Home | Community | Message Board


Kratom Eye
Please support our sponsors.

General Interest >> Political Discussion

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: Bridgetown Botanicals Bridgetown Botanicals   North Spore North Spore Mushroom Grow Kits & Cultivation Supplies   PhytoExtractum Maeng Da Thai Kratom Leaf Powder   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom

Jump to first unread post. Pages: < Back | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | Next >  [ show all ]
Offlineshivas.wisdom
בּ
 User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 02/19/09
Posts: 11,619
Loc: Turtle Island
Last seen: 15 hours, 10 minutes
Re: Crimea [Re: Mycolorado]
    #25654102 - 12/03/18 09:07 AM (1 year, 8 months ago)

Read my posts in this thread regarding Crimean Tatars before making a sweeping claim like "the Crimeans wanted to go back to Russia".


--------------------


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleMycolorado
Hobbyist
Male User Gallery

Registered: 07/23/16
Posts: 6,149
Loc: Interdimensional Bootcamp
Re: Crimea [Re: shivas.wisdom] * 1
    #25654111 - 12/03/18 09:14 AM (1 year, 8 months ago)

I didn’t make the claim.  My sister in law is Ukrainian and she told me that.  She seems like a pretty reliable source....she’s educated and honest and often returns there to visit family.  In fact, she and my brother just returned from the Ukraine like 3 weeks ago.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlineshivas.wisdom
בּ
 User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 02/19/09
Posts: 11,619
Loc: Turtle Island
Last seen: 15 hours, 10 minutes
Re: Crimea [Re: Mycolorado]
    #25654154 - 12/03/18 09:34 AM (1 year, 8 months ago)

Yes, it is highly likely that the majority of ethnic Russians residing in Crimea are happy to be part of Russia instead of Ukraine.

But the claim "the Crimeans wanted to go back to Russia" ignores the fact that a very vocal minority was opposed to the annexation, has been suffering severe Russian state repression in the aftermath, and is only a minority because of Russian/USSR state repression in the past century.

The reality is that the situation is not clear. Ukraine has the misfortune of falling between two superpowers, and as a result ends up being a geopolitical playground. I'm not arguing that Crimea should have necessarily remained with Ukraine (I'm opposed to borders, on principle), I'm just not willing to let the situation be completely whitewashed, and the human rights violations of Russia be ignored.

It would be like a bunch of Americans moving to some northern Mexico community until they vastly outnumbered the original local population, and then calling it liberation when the USA military came in to annex the region because 80% of the people living there supported it.


--------------------


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleMycolorado
Hobbyist
Male User Gallery

Registered: 07/23/16
Posts: 6,149
Loc: Interdimensional Bootcamp
Re: Crimea [Re: shivas.wisdom]
    #25654177 - 12/03/18 09:50 AM (1 year, 8 months ago)

But why stop there?  I think it’s been mentioned, but how about the entire continental US?  Or the americas in their entirety, for that matter?  I’m sure your country has perpetuated its fair share of human rights violations.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlineshivas.wisdom
בּ
 User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 02/19/09
Posts: 11,619
Loc: Turtle Island
Last seen: 15 hours, 10 minutes
Re: Crimea [Re: Mycolorado]
    #25654187 - 12/03/18 09:56 AM (1 year, 8 months ago)

I'm not American, but I definitely oppose many actions that the USA has committed, and the existence of the state itself.

That being said, this thread is about Crimea, so discussion is focused on the human rights violations happening in Crimea, under Russian state authority.

With the above information about Crimean Tatars, do you still think the statement "the Crimeans wanted to go back to Russia" is correct or appropriate to apply?


