to have. And no, I do not believe that the Russians are going to manipulate it. Mainly because they don't need to. To reprint:-

And how is that Russia's issue then? As has been stated, if people of Russian ethnicity want to be Russian, then they can walk across the border.

If N. Ireland wished to leave the UK, would you support the US dropping the 101st in until a vote could be held?

.

 Jihadin wrote:
Started reading on page 34ish and pretty much went skimming after that with the "Russian" military ubit seemingly influencing the general population votes for being there with "guns to their heads".

You all forgotten the Iraq free elections and Afghanistan Free election with US/Coalition military forces securing the area of the voting centers?

 Frazzled wrote:


To be accurate, it would have to be the US drops the 101 in, and then two days later Ireland declares it wants to be the 51st state. We've seen this game before.

djones520 wrote:N. Ireland wished to leave the UK, would you support the US dropping the 101st in until a vote could be held?

Russia is playing Imperial King Maker here, plain and simple. Were the US to do something like this, the international indignation would be through the roof. There would be no arguing if it was wrong or not

 Frazzled wrote:
Its not rigged.

IF there is an election, and it went the wrong way, it was just disappear. Again, we've seen this dance before in Russian client states.

We have been rubbing Russia up the wrong way for nearly 25 years.

It is hard to see why.

Moscow could have been our friend if we had wanted that.

We rightly viewed the old Soviet Union as a global menace to freedom.

But Russia is no such thing, just a major regional power sick of being humiliated and pushed around by ignorant outsiders.

I watched the old Soviet menace vanish on the streets of Moscow in August 1991 when a KGB putsch failed, the Communist Party was shattered in pieces, and the USSR collapsed in a cloud of rust.

Russians always believed there was an unspoken agreement that, in return for this, they would be allowed their dignity. They now believe that agreement has been broken.

What was left after 1991 was Russia, a proud and courageous people living amid the wreckage left by 74 years of Marxism and hoping to revive their ravaged country. We could have helped them.

By indulging Boris Yeltsin’s debauched reign (during which he shelled his own parliament while the West looked on complacently), we made Russian voters see Vladimir Putin as an attractive alternative.

The Putin government is squalid, but nothing like as bad as that of China, with whom we are on good terms.

Rather than recognising that the Cold War was over, we re-started it for no good reason, encouraging Russia’s neighbours to join the EU or Nato as if the USSR still existed.

In recent months, the EU and the United States have been willing to wound but afraid to strike.

They have aggressively sought to detach Ukraine from Russia and draw her into the EU orbit, knowing very well that this would infuriate Moscow.

Rather than recognising that the Cold War was over, we re-started it for no good reason, encouraging Russia's neighbours to join the EU or Nato as if the USSR still existed

Rather than recognising that the Cold War was over, we re-started it for no good reason, encouraging Russia's neighbours to join the EU or Nato as if the USSR still existed



We have awakened the ancient passions of this cruel part of the world, who knows where it will lead?

We have awakened the ancient passions of this cruel part of the world, who knows where it will lead?






Senior American, German and EU figures have gone to Kiev to egg on the anti-Russian crowds. Imagine how you would feel if Russia’s Foreign Minister turned up at SNP rallies in Edinburgh, backing Scottish independence.

Putin’s Crimean games are a sarcastic response.

The unspoken message is: ‘You like breakaway movements and meddling in other people’s business? Try this for size.’

And now, having raised hopes we cannot fulfil, we have awakened the ancient passions of this cruel part of the world and who knows where our vainglorious folly will now lead?