icemann on 17/3/2014 at 11:00
Wonder which country Russia will invade next. Or maybe they'll chop more of Ukraine off first while Europe and the US do nothing. Time will tell.
Gryzemuis on 17/3/2014 at 11:21
Quote Posted by Harvester
Wrong. Becoming independent was one of the options. Remaining a part of the Ukraine wasn't.
This is from the wiki page:
(
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crimean_referendum,_2014)
Quote:
There will be two choices to choose from on the ballot with voters able to choose only one of them. The choices, in synthesis, reflect the following stances:
Choice 1: Are you in favour of the reunification of Crimea with Russia as a part of the Russian Federation?
Choice 2: Are you in favour of restoring the 1992 Constitution and the status of Crimea as a part of Ukraine?
Now I don't know all the little details. But option 2 says "are you in favor of .... Crimea as part of Ukraine ?". To me it seems this is an option to vote for if you want Crimea to stay in the Ukraine. Right ? Maybe with a lot of independency from Kiev. But still part of the Ukraine.
(
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/15/world/europe/crimea-vote-does-not-offer-choice-of-status-quo.html)
There are many other parts of the world that either have that situation, or are striving for it. Flanders wants to be an independent state inside Belgium. Scotland wants to be independent inside the UK.
What am I missing here ?
Another way to look at it.
The people of the Krim we given the choice to be either part of a country which had a violent coup. Where neo-nazis are in the government. A country that is on the edge of bankrupcy. Or they could cose for a country that is economically doing much better, even rich. Has oil and gas. Is much more stable. There are many things wrong with Russia. But would life be worse than what it is in the Ukraine ? What would you chose ?
Ukraine is not Syria. But I will bet anyone here that the Ukraine will be politically and financially a mess during the next 10 years. Another example where the clueless west fucked up a country by doing all the wrong things.
zombe on 17/3/2014 at 11:37
Quote Posted by Gryzemuis
This is from the wiki page:
Now I don't know all the little details. But option 2 says "are you in favor of .... Crimea as part of Ukraine ?". To me it seems this is an option to vote for if you want Crimea to stay in the Ukraine. Right ? Maybe with a lot of independency from Kiev. But still part of the Ukraine.
Interesting, this seems to contradict the reports. Unfortunately, my Russian is a bit wonky and the more proficient members are not at home :(.
Quote Posted by Gryzemuis
There are many other parts of the world that either have that situation, or are striving for it. Flanders wants to be an independent state inside Belgium. Scotland wants to be independent inside the UK.
What am I missing here ?
By the constitution of Ukraine - border change IS possible if the majority of Ukraine citizens choose so. Crimea can not do so itself. Usually, similar laws are in effect elsewhere too.
Quote Posted by Gryzemuis
Another way to look at it.
The people of the Krim we given the choice to be either part of a country which had a violent coup. Where neo-nazis are in the government. A country that is on the edge of bankrupcy. Or they could cose for a country that is economically doing much better, even rich. Has oil and gas. Is much more stable. There are many things wrong with Russia. But would life be worse than what it is in the Ukraine ? What would you chose ?
That is irrelevant. It is not theirs to choose.
Quote Posted by Gryzemuis
Ukraine is not Syria. But I will bet anyone here that the Ukraine will be politically and financially a mess during the next 10 years. Another example where the clueless west fucked up a country by doing all the wrong things.
What did "west" do?
edit: excel in inactivity?
Harvester on 17/3/2014 at 12:05
Quote Posted by zombe
Interesting, this seems to contradict the reports. Unfortunately, my Russian is a bit wonky and the more proficient members are not at home :(.
Hmm. It also contradicts what they said on the Dutch news. But if it's true, apologies to Nemyax for that part. I should remember to recheck facts online before blindly trusting what they say on the Dutch 8 PM news.
Gryzemuis on 17/3/2014 at 12:06
Quote Posted by zombe
Interesting, this seems to contradict the reports.
And that is my whole fucking point in this thread.
The western media are so biased, it is ridiculous.
I just read this from one of the major dutch tv-news sources (NOS Teletekst).
Translation is mine:
"Russia is now willing to take part in an international contact-group. The contact-group is an initiative of western countries to find a solution for the conflict. Presumably Russia will bring demands that are unacceptable for the western countries".
WTF ? Presumably ? What does that mean ? The contact-group hasn't started yet. No proposals have been made. And Russia has made no demands yet. But our news already knows now that Russia is gonna attach unacceptable demands ? What kind of "unbiased news reporting" is that ?
nemyax on 17/3/2014 at 12:11
Quote Posted by zombe
What did "west" do?
According to Ms Nuland's revelations, it sank $5 billion into abetting regime change in Ukraine and came up with roles for the coup crowd.
Quote Posted by zombe
Declaring something does not make it true
Sometimes it does, and sometimes it doesn't. The American declaration of independence became reality. Kosovo didn't do much in the way of asking permission. And so on. These things happen as long as there's a strong enough arm to make them happen. And they are justified after the fact.
The link, by the way: (
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2578160/Ukraines-fugitive-president-blasts-bandit-regime-says-country-heading-civil-war.html)
Quote Posted by Harvester
they themselves get their facts wrong
listed the facts, and they match what I wrote. The Wikipedia translation is accurate. Also note the "re" bit in "reunification".
Quote Posted by zombe
accept my declaration of you being an idiot.
I may be, but that's beside the point. I'll leave the acceptance issue pending.
zombe on 17/3/2014 at 12:33
Quote Posted by Harvester
Hmm. It also contradicts what they said on the Dutch news. But if it's true, apologies to Nemyax for that part. I should remember to recheck facts online before blindly trusting what they say on the Dutch 8 PM news.
I am not so willing to jump to conclusions (ie: "seems to contradict") - as the wiki page you linked notes:
Quote:
It is yet unclear which version of the 1992 constitution the second choice refers to.[71][72] The original 1992 constitution was adopted together with a declaration of independence, but parliament then ratified a second version one day later that stipulated that Crimea "was a part of Ukraine".[k][74] The declaration states that independence from the Ukraine will take effect if the "reunification with Russia" choice gets the most votes (art. 1); this independence will pave way for Crimea's application for membership in the Russian Federation (via inter-state treaty (art. 3).[75]
You can bet your socks on what version Russia/Crimea will insist on (not that it would have any validity either way, but interesting nonetheless).
My guess is that the first interpretation is what people in Crimea understood it and that is why it was reported as such.
zombe on 17/3/2014 at 12:46
Quote Posted by nemyax
Sometimes it does, and sometimes it doesn't. The American declaration of independence became reality. Kosovo didn't do much in the way of asking permission. And so on. These things happen as long as there's a strong enough arm to make them happen. And they are justified after the fact.
So, by your own admission, it doesn't. Guns'n'force do - tentatively (Pending anyone else recognizing the legitimacy - no chance for that here).
Did you seriously give a dailymail link? ... one would generally prefer a legitimate news source in relation to - news.
nickie on 17/3/2014 at 12:50
Quote Posted by zombe
Does anyone know the "referendum" options?
(
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26514797) Not that it helps much because I don't speak the language but I understand the options were: "to join Russia immediately or gain greater autonomy within Ukraine."
nemyax on 17/3/2014 at 12:58
Quote Posted by zombe
Pending anyone else recognizing the legitimacy
I suppose Russia considering Crimea its territory and the others considering it occupied territory sits well enough with Putin.
Quote Posted by zombe
Did you seriously give a dailymail link?
That's the first relevant item that Google turned up. The case in point was that the Crimean parliament did sign this sort of paper. The rest of the article doesn't matter.