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleMycolorado
Hobbyist
Male User Gallery

Registered: 07/23/16
Posts: 6,149
Loc: Interdimensional Bootcamp
Re: Crimea [Re: shivas.wisdom] * 1
    #25654196 - 12/03/18 10:01 AM (1 year, 8 months ago)

Who said you were from the US?  The majority of the inhabitants of Crimea wanted to return to Russia.  I’m simply pointing out what I was told by a Ukrainian.  :shrug:  And my point about human rights violations is that regardless of the nations/people involved, superior technology will always prevail and indigenous populations will be displaced or eliminated because humans are unscrupulous and biologically speaking, will use any and all means possible to outcompete other organisms for the resources needed to ensure survival.  You’re arguing against biological/human nature. 


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlineshivas.wisdom
בּ
 User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 02/19/09
Posts: 11,619
Loc: Turtle Island
Last seen: 15 hours, 10 minutes
Re: Crimea [Re: Mycolorado]
    #25654217 - 12/03/18 10:18 AM (1 year, 8 months ago)

Forced copulation is also part of biological nature. Doesn't mean I'll stop being opposed to rape.

Will you answer this question: with the above information about Crimean Tatars, do you still think the statement "the Crimeans wanted to go back to Russia" is correct or appropriate to apply?


--------------------


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleMycolorado
Hobbyist
Male User Gallery

Registered: 07/23/16
Posts: 6,149
Loc: Interdimensional Bootcamp
Re: Crimea [Re: shivas.wisdom] * 1
    #25654229 - 12/03/18 10:31 AM (1 year, 8 months ago)

Yes, the majority of the inhabitants of Crimea wanted to return to Russia.  I don’t like HR violations any more than you do.  :shrug:


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinechibiabos
Cosmic Pond Scum
I'm a teapot User Gallery


Registered: 03/16/17
Posts: 3,860
Last seen: 7 days, 13 hours
Re: Crimea [Re: Mycolorado]
    #25654529 - 12/03/18 12:50 PM (1 year, 8 months ago)

Quote:

Mycolorado said:
Since the Crimeans wanted to go back to Russia, couldn’t the whole affair be considered an act of liberation as opposed to annexation?



Just like the Sudetenland!:rollsafe:


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OnlineFalcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 23,639
Loc: California, US Flag
Last seen: 44 seconds
Re: Crimea [Re: shivas.wisdom]
    #25654662 - 12/03/18 01:51 PM (1 year, 8 months ago)

Quote:

shivas.wisdom said:
I'm not defending the coup or the actions of any western players, I'm responding to your defence of Russian actions so drop the "what about the coup" dance.



But the vote to leave Ukraine never would have happened if not for the Western backed coup.  Crimeans preferred voting for their leader rather than having one installed by the US, so they voted to leave.

Quote:

shivas.wisdom said:
Was it normal for Russian ground combat forces to man roadblocks and seize strategic points on the Crimean peninsula?



Again, either prove it was Russians who took over government building, or stop make believing.  I told you I don't like to play make believe in the political forum.  If you'd like, I'll go to the Pub with you and we can make believe all our facts there.

Quote:

shivas.wisdom said:
Why would Putin send out uninsigniad soldiers and deny their status as Russian troops, instead of properly identifying them as Russian peacekeepers from the start? What reason, other than subterfuge?



Again, you need to prove the "uninsigniad soldiers" were Russians rather than Ukrainian; I'm not playing make believe with you.

Quote:

shivas.wisdom said:
Yes, Putin claimed to know because of "secret, undated opinion polls showed 80% of Crimeans favoured joining Russia." As you like to say, "there is absolutely NO evidence" that Putin knew the opinion of Crimeans before he gave the order to begin planning the operation to annex.



Who said "secret, undated opinion polls showed 80% of Crimeans favoured joining Russia."  That was obvious to anyone who knew anything about Crimea.

Quote:

shivas.wisdom said:
Quote:

Falcon91Wolvrn0o3 said:
No one I spoke with in Crimea said they saw any sign of unusual Russian activity during the referendum.



well the thing about anecdotal evidence...



Do you know the difference between "Pro-Russian Troops" mentioned in your article and "Russian Troops" as you are make believing?

