Russia gets Crimea

[senseamp]

Most of the world makes that claim as well. Is this where you trot out russian state media's list of "observers"? A collection of communists, nationalists, and paid anti-western fools?

But at least we are making progress. You have finally admitted the Russians were in Crimea over watching those polls.

Of course Ukraine will do what it can to preserve its border. What country wouldnt? Certainly Russia would as well. Chechnya wanted to leave. Russia responded with the army.

As for your last question. Is there really any debate about those elections in Afghanistan? Does anybody believe Karzai would had won on his own? But so what? Are you back to arguing two wrongs make a right?

Russia offered to allow OSCE election observers, OSCE refused, because then it would have to recognize the results of the referendum.
Two "wrongs" as you call them make reality. The reality is that Crimea is in Russia. The second reality is that there is no armed resistance to Russia in Crimea. No guerrillas fighting Russia for Crimea to stay in Ukraine. So the Chechnya scenario is not happening. If there is a majority against joining Russia, as referendum critics imply, it's doing absolutely nothing to demonstrate it. Russia lost 1 soldier to take Crimea, a place where the West would have you believe there is not a majority for joining Russia.
So there is simply no evidence that majority of people of Crimea don't want to be part of Russia.
If Mexico tried to take back Texas, do you think they would only lose 1 soldier trying? Do you think half of the US military based in Texas would have switched to the Mexican army?

 

[senseamp]

You are a tool who gets his news from RT, who you simultaneously blasted others for not Questioning Everything enough.

This war between the west and Russia is a figment of Russia's ruling classes imagination, fuel on to keep them in power.

I'm smart enough to know when arguing with an insignificant nobody like you will never produce further results.

Goodbye, hypocrite. I don't need to prove anything further to the onlookers of the thread. Those who are in lock-step with Russian propaganda will always side with you. Those not in lock-step with Russian propaganda will always side against you. Nothing anyone says or does here can change that.

Nice ad-hominem. :thumbsup:
It's still orthogonal to substance, so it doesn't bother me.

 

[norseamd]

communists

like i said earlier russian fundamentalists are not communists

 

[fskimospy]

Russia offered to allow OSCE election observers, OSCE refused, because then it would have to recognize the results of the referendum.

What is your basis for this claim? Please no RT links, as that is a propaganda network.

 

[norseamd]

The reality is that Crimea is in Russia

we already know you are a muscovite fanatic

and crimea is not undisputed russian territory

If Mexico tried to take back Texas, do you think they would only lose 1 soldier trying? Do you think half of the US military based in Texas would have switched to the Mexican army?

if russia invaded ukraine do you not think there would be more than 10 lost? if ukraine wanted to keeep crimea do you not think there would be massive fighting?

oh wait russia did invade ukraine. and ukraine really does want the crimean peninsula. why is there no fighting? probably because russia is much bigger than ukraine and the ukrainians are wary of directly engaging the russians

and as for a question concerning your bullshit what is your opinion on the caucasian conflicts

 

[senseamp]

What is your basis for this claim? Please no RT links, as that is a propaganda network.

Horse's mouth.
http://www.osce.org/cio/116313

 

[norseamd]

Horse's mouth. http://www.osce.org/cio/116313

do you understand the official international policies they were talking about

there is nothing different to other international organizations in how they were deciding to act on protocol

 

[senseamp]

we already know you are a muscovite fanatic

and crimea is not undisputed russian territory



if russia invaded ukraine do you not think there would be more than 10 lost? if ukraine wanted to keeep crimea do you not think there would be massive fighting?

oh wait russia did invade ukraine. and ukraine really does want the crimean peninsula. why is there no fighting? probably because russia is much bigger than ukraine and the ukrainians are wary of directly engaging the russians

and as for a question concerning your bullshit what is your opinion on the caucasian conflicts

Russia fought two bloody wars to keep Chechnya.
Ukraine didn't lift a finger to defend its claim over the Crimea, because they knew the local population was against them. Isn't national defense the number one job of a central government? If they let Crimea go to what they call "foreign occupation" without putting up a fight, what claim do they have to it? Ukraine didn't fight over Crimea, but not only that, there isn't even a significant underground resistance that you would expect if Russians weren't welcome there. Quite the opposite, half the Ukraine's military based in Crimea simply joined Russian military.

 

[fskimospy]

Horse's mouth.
http://www.osce.org/cio/116313

Saying you refuse to observe an illegal referendum is not the same as saying you do not want to go there because you will be forced to recognize its results.

