Russia accuses Ukraine of attempted Crimea 'incursions' - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Conscript;50861738]What does this even mean? Your history is inextricably tied to Russia, you're part of a cultural union. You might not like that Ukraine, as the borderland, went East more than West since the 1600s but you're not going to change that. Not without tearing apart the multicultural soviet borders. Which might be a fair trade, but it'll never happen because money [img]http://i.imgur.com/asN8rf1.png?1[/img][/QUOTE] It means exactly what it means. If you can't understand that then I'm not going to bother, especially since you unironically used a polandball comic as part of your argument.

[QUOTE=Electrocuter;50861686]You go on about the people's right to choose and self-determination and shit but then you favor forcing an option the people don't want on them because "it's for the best"? Are you just arguing for argument's sake now?[/QUOTE] In a perfect world, we would only need to care about self-determination but Russia has already invaded, so it's a bit too late for that. Therefore peace and an end to the fighting and hostility is more important at the moment.

Not going to discuss or advocate the invasion, just wanted to note that there wasn't much sense for Putin to push an actually open and supervised referendum, as the US as a leading power would never accept it anyways no matter how deeply and overwhelmingly the majority of the local population supports the unification with Russia. It's obvious both the West and Russia don't give a fuck about the people of Crimea, it's just they follow their very own global goals that will always be > regular people's interests.

[QUOTE=Conscript;50861590]What do you expect from [img]https://facepunch.com/fp/flags/ca.png[/img]? Been talking to some butthurt Banderite ex-pats? Frankly, Crimea was never Ukrainian[/QUOTE] If nations can seize territory that is historically "theirs" then Germany should straight-up annex Konigsberg and correct the mistake of the Potsdam Conference, Denmark should retake Scania, Mexico should reclaim Texas, and Russia has every right to take Alaska back. Nevermind national sovereignty or the changes in demographics and national sentiment that can happen over decades or centuries - that's irrelevant to historical claims.

[QUOTE=piddlezmcfuz;50861910]If nations can seize territory that is historically "theirs" then Germany should straight-up annex Konigsberg and correct the mistake of the Potsdam Conference, Denmark should retake Scania, Mexico should reclaim Texas, and Russia has every right to take Alaska back. Nevermind national sovereignty or the changes in demographics and national sentiment that can happen over decades or centuries - that's irrelevant to historical claims.[/QUOTE] There are still Russians living in Crimea though, not so many Germans in Königsberg. So it's not exactly the same thing.

[QUOTE=Conscript;50861684]You aren't an imperialist no, you're just from a long-running tradition of nationalists that serve as pawns in a chess game between great powers. Even your fascists just act as street thugs for neoliberal economic reform, it's such a joke. Go beat up some coal workers so you can serve up Donbass to the IMF for a better loan.[/QUOTE] I really wonder if you got dropped on the head when you were younger. Every post you make I'm becoming more convinced you're a Russian fascist, I'm sure I'm not the only one who thinks so either. Do you have anything better to do than post disinformation and justify a war with lies?

[QUOTE=Ghost656;50861940]I really wonder if you got dropped on the head when you were younger. Every post you make I'm becoming more convinced you're a Russian fascist, I'm sure I'm not the only one who thinks so either. Do you have anything better to do than post disinformation and justify a war with lies?[/QUOTE] I'm neither Russian nor a fascist. I'm polish and a socialist so I can afford the nuance, I completely understand the feelings of both sides here because I see them day to day. [quote]f nations can seize territory that is historically "theirs" then Germany should straight-up annex Konigsberg and correct the mistake of the Potsdam Conference, Denmark should retake Scania, Mexico should reclaim Texas, and Russia has every right to take Alaska back. Nevermind national sovereignty or the changes in demographics and national sentiment that can happen over decades or centuries - that's irrelevant to historical claims.[/quote] All these other territory disputes are a product of run of the mill historical shit that's been going on forever (and for that reasons you're right the claims are essentially meaningless), but here you're talking about a territorial dispute that boils down to there once being a multicultural, international socialist union where communists from the top-down tried to take care of the East's unresolved national questions (because unlike the West it never did on its own, and Eastern Europe was made up heterogeneous empires that the nationalism of the 19th century and WW1 would implode) by drawing up the borders they thought were best. Ukraine is the first obvious consideration on that note in 1917, having nebulous borders and traditions of nationhood at that point, and Lenin became a vocal opponent of russian chauvinism for that reason. He saw socialism and Ukraine's national development as one in the same, because everyone else of the status quo (the west, germans, poles, and tsarists) had and would continue to just fuck them. He's still right, but regardless... It made a lot of sense in the 1920s to make Ukraine what it is today, before WW2, before Hitler's race war and Stalin's nationalism in response that cemented the USSR as a 'Russian' state, and before that state collapsed. Now, not so much. You have conservative Russia and nationalist Ukraine with SSR borders, which means we should probably change them. And yes, that logic goes for Russia and Chechnya as well.