Quote:

shivas.wisdom said:
you were glossing over this history, acting like Crimea naturally had a Russian population, and avoiding any discussion of the Tartars.



And again, I acknowledge the Tatars and that aren't treated well.  You fail to acknowledge that regardless of the Tatars, 96% of Crimea wanted to rejoin Russia.

Quote:

shivas.wisdom said:
Quote:

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
As I just mentioned above, the protests led to the small number of deaths that occurred in Crimea during that time.  You don't think anyone should be held accountable?



Akhtem Chiygoz was arrested for organising protests and Ilmi Umerov was arrested for “separatism” after he criticised Russia's seizure of his homeland. Neither was connected to, or charged with, any murder.



I didn't say he murdered anyone, I said people were killed in the protests he staged.

Quote:

shivas.wisdom said:
Who is being held accountable in the death of Reşat Amet?



His murderers would be held accountable if they are found, that's who.

Quote:

shivas.wisdom said:
You should read those human rights reports, because mass arrests of Crimean Tatars have occurred, along with punitive searches, and banning of Crimean Tartar organizations and media. The claim that "Nobody protested after or since the referendum", is a lie! If you had bothered to read either of those reports you would see that detention and prosecution for "separatism" has happened to Crimean Tartars for as little as posting a comment on social media criticizing the occupation of Crimea (Suleiman Kadyrov), or peacefully staged single-person pickets to protest the arrest and prosecution of other Tatars. 

Avoiding all this, while gleefully exclaiming "Nobody protested after or since the referendum." is to diminish the reality of human rights abuses that Crimean Tatars are experiencing at the hands of Russian authorities.



I'll say it for about the 10th time:  Tatars are mistreated in Crimea.  And for about the 10th time, this doesn't change the fact that 96% of the Crimiean population voted to rejoin Russia.

Quote:

shivas.wisdom said:
You aren't arguing against it, you are just nodding your head briefly and moving on to talking about how happy the majority of Crimeans are to be part of Russia, without any further discussion. That is diminishing the reality of the situation.



No, that's explaining the reality of the situation.

Quote:

shivas.wisdom said:
you have to be incredibly naive or deliberately obtuse to think that Russia, when faced with a US-led coup with potential consequences that would be "suicidal for Russia", would take a hands-off approach to the situation and just hope that local democracy would be enough to prevent the worst from happening.



Once again, I'm not saying there were no Russian troops in Crimea.  I'm saying there is no evidence they are the ones who took over the Government buildings.

Quote:

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
So you agree with the assessment that George Soros was largely responsible for the events surrounding Euromaidan?



The article I provided said "George Soros, John McCain, Neocons and EU leaders openly intervened in a sovereign nation’s democracy and manipulated the system."  Yes, I absolutely agree with that statement, and there are leaked documents showing evidence of that.

Quote:

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Where in this thread have you talked about Russian faults with regards to the situation in Ukraine?



I acknowledged many times that they mistreat Tatars.


--------------------
I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them.  People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.

Perhaps I'm a bit vain, but I pay careful attention to my 'vote ups'.  Please feel free to 'vote up' a post that you like - I won't tell anyone.  :smirk:


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OnlineFalcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 23,639
Loc: California, US Flag
Last seen: 44 seconds
Re: Crimea [Re: Mycolorado]
    #25654685 - 12/03/18 01:58 PM (1 year, 8 months ago)

Quote:

Mycolorado said:
Quote:

shivas.wisdom said:
...with the above information about Crimean Tatars, do you still think the statement "the Crimeans wanted to go back to Russia" is correct or appropriate to apply?



Yes, the majority of the inhabitants of Crimea wanted to return to Russia.  I don’t like HR violations any more than you do.  :shrug:



Exactly.  Instead of saying "the Crimeans wanted to go back to Russia", let's say "96% of the Crimeans wanted to go back to Russia.".  Better?