 

[senseamp]

do you understand the official international policies they were talking about

there is nothing different to other international organizations in how they were deciding to act on protocol

You can't have it both ways. If you don't care about what the people of Crimea think and don't want a referendum at all, then don't later complain about the results of the referendum by claiming they don't reflect what the people of Crimea think.

 

[fskimospy]

Russia fought two bloody wars to keep Chechnya.
Ukraine didn't lift a finger to defend its claim over the Crimea, because they knew the local population was against them. Isn't national defense the number one job of a central government? If they let Crimea go to what they call "foreign occupation" without putting up a fight, what claim do they have to it? Ukraine didn't fight over Crimea, but not only that, there isn't even a significant underground resistance that you would expect if Russians weren't welcome there. Quite the opposite, half the Ukraine's military based in Crimea simply joined Russian military.

Ukraine did not choose to fight because of the overwhelming military disparity between Ukraine and Russia. They clearly learned a lesson from Russia's last illegal invasion of one of its neighbors.

Ukraine's decision not to engage in a losing military battle does not mean that they suddenly give up their claim to a territory. That's like saying that Czechoslovakia gave up its right to exist because they didn't fight Hitler when he took it. Russia's actions are illegal regardless of Ukraine's actions.

 

[fskimospy]

You can't have it both ways. If you don't care about what the people of Crimea think and don't want a referendum at all, then don't later complain about the results of the referendum by claiming they don't reflect what the people of Crimea think.

No, they didn't want a referendum while Crimea was under illegal armed occupation by one of the interested parties. How is that a complicated thing?

 

[senseamp]

Ukraine did not choose to fight because of the overwhelming military disparity between Ukraine and Russia. They clearly learned a lesson from Russia's last illegal invasion of one of its neighbors.

Ukraine's decision not to engage in a losing military battle does not mean that they suddenly give up their claim to a territory. That's like saying that Czechoslovakia gave up its right to exist because they didn't fight Hitler when he took it. Russia's actions are illegal regardless of Ukraine's actions.

They can claim whatever they want. Serbia is still claiming Kosovo, and Argentina is still claiming the Falklands. Cyprus is still claiming Northern Cyprus. It has no bearing to reality.
But even if Ukraine is not willing to fight for Crimea AT ALL, where is the underground resistance in Crimea? I mean if we are to believe resident Russophobes here, the referendum was rigged, and majority of Crimeans really don't want to be part of Russia. They sure have a funny way of showing it. Ukraine isn't willing to fight for Crimea to stay in Ukraine, Crimeans aren't fighting for Crimea to stay in Ukraine. If you want to believe it's part of Ukraine, I guess nothing is stopping you.

 

[senseamp]

No, they didn't want a referendum while Crimea was under illegal armed occupation by one of the interested parties. How is that a complicated thing?

That's not what they said. Read the letter again.

 

[fskimospy]

That's not what they said. Read the letter again.

That's definitely what they said. I would suggest you read it more closely.

 

[senseamp]

That's definitely what they said. I would suggest you read it more closely.

They said they won't recognize it because Ukraine didn't agree to the referendum, not because Russian troops were there. Read it again.

 

[fskimospy]

They can claim whatever they want. Serbia is still claiming Kosovo, and Argentina is still claiming the Falklands. Cyprus is still claiming Northern Cyprus. It has no bearing to reality.

So? Doesn't change the fact that this action by Russia is blatantly illegal.

But even if Ukraine is not willing to fight for Crimea AT ALL, where is the underground resistance in Crimea? I mean if we are to believe resident Russophobes here, the referendum was rigged, and majority of Crimeans really don't want to be part of Russia. They sure have a funny way of showing it. Ukraine isn't willing to fight for Crimea to stay in Ukraine, Crimeans aren't fighting for Crimea to stay in Ukraine. If you want to believe it's part of Ukraine, I guess nothing is stopping you.

So in other words people now need to undertake an insurgency in order for an illegal occupation to not be legitimate? On what possible grounds?

I'm genuinely curious, why do you so firmly support what was clearly an illegal invasion of a sovereign country? Especially by a country as lawless and vile as Russia?

 

[fskimospy]

They said they won't recognize it because Ukraine didn't agree to the referendum, not because Russian troops were there. Read it again.

Nope, go back and read it for a third time:

For any referendum regarding the degree of autonomy or sovereignty of the Crimea to be legitimate, it would need to be based on the Ukrainian constitution and would have to be in line with international law, he said. In that context, Burkhalter called upon all actors to refrain from supporting unconstitutional activities.

Basically the only group in the world that thinks this invasion was legal is Russia. The rest of the world pretty much uniformly accepts that this was a crime.

