• Putin opens Russian bridge link with annexed Crimea
    21 replies, posted
The madman even went to the opening himself. But still guys, no Russian troops were in Crimea, those were Euro-Nazi-Zionists in sheeps clothing.
Its pretty crazy if you stop to take it all in. Russia straight up invaded and annexed it's neighbor, perpetuating a bloody civil war that climaxed in Russia shooting down a passenger jet, and seemingly nothing major has happened in response.
Europe relies too heavily on Russia's oil to give any political response apart from sanctions, sanctions that are by and large made up for the more Europe guzzles from the spouts of those pipelines. Most outcries end with the journalism that started it, granted the west did supply a meager amount of weapons to Ukraine but at the same time the UK is divided in terms of those in power, right down to the individual. People have vested interests in energy, defence (or offence it should be called these days) . Money talks more than morality or honour, damn shame.
Well, Just mildly part of it through unrecognized and illegal referendum than takeover it. For civil war, well right now there no major fights than last a year or two but rebel states are recovering their military and society after that bloodshed stopped by working current ceasefire and got semi-recognized by Russia itself since February 2017.
I would argue that, whilst the oil thing is a factor, the main reason that the rest of the world didn't get involved is that escalation in military conflict is hard to predict, and escalation with nuclear-armed powers can get out of hand extremely quickly and potentially be devastating.
That's one heck of a quick bridge conctruction, politics aside, you can not apreciate amount of enginering effort, when taking in account geography and sanctional climate.
I'd say he burned more bridges than he built with this crap
We could've used more practical bridges inland but no, let's do some stupid dickwaving that took a toll on a already not very strong economy. Do they even have a plan at this point? Do they do stuff they do "just because" due to power going to their heads? They continue to do this "in your face" to their own population while keeping tightening the screws, and for what? Any civil unrest that is breeding can be easily quenched by few liberal reforms and paying something out of their own, very rich from corruption, pockets but no. Do they plan to set Russia ablaze and then ran away to Bahamas or some shit? Level of life keeps plummeting down and frankly at this point we might be looking at a major civil unrest in next 10 to 20 years, perhaps a new revolution with rivers of blood. Not a very bright perspective to be looking forward to.
The EU and Western states in general should have sent some forces to Crimea. Putin's Hitleresque tactic of doing what he wants and hoping that the west are scared enough of war to do anything is exactly how you let an international tyrant loose.
Do you all think the US should have more directly defended Ukraine? Theoretically, the UN Security Council is supposed to do that, but Russia is a permanent member of it and so could veto any attempt to intervene. It's absolute bullshit that Russia can just come up with a half-assed excuse to invade any country and annex its land.
Connecting a completely separated region with two million people to the mainland sounds like a pretty practical thing to me, especially with the intermittent Ukrainian freight blockades.
How long until there's a bridge to the US
Yeah...no I think you can't separate politics from this story. The whole point of this bridge is to further Russia's hold on Crimea, which was wrongly taken from Ukraine. The whole existence of this bridge is political.
just little green slavic men parachuting in, nothing to see here.
I tried to understand why Russia was so hellbent on taking over Crimea. My approach was to talk to my dad's Ukrainian girlfriend about this. She kind of went off on a tirade of how ignorant it was that I didn't get that Crimea was truly Russian land and the Russians have only done good since taking it over by taking it over while her, also very Ukrainian, daughter echoed everything she said. I didn't really learn much other than apparently some Ukrainians agree with it? Worth noting they both watch Russian, not Ukrainian, news channels nightly. If someone can actually explain this to me, that'd be amazing, though I might go see what I can gleam from the rest of the internet about Crimea's history.
Russia has always sucked its teeth into Ukraine, and basically the Kremlin and its underlings view Ukraine as an extension of Russia. Instead of its own country and sovereign people.
Realpolitik-wise, they wanted access to the port of Donetsk. Because Russia is an otherwise almost landlocked nation (with only limited access to the Atlantic Sea during parts of the year when the ice melts), they needed access to the Mediterranean Sea to confer trade power. They've also been using ice breaker ships to expand their reach into the Antlantic. Its the same reason China is building artificial islands with military bases in the south china sea.
There are some very pro-Russia attitudes in Ukraine, especially in the Eastern side. Same can be said for a lot of Eastern Europe, reasons vary, I don't say it's all propaganda as some people may genuinely just like Russia. But I will say that a huge part is because Russia has been strategically exporting their people and culture across Eastern Europe for 300 years, from the days of the Russian Empire to the fall of the Soviet Union.
Quick correction, it was port of Sevastopol, not Donetsk. And Realpolitik-wise, If Crimea would've stayed Ukranian, there would've been NATO warships instead of Russia's Black Sea fleet in Sevastopol. It's quite common understanding of why wee took opportunity. Also, if you'd like to keep it attached to politics, Ukraine deserves this whole show cause ever since reunification with Russia, they've done nothing but trying to worse conditions for people living on pennisula - from energy cuts, road blocks and cargo blocks. They are well aware they have no capacity to ever return it, but they still gotta look miserable. Hope they will enjoy swiming in a puddle that is left of a Black Sea they got after bridge cut in half their freight routes.
Ukrainian I guess just refers to her citizenship, she is likely an ethnic Russian, from the eastern part of the country. Ukraine has essentially two parts: an Ukrainian speaking north-west and a Russian speaking south-east (Novorossiya). Ethnically the latter is a mixed bag, but Crimea is (or was) the part of Ukraine that was totally Russian majority. The reason for this is that Crimea has been part of Russia for almost two centuries after being taken in from the Ottoman Empire. Then, in a purely administrative move (in an effort to decentralize the Soviet Union) in 1954 it was made part of the Ukrainian SSR. This obviously didn't mean much back then, its like saying your city got transferred to Texas from Arizona, big woop. Sevastopol was also a somewhat important military port, which meant a lot of people living there were related to the Soviet military, not necessarily locals. Then the SU fall apart which meant they were remaining part of Ukraine for good. This obviously didn't sit well with the locals, and in the 90s they actually held a referendum about granting them more authority in Ukraine (they were already granted special status in 1991). This sentiment remained, even two decades later. Then came the Euromaidan and the ousting of then-president Yanukovych in 2014, and the Ukraininan government was in complete disarray, including its military. Russia saw a once in a lifetime opportunity to get a region back, hell, they could possibly do that without any violence. And the rest is history.
Yeah screw that country right, forget about the average person who lives there as long as Russia gets a port! This post is toxic as hell, "enjoy swimming in a puddle" what the fuck man? Show some human decency
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.