Quote:

shivas.wisdom said:
It would be like a bunch of Americans moving to some northern Mexico community until they vastly outnumbered the original local population, and then calling it liberation when the USA military came in to annex the region because 80% of the people living there supported it.



It would also be like Europeans coming to North America and pushing out the Indians, and then claiming North America for themselves because the majority support it.  :shrug:


--------------------
I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them.  People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.

Perhaps I'm a bit vain, but I pay careful attention to my 'vote ups'.  Please feel free to 'vote up' a post that you like - I won't tell anyone.  :smirk:


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleMycolorado
Hobbyist
Male User Gallery

Registered: 07/23/16
Posts: 6,149
Loc: Interdimensional Bootcamp
Re: Crimea [Re: Mycolorado]
    #25654697 - 12/03/18 02:02 PM (1 year, 8 months ago)

Quote:

Mycolorado said:
But why stop there?  I think it’s been mentioned, but how about the entire continental US?  Or the americas in their entirety, for that matter?  I’m sure your country has perpetuated its fair share of human rights violations.




Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlineshivas.wisdom
בּ
 User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 02/19/09
Posts: 11,619
Loc: Turtle Island
Last seen: 15 hours, 10 minutes
Re: Crimea [Re: Mycolorado]
    #25654866 - 12/03/18 03:14 PM (1 year, 8 months ago)

I'm glad you both agree that the actions of Russia are similar to the human rights violation that is colonization.

What, to you, would constitute proof or evidence that the unmarked soldiers in Crimea were from the Russia military? Just so I'll know what threshold I have to meet.


--------------------


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OnlineFalcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 23,639
Loc: California, US Flag
Last seen: 44 seconds
Re: Crimea [Re: shivas.wisdom]
    #25655380 - 12/03/18 06:47 PM (1 year, 8 months ago)

Quote:

shivas.wisdom said:
What, to you, would constitute proof or evidence that the unmarked soldiers in Crimea were from the Russia military? Just so I'll know what threshold I have to meet.



Burden of proof is ALWAYS on the person making a claim.  What was that proof for you that the unmarked soldiers in Crimea were from the Russia military?


--------------------
I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them.  People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.

Perhaps I'm a bit vain, but I pay careful attention to my 'vote ups'.  Please feel free to 'vote up' a post that you like - I won't tell anyone.  :smirk:


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinechibiabos
Cosmic Pond Scum
I'm a teapot User Gallery


Registered: 03/16/17
Posts: 3,860
Last seen: 7 days, 13 hours
Re: Crimea [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
    #25655400 - 12/03/18 06:56 PM (1 year, 8 months ago)

Yeah, Mr. Wisdom.  You know, aside from the fact that they were speaking Russian and using Russian kit and Russian protocols.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OnlineFalcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 23,639
Loc: California, US Flag
Last seen: 44 seconds
Re: Crimea [Re: chibiabos]
    #25655491 - 12/03/18 07:47 PM (1 year, 8 months ago)

Almost everyone speaks Russian in Crimea.  Please provide links about 'Russian kit' and 'Russian protocols', so I can see what you mean.

I suspect it will be very similar to them speaking in Russian...  "They used radio to communicate.  The Russians use radio too!  They must be Russian!!!"

But hey, prove me wrong...


--------------------
I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them.  People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.

Perhaps I'm a bit vain, but I pay careful attention to my 'vote ups'.  Please feel free to 'vote up' a post that you like - I won't tell anyone.  :smirk:


Edited by Falcon91Wolvrn03 (12/03/18 08:42 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlineshivas.wisdom
בּ
 User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 02/19/09
Posts: 11,619
Loc: Turtle Island
Last seen: 15 hours, 10 minutes
Re: Crimea [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03] * 1
    #25655756 - 12/03/18 09:55 PM (1 year, 8 months ago)

Analysis of the kits by Finnish military magazine, concludes: "With a very high probability we argue that these troops are the 45th Guards Separate Reconnaissance Regiment of VDV."

