The Russian government probably wants disgruntled Russians to move to places like that. The Russian fertility rate isn't high, but it's higher than all its nearest neighbors, and Empire is a long-term game.
You should really cut down on your TV time. Parroting stuff that comes out of that box makes you look .. I don't know .. lacking your own basic intelligence?
Do you seriously think Russia will invade Ukraine or Baltic republics? What f#cking for? Who needs to annex countries that are already knee deep in debt, while pissing off the rest of the world? This makes no sense. Just use your gray matter a bit.
Way to quote by stripping away the context. Have you not been paying attention too? To things like history of Crimea or its geographical location, for example?
The question remains - what will invading Ukraine, strapped in debt and with nothing to offer, give the invaders to be? The brainless hysteria surrounding this situation is absolutely ridiculous. It's twice as ridiculous if you'd remember that Russians and Ukrainians generally treat each other as close relatives. Annoying at times, but still same blood basically. There are radical nationalists on both sides, but that's marginal. Just look at how Ukrainian team was welcomed at the Olympics - with an ovation. And how things were unfolding in Crimea - with flash-bang grenades and blanks.
It's not about Russia threatening Ukraine. It's about Russia paying back US and EU for stirring shit in Ukraine to drive it away from Russia. This is all macro-political. Ukraine is just a casualty caught in a cross-fire.
--
Have I been paying attention? Yes, I have been. Have you though?
> To things like history of Crimea or its geographical location, for example?
If history and geography trump the current citizens and laws, then the yanks should all fuck off back where they came from and leave it to the native americans and the mexicans, no?
> Have you though?
Enough to realise that something is fishy.
Russian troops invaded crimea, surrounded the Ukrainian military bases, and then declared it was all "legit" because a referendum had 96% voting in favour of joining Russia, despite polls from previous years showing 34% support.
All but 2 members of the UN Security Council voted to declare the referendum invalid - it was only defeated because Russia has veto power.
Your argument is that Russia doesn't get anything out of this. Like Putin is a completely rational guy who does shit because it makes sense, rather than because he's a whack job who pines for the "glory" of the USSR.
> If history and geography trump the current citizens and laws, then the yanks should all fuck off back where they came from and leave it to the native americans and the mexicans, no?
Just the former. Because, you know, the latter, inasmuch as they are distinct from the former, have the same problem as "the yanks".
Yeah, that's just some guy on US government payroll pulling numbers from thin air and an Ukrainian politician quoting some other guy who said this and that. That's not "polls from previous years showing 34% support" as you put it.
Bottom line is that Crimea is massively pro-Russian. Unlike you I've actually been there multiple times and have friends who still live there. The overall sentiment has always been that Khrushev was an idiot to detach Crimea from Russia and "gift" it to Ukraine in the 50s. That 97% looks pretty damn close to the reality. If you are interested in this, take a look at BBC coverage of the referendum. The turnout and voting numbers were in fact all legit and no one was going to the voting booths under a gunpoint.
> If you are interested in this, take a look at BBC coverage of the referendum
They quoted a single woman who claimed the Ukrainian government are nazis. Sounds legit.
> have friends who still live there. The overall sentiment
I lived in Australia for 29 years and everyone I know thinks Tony Abbot is a fucking idiot, so he must have rigged the election, right? How many of the 2 million Crimean people do you know well enough to have had discussions about their thoughts on Russia? Anything over a million and you're probably safe.
> The turnout and voting numbers were in fact all legit and no one was going to the voting booths under a gunpoint.
a) facts have to be proven. b) who says you need a gun to rig a poll?
Apart from being illegal according to their own constitution, the referendum gave no option to maintain the status quo - only to become part of Russia, or to become independent. That sounds amazingly legit.
A Russian citizen in Crimea on a one year visa was allowed to vote, which is illegal. There are confirmed reports of people having their identification confiscated before they could vote.
Add to this - Russia invited "observers" to validate the legitimacy of the vote. The leader of the group invited to observe is a Neo Nazi and Adolf Hitler admirer. The "observers" from the group were a Frenchman, a Spaniard and a Hungarian. All three are former members of neo-Nazi parties, and currently members of far-right-wing political parties. Still legit though right?
And of course every country on the UN security council except China and Russia must be just saying it's illegal and illegitimate for shits and giggles, not because of any evidence.
It depends on your perspective. Crimea agreed after the fact that the Russians were merely securing their own territory, correct? If so, then there was no invasion.
If the Crimeans had voted no, would Russia still be there?
> Crimea agreed after the fact that the Russians were merely securing their own territory, correct?
Those are the results announced by Russia immediately after their military invasion, yes.
It doesn't mean those are the actual results, that the voting was actually done by "the Crimeans", or that the voting was free or fair. [1]
> If so, then there was no invasion.
No, even if the people of the invaded part of the Ukraine actually agreed after-the-fact, Russia unauthorized intrusion with military forces into what Russia had previously by treaties (in which it also agreed to respect and guarantee the soveriegnty and territorial integrity of the Ukraine, as part of a deal wherein the Ukraine gave up the former Soviet nuclear weapons on its territory) agreed was Ukrainian territory would still be an invasion. It doesn't retroactively become "not an invasion" based on events after the invasion occurs.
> If the Crimeans had voted no, would Russia still be there?
> If the Crimeans had voted no, would Russia still be there?
Seriously?
Do you actually believe that, or are you simply posting here as part of your job?
You have absolutely no clue as to what a free election is if you believe that 97% of the people in Crimea voted to join Russia. I won't even bother posting any details as to the wording of the ballot, or as to all the Russian slanted propaganda prior to the vote. 97% votes only happen in "People's Republics".
Putin and his kleptocrat buddies (nee oligarchs) are busy looting Russia. Hope you're getting your share.
Man, it's be awesome to get paid to post. I mean, yeah, you'd probably be a shill for some large conglomerate, but the paycheck would probably be great to supplement my other earnings.
I'm curious as to how you know what my beliefs are. I don't think they were in the GP post.
