In the case of Crimea, well senseamp sums it up pretty well:
Crimea was in Russia long before Texas was in the US. Texas voluntarily joined the US. Crimea was arbitrarily "given" to Ukraine by Khruschev (who was from Ukraine) 60 years ago. The people of Crimea never had a say in it, until now.
There is going to be a referendum at the end of March on Crimean independence from Ukraine.
If by 'right up till' you mean 'from 1783 to 1953'. It was a relatively autonomous region under the Ottoman Empire for centuries before Russia conquered it. If we're going by historical claims I guess we should give it to Turkey.
Crimea was in Russia long before Texas was in the US. Texas voluntarily joined the US. Crimea was arbitrarily "given" to Ukraine by Khruschev (who was from Ukraine) 60 years ago. The people of Crimea never had a say in it, until now.
There is going to be a referendum at the end of March on Crimean independence from Ukraine.
Crimea was in Russia long before Texas was in the US. Texas voluntarily joined the US. Crimea was arbitrarily "given" to Ukraine by Khruschev (who was from Ukraine) 60 years ago. The people of Crimea never had a say in it, until now.
There is going to be a referendum at the end of March on Crimean independence from Ukraine.
What about California and Arizona then? They were treatied over from the Mexican-American war. Should Mexico have a right to invade to protect Mexican citizens in CA because the Mexicans living there 170 years ago didn't have a say in the matter?
I find this all rather weak as a justification for invasion by the Russians. Especially when we consider the ethnic cleansing that happened there under the Soviet Union. Anyways Crimea was agreed to by the Russians to remain in the Ukraine 20 years ago.
And I find people condemning Russia here to be bizarre. Violent protesters showed they were perfectly willing to attack government police/facilities. How is Russia not justified in protecting it's military assets in the region? Further, why does Russia's military presence preclude a fair and free referendum?
You have no say in where the Crimea goes. America is bankrupt and militarily impudent at this point, so is EU for that matter. Russia is the only player in the black, 500 billion in cash reserves. Obama needs to apply for a bank loan from China but I hear they're doing credit checks now.
Demographics determine loyalties. Crimea is pro-Russia. You keep saying invasion, but it could simply be liberation. It is not for you to decide.
. . . I'm getting a pretty strong sense that you are allowing emotion to trump rational analysis. . .
You have no say in where the Crimea goes. America is bankrupt and militarily impudent at this point, so is EU for that matter. Russia is the only player in the black, 500 billion in cash reserves. Obama needs to apply for a bank loan from China but I hear they're doing credit checks now.
If you fought them you would destroy them but America almost destroyed itself in Iraq (financially) and there is still a financial crash coming. If you didn't borrow money to go to war you would have to have the American people foot that bill but they are in debt up to their eyeballs as well.I'm sorry but if you think that's the case you have a fundamental misunderstanding of international finance. The US does not require Chinese money for anything, nor do we require any further purchases of our debt by them. They do this as a form of currency manipulation to serve their own interests, not ours.
Furthermore, as treasury spreads clearly show the world views the US as a far safer financial bet than Russia. Our economic power is almost an order of magnitude larger than theirs, and they are vastly more dependent on the goodwill of the international community than we are. In short, if it came down to an economic fight Russia would collapse in short order.
Now we can move to the military aspect. I presume you meant 'impotent' as opposed to 'impudent', but to be clear we could make very short work of Russia's military if we chose to do so. They are poorly equipped, generally poorly trained outside of some decent infantry, they use mostly outdated equipment (their best equipment is exported, ironically), and they are generally designed for operations inside of Russia as opposed to a fight against an actually capable military power. It would be a slaughter.
I'm getting a pretty strong sense that you are allowing emotion to trump rational analysis. You might be able to make the argument that due to a disparity in interest that the west is not as willing to fight over Ukraine as Russia is, but do not confuse a lack of interest with a lack of capability.
I think you're way off on this one. Just because the USA has more debt than Russia doesn't mean its military isn't far, far stronger. Russia's military right now is just a shell of what the USSR's was.
Those of you who are pro-Russia in this debate are not doing so well. lol
I wonder what the people of Crimea would have said before the Russians deported/murdered most of them?
What's even more interesting is that you seem to be arguing that a country which was forcibly conquered, subjugated, and subjected to crimes against humanity should be returned to the sphere of influence of those who committed those crimes because the people who were left alive there after these crimes against humanity are pro-Russian.
Of course they were, that's why they were deported or murdered. I find it funny that you would think that a gift is any less legitimate than forcible conquest and ethnic cleansing. Why is this?
If you fought them you would destroy them but America almost destroyed itself in Iraq (financially) and there is still a financial crash coming. If you didn't borrow money to go to war you would have to have the American people foot that bill but they are in debt up to their eyeballs as well.
If you fought them you would destroy them but America almost destroyed itself in Iraq (financially) and there is still a financial crash coming. If you didn't borrow money to go to war you would have to have the American people foot that bill but they are in debt up to their eyeballs as well.
"We" are pro-Crimea independence and self determination. As we are for ALL peoples.
Russia is neither friend nor foe in this, but atm they are a key player who can facilitate the freedom of Russians in Crimea from the mob in Kiev. They could also act as brutal dictators and oppressors in Crimea. Russia's intentions and further actions remain to be seen.
It is my hope that they let Crimea decide the future and that BOTH sides respect the choice that is made. It is not for us to tell others how to live. That is the very basis of freedom and liberty, something America used to know something about.
Not to take this too far off subject. But I think the USSR's military was a shell of what people believed. But it was great at crushing internal dissent or keeping those pesky Eastern Bloc countries in check.
You have an odd idea of freedom. Russia invading a country and annexing parts of it are not what many people would call "freedom".
Who would those "people of Crimea" be? Crimean Tatars?
Do you know where they came from? Golden Horde ring a bell?
You know what they were doing before Russia put a stop to it? Capturing and selling Ukrainians into Ottoman slavery.
That's all historical trivia at this point. Reality on the ground right now is that Crimea is 60% ethnic Russian, and almost entirely Russian speaking.
"We" are pro-Crimea independence and self determination. As I am for ALL peoples.
Russia is neither friend nor foe in this, but atm they are a key player who can facilitate the freedom of Russians in Crimea from the mob in Kiev. They could also act as brutal dictators and oppressors in Crimea. Russia's intentions and further actions remain to be seen.
It is my hope that they let Crimea decide the future and that BOTH sides respect the choice that is made. It is not for us to tell others how to live. That is the very basis of freedom and liberty, something America used to know something about.
You have an odd idea of freedom. Russia invading a country and annexing parts of it are not what many people would call "freedom".