Independent Crimean Tartar TV station ATR (since shut down by Russian authorities) reports unmarked Russian special forces were photographed carrying VSS Vintorez rifles near Belbek airbase in Crimea. Significant because this gun is issued primarily to Russian Spetsnaz units for undercover or clandestine operations.

There's also this interview where Admiral Kasatonov revealed what he knew about the operation, saying that the famous "polite people" were Army Spetsnaz.



Beyond that, let's examine the various lies fron Putin and other Russian authorities:

  • Initially, Putin stated that the men in green were not part of Russian Armed Forces, but groups of local militia who had seized their weapons from the Ukrainian Army. Since examination of the kit recreate the weapons could only have come from the Russian army, this was a lie.

  • In March 2014, Putin continued to maintain that there was no pre-planned intervention but that "the heavily armed, tightly coordinated groups who took over Crimea's airports and ports at the start of the incursion – they were merely spontaneous 'self-defence groups' who may have acquired their Russian-looking uniforms from local [military] shops (voyentorg)". Once again, analysis of the kit reveals the weapons and uniforms could only have been obtained from Russian military sources. We also know, as Putin later admitted, that the intervention had been pre-planned. Double lie.

  • On 17 April, President Putin admitted for the first time publicly that Russian special forces were involved in the events of Crimea, for the purposes of protecting local people and creating conditions for a referendum. Later, he admitted that Russian Armed Forces had blocked Ukrainian Armed Forces in Crimea during the events. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. But fool me three times? No.





I feel that the combination of analysis of the military kits, interview statements of Admiral Kasatonov, the serial lies/denials of Putin, and common sense all together should provide sufficient evidence of the role Russian forces played in Crimea.


--------------------


Edited by shivas.wisdom (12/03/18 10:01 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OnlineFalcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 23,639
Loc: California, US Flag
Last seen: 44 seconds
Re: Crimea [Re: shivas.wisdom]
    #25655901 - 12/04/18 12:31 AM (1 year, 8 months ago)

Your sources are incorrect that the uniforms and helmets could only have belonged to the Russian military.  I can buy them online.  And the rifles that your article said could only have belonged to the Russian army are known to be sold in four other countries.

Regardless, I'm NOT arguing Russian troops weren't involved in Crimea.  I already noted there were Russian troops in Crimea as Russia has a base there, and the Russian military served as peacekeepers there (only 6 people died when Crimea rejoined Russia).  They also helped local self defense units secure the Crimean airport.

But we're diverging from the original argument which was whether Russia has been an imperialistic country post WWII.  Your definition says:  "imperialism is defined as major powers using force (military, economic, diplomatic) to subordinate weaker states to their interests"

Russia didn't use force to subordinate Crimea to its interests.  It may have used force to support Crimean interests (or at least the interests of 96% of Crimea's population).


--------------------
I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them.  People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.

Perhaps I'm a bit vain, but I pay careful attention to my 'vote ups'.  Please feel free to 'vote up' a post that you like - I won't tell anyone.  :smirk:


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlineshivas.wisdom
בּ
 User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 02/19/09
Posts: 11,619
Loc: Turtle Island
Last seen: 15 hours, 10 minutes
Re: Crimea [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03] * 1
    #25656055 - 12/04/18 04:47 AM (1 year, 8 months ago)

Quote:

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Your sources are incorrect that the uniforms and helmets could only have belonged to the Russian military.  I can buy them online.  And the rifles that your article said could only have belonged to the Russian army are known to be sold in four other countries.




The Russian claim was that the "self-defense groups" were a spontaneous response from locals who stole their weapons from the Ukrainian military and purchased their Russian uniforms from local shops.

These weapons were not held by the Ukrainian military, nor were any local shops selling the Russian military gear ever identified. I think you lose the claim of "spontaneous" if you were engaging in illegal arms trades with Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Namibia, or Syria to get your weapons.