[QUOTE=Conscript;50861590]What do you expect from [img]https://facepunch.com/fp/flags/ca.png[/img]? Been talking to some butthurt Banderite ex-pats? Frankly, Crimea was never Ukrainian, it was integrated into a multicultural project known as the Ukrainian SSR (as explicitly distinguished from unitary nation-state of Ukraine) as a symbol of the union and 300 years of friendship. That did not mean being Ukrainian or loyal to a post-soviet unitary nation-state. Some people here are so brainwashed into being for Western imperialism with the excuse of Ukrainian self-determination they consciously don't care about little non-Ukrainian regions historically never part of the states Kiev was. Through the course of the last 20 years, it's been shown besides different pasts, they want different futures as well, but some are insistent on mashing them together to everyone's expense just to spite big bad Russia. Also, the annexation was supported by an overwhelming majority of the population (88% according to pew, compared to 58% Russian demographic). Nobody cares if it was illegal, self-determination precedes international law and the demands of great powers. Those who say otherwise are often the same people that support Kosovo independence or Georgian annexation of former autonomous regions of Abkhazia and South Ossetia. It's a joke, same with this 'Russian threat' being used as deflection. That first words here are blatantly false and contradicted by history recent enough that you and I can remember it. Putin is 'playing Tsar' (aka developing a Eurasian position in response to the last 15-20 years of political developments) because it's kind of hard to diversify and develop when you've been snubbed by the European project as non-european and anti-liberal, and globalization instead comes at your expense. Russia has been, hardly by any choice of its own, placed on a 'wrong side of history' and [b]has become unrepentant in response[/b] Thus, it is our duty as Westerners to put aside a rivalry our elites are anxious to get back into, bring Russia back into the fold of growth and back on the track to its own eventual liberalization/Westernization. America, as successor to the British Empire that has adopted a winner-takes-all attitude, is cynically bringing back not cold war 2.0, but Great Game 2.0. Russia's geopolitical position here is defined by a return to nationalism in a region whose Soviet-era borders are defined by trying to transcend such things, this creates national questions in various areas with one side that inevitably looks to Russia, who tries to freeze the conflict and stem Western advance. This has been happening since the 90s. Anyone who pretends to care about imperialism and focuses on Russia the most (because it uses hard power which is plastered all over mainstream media and easy to paint as 'the real imperialist') is deluding themselves.[/QUOTE] If ukranians dont like Ukraine, they can move to russia. If i dont like the US and want to live in Canada, canada cant just invade to protect my idea.

[QUOTE=Conscript;50861590]Frankly, Crimea was never Ukrainian, it was integrated into a multicultural project known as the Ukrainian SSR (as explicitly distinguished from unitary nation-state of Ukraine) as a symbol of the union and 300 years of friendship. That did not mean being Ukrainian or loyal to a post-soviet unitary nation-state.[/QUOTE] If you go by that logic then, theoretically, the UK could invade France and seize Normandy because at one point long ago our ancestors held it, or Mexico could seize back Texas because it was stolen from them almost 200 years ago. Based on that logic any country could annex another sovereign nation's territory just because at some point long ago that country or its predecessor touched it. Not taking a side or anything here, but it's a slippery slope to use that kind of argument.

If Crimea had a [i]peaceful[/i] vote to secede from Ukraine and join Russia, [i]without any meddling from the Ukrainian or Russian governments[/i], they would belong to Russia (or otherwise be a conflicted territory if Ukraine refused to accept the secession). Since Russia meddled in the elections, and they have a long history of blatantly falsifying their own election results, Crimea does not belong to Russia. The circumstances around the "referendum" in Crimea are so suspect that it's [I]justifiably[/I] a disputed election. Russia's possession of Crimea is illegal. I'm aware that most Crimeans are of Russian ancestry and that a fair amount actually would vote to secede and join Russia, [i]but the vote was run during violent revolution during which Russia snuck soldiers across the border[/i]. It's a disputed territory for good reason. It was an annexation disguised as a vote. If the majority of Crimea actually wants to go to Russia, have them hold a [i]transparent[/i] vote on that issue. That's not currently possible with Russian meddling, so the status quo remains - meaning Crimea belongs to Ukraine, not Russia.

[QUOTE=Teddybeer;50862647]Historical revisionism is one hell of a drug. Oh the annexation found that much support because everyone a lot of people evacuated by car and later by train when other options were blocked skewing any results. Not that you care as Crimea had some support for join the Ukrainian SSR but that does of course not fit your agenda. And if it's our duty as Westerners to put aside a rivalry to bring them on the liberalization/Westernization path why are the LGBT now worse off on the the glorious Russian banner? The entire post and debating style reminds me of Neo-Nazis forums I used to visit. You really don't give a shit about any people involved and just want to stick it to the west because Putin can have his repressive shit show and you can't.[/QUOTE] Don't get him started on the Holodomor in the Ukraine. Apparently, Stalin's forced confiscation of their grain which led to millions of people starving to death there wasn't an act of genocide. At least according to him anyway. And apparently, the entire history of the Holodomor has been "muddled" by Ukrainian expats who are out to smear Stalin's name and legacy.:v: There are times where Conscript can make good points, but more often than not he's just more of a nuisance to this forum than he's worth. Do yourself a favor and ignore him. [editline]10th August 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=antianan;50861876]Not going to discuss or advocate the invasion, just wanted to note that there wasn't much sense for Putin to push an actually open and supervised referendum, as the US as a leading power would never accept it anyways no matter how deeply and overwhelmingly the majority of the local population supports the unification with Russia.[/quote] This is nonsense. Having an open and supervised referendum is the United Nations' business to, you know, supervise-- not exclusively the United States'. The only sense for the one that was conducted as it was conducted comes down purely to the cynical reality of politics: it added false legitimacy to Russia's claims about how "the people want this". They could claim that the people wanted it, they could downplay the fact they didn't go to the United Nations with their referendum in the first place because "evil Western imperialists will never accept it", and they knew that apart from some diplomatic and economic protests there wouldn't be any serious military repercussions against them. [QUOTE=antianan;50861876]It's obvious both the West and Russia don't give a fuck about the people of Crimea, it's just they follow their very own global goals that will always be > regular people's interests.[/QUOTE] And this is just pointless. We care about the Crimea and the people of the Crimea because what goes on there and