 

[senseamp]

So? Doesn't change the fact that this action by Russia is blatantly illegal.

So in other words people now need to undertake an insurgency in order for an illegal occupation to not be legitimate? On what possible grounds?

I'm genuinely curious, why do you so firmly support what was clearly an illegal invasion of a sovereign country? Especially by a country as lawless and vile as Russia?

I am curious what basis you have for claiming it's illegal. International court of justice ruled that Kosovo independence was legal under international law even without consent of Serbia. Under that precedent, Crimea is within it's rights to conduct an independence referendum without consent of Ukraine, contrary to Western claims. And if it's within its rights to conduct such referendum, it's also within its rights to join Russia.
Why Crimeans want to join Russia is for them to decide, but it is their decision. Ukrainians and the West are the ones claiming that Crimea has no right to make such a decision at all without Kiev's agreement, which is in clear contradiction to the Kosovo case law.

 

[senseamp]

Nope, go back and read it for a third time:



Basically the only group in the world that thinks this invasion was legal is Russia. The rest of the world pretty much uniformly accepts that this was a crime.

But what is the international law? Shouldn't you find that out before claiming that it's against it? Their claim is that international law doesn't allow Crimea to hold an independence referendum without consent of Ukraine that it wants independence from, not that it's in violation of international law because Russian troops are present.
But the International Court of Criminal Justice has already ruled that provinces have a right to declare independence without consent of the country they seek independence from.

 

[fskimospy]

I am curious what basis you have for claiming it's illegal. International court of justice ruled that Kosovo independence was legal under international law even without consent of Serbia. Under that precedent, Crimea is within it's rights to conduct an independence referendum without consent of Ukraine, contrary to Western claims. And if it's within its rights to conduct such referendum, it's also within its rights to join Russia.
Why Crimeans want to join Russia is for them to decide, but it is their decision. Ukrainians and the West are the ones claiming that Crimea has no right to make such a decision at all without Kiev's agreement, which is in clear contradiction to the Kosovo case law.

Russia's actions are illegal for numerous reasons.

1.) Russia invaded Ukraine in violation of the UN Charter and international law, specifically the laws covering sovereignty. Russia's argument was that they were going there to protect ethnic Russians from attack, but there is no evidence for this being an issue.

2.) Russia's actions violate its treaty obligations with Ukraine on the basis of the usage of troops within Ukranian territory. (the troops were not allowed to interfere with the sovereignty of Ukraine, etc)

3.) If Crimea wants to conduct a referendum that's fine, but Russia's actions made a fair and impartial referendum impossible due to their military occupation.

 

[senseamp]

Russia's actions are illegal for numerous reasons.

1.) Russia invaded Ukraine in violation of the UN Charter and international law, specifically the laws covering sovereignty. Russia's argument was that they were going there to protect ethnic Russians from attack, but there is no evidence for this being an issue.

2.) Russia's actions violate its treaty obligations with Ukraine on the basis of the usage of troops within Ukranian territory. (the troops were not allowed to interfere with the sovereignty of Ukraine, etc)

3.) If Crimea wants to conduct a referendum that's fine, but Russia's actions made a fair and impartial referendum impossible due to their military occupation.

Good thing we agree on the bolded. :thumbsup: Unfortunately, the US and the West does not. They did not demand an impartial referendum. They demanded no referendum in Crimea because Ukraine didn't agree to it.
Good day to you sir.

 

[Fern]

Russia offered to allow OSCE election observers, OSCE refused, because then it would have to recognize the results of the referendum.

What is your basis for this claim? Please no RT links, as that is a propaganda network.

Horse's mouth.
http://www.osce.org/cio/116313

You do agree that your link doesn't offer any evidence that Russia offered to allow OSCE observers?

I'm pretty sure I remember one OSCE official being frog-marched out of Crimea and forcibly placed on an international flight. I'm pretty sure I remember others being turned back at the border - i.e., not permitted entry.

Fern

 

[norseamd]

You can't have it both ways. If you don't care about what the people of Crimea think and don't want a referendum at all, then don't later complain about the results of the referendum by claiming they don't reflect what the people of Crimea think.

first off what you answered has nothing to do with what i said

you are also a fucking chickenshit hypocrite

and also 40% of the population of the crimean peninsula is not russian

taht is barely a majority of russians

that also does not take into account how many russians would vote to join a theocratic dictatorship

 

[norseamd]

Good thing we agree on the bolded

you are constantly using hypocritical chickenshit rhetoric

that was a russian run referendum