I would also say that it is highly unlikely that uninsigniad soldiers would be wearing only military gear of Russian origin, if their point of origin was within Ukraine. Its highly unlikely that spontaneous self-defense groups would be decked out, uniformly, in some of the most modern gear available at the time without outside assistance and/or pre-planning.

Then you also have the claim from Admiral Kasatonov directly connecting the "polite men" (Russian term for the unidentified soldiers) to Russian Spetsnaz units.


Quote:

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Again, either prove it was Russians who took over government building, or stop make believing.  I told you I don't like to play make believe in the political forum.  If you'd like, I'll go to the Pub with you and we can make believe all our facts there.

Again, you need to prove the "uninsigniad soldiers" were Russians rather than Ukrainian; I'm not playing make believe with you.

Once again, I'm not saying there were no Russian troops in Crimea.  I'm saying there is no evidence they are the ones who took over the Government buildings.




Responding to the claims above, I still believe I have provided sufficient evidence that the unmarked troops were Russian soldiers, not spontaneous self-defense groups of local Ukrainians. I don't believe you have supplied any evidence to support your position that the unmarked troops were Ukrainian. As it stands, the only reason I've seen to support that claim is the words of Putin. Considering his story changed several times, I don't consider it reliable testimony. Otherwise, all the evidence I supplied shows that none of the military gear used was acquired locally; needed to have either been provided by Russia or sought in advance of the coup.



Quote:

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:.
But we're diverging from the original argument which was whether Russia has been an imperialistic country post WWII.  Your definition says:  "imperialism is defined as major powers using force (military, economic, diplomatic) to subordinate weaker states to their interests"

Russia didn't use force to subordinate Crimea to its interests.  It may have used force to support Crimean interests (or at least the interests of 96% of Crimea's population).



Here is a quote from Putin: “Our armed forces, let’s be frank, blocked Ukraine’s armed forces that were stationed in Crimea."

Regardless the results of the referendum, it was considered illegal under both Ukrainian law, Crimean law, and international law. The only reason the referendum, and resulting annexation, happened, was because of the force (or threat of force) of Russian armed forces preventing Ukrainian armed forces from controlling the region. Ukraine was weaker than Russia, and lost Crimea as a result. Fits the definition of a "major power using force (military, economic, diplomatic) to subordinate weaker states to their interests."


--------------------


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OnlineFalcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 23,639
Loc: California, US Flag
Last seen: 44 seconds
Re: Crimea [Re: shivas.wisdom]
    #25657327 - 12/04/18 05:12 PM (1 year, 8 months ago)

Quote:

shivas.wisdom said:
The Russian claim was that the "self-defense groups" were a spontaneous response from locals who stole their weapons from the Ukrainian military and purchased their Russian uniforms from local shops.

These weapons were not held by the Ukrainian military, nor were any local shops selling the Russian military gear ever identified.

I would also say that it is highly unlikely that uninsigniad soldiers would be wearing only military gear of Russian origin, if their point of origin was within Ukraine. Its highly unlikely that spontaneous self-defense groups would be decked out, uniformly, in some of the most modern gear available at the time without outside assistance and/or pre-planning.

Then you also have the claim from Admiral Kasatonov directly connecting the "polite men" (Russian term for the unidentified soldiers) to Russian Spetsnaz units.



As I said above, "I'm NOT arguing Russian troops weren't involved in Crimea, and the Russian military served as peacekeepers there.  They also helped local self defense units secure the Crimean airport.  But we're diverging from the original argument which was whether Russia has been an imperialistic country post WWII."

So I agree with you that Russian troops were used in Crimea and we can look at whether that was imperialism.  If the Crimeans wanted them there, then by definition it's not imperialism.

Quote:

shivas.wisdom said:
Quote:

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Again, either prove it was Russians who took over government building, or stop make believing.



Again, you need to prove the "uninsigniad soldiers" were Russians rather than Ukrainian; I'm not playing make believe with you.

I still believe I have provided sufficient evidence that the unmarked troops were Russian soldiers, not spontaneous self-defense groups of local Ukrainians. I don't believe you have supplied any evidence to support your position that the unmarked troops were Ukrainian.



As I said, I agree that Russian soldiers worked together with the local self defense units, and I said the Russian military helped secure the Crimean airport.  I don't know whether the Russian military secured the parliamentary buildings, but if they did it was with the support of the locals, so I'll give this to you.

Quote:

shivas.wisdom said:
I was asking for evidence for your claim.  As it stands, the only reason I've seen to support that claim is the words of Putin. Considering his story changed several times, I don't consider it reliable testimony.



Since the Russian military was working together with the local self defense units, it's very possible that Putin was telling the truth about them.

Quote:

shivas.wisdom said:
Quote:

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:.
Russia didn't use force to subordinate Crimea to its interests.  It may have used force to support Crimean interests (or at least the interests of 96% of Crimea's population).



Here is a quote from Putin: “Our armed forces, let’s be frank, blocked Ukraine’s armed forces that were stationed in Crimea."

Regardless the results of the referendum, it was considered illegal under both Ukrainian law, Crimean law, and international law. The only reason the referendum, and resulting annexation, happened, was because of the force (or threat of force) of Russian armed forces preventing Ukrainian armed forces from controlling the region.  Ukraine was weaker than Russia, and lost Crimea as a result. Fits the definition of a "major power using force (military, economic, diplomatic) to subordinate weaker states to their interests."



This is the crux of the entire argument right here.

If Russia accepted the Crimean referendum with no other factors, then I'd absolutely agree with everything you just said.  However, everything you just said was preceded by an illegal coup in which the democratically elected leader of Ukraine was ousted.  Why does Crimea have to accept a leader that the US installed over a leader that they elected???

A coup is illegal under all laws, and the Crimean people had a moral right to say "If Ukraine won't let us vote for our leader, then we'll vote to leave Ukraine."


Edited by Falcon91Wolvrn03 (12/04/18 05:37 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Jump to top. Pages: < Back | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | Next >  [ show all ]

Shop: Bridgetown Botanicals Bridgetown Botanicals   North Spore North Spore Mushroom Grow Kits & Cultivation Supplies   PhytoExtractum Maeng Da Thai Kratom Leaf Powder   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom

General Interest >> Political Discussion

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Bama gonna Crimea river
( 1 2 3 4 5 all )
Therian 4,166 88 03/24/14 05:23 PM
by Brian Jones
* No White Construction Workers on Infrastructure Projects using stimulus money
( 1 2 all )
lonestar2004 2,549 39 01/26/09 09:17 AM
by Seuss
* W.Va.'s Byrd now longest-serving senator luvdemshrooms 1,172 19 07/08/10 02:29 PM
by lines
* Defiance of the Northern Aliance GabbaDj 1,060 8 11/25/01 10:01 PM
by GabbaDj
* WTC Construction Manager: Towers Were Designed to Take Numerous Plane Crashes usefulidiot 2,259 18 11/16/04 11:35 AM
by Rose
* Say something constructive
( 1 2 all )
Silversoul 1,781 37 11/20/05 10:44 PM
by kilgore_trout
* Need constructive criticism on political poem mr_minds_eye 1,737 15 03/16/02 12:47 PM
by Anonymous
* Constructing propaganda. Winning hearts and minds... carbonhoots 320 1 04/17/03 07:28 PM
by Anonymous

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Enlil, ballsalsa
2,341 topic views. 4 members, 0 guests and 10 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Print Topic ]
Search this thread:
World Seed Supply
Please support our sponsors.

Copyright 1997-2020 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.091 seconds spending 0.01 seconds on 16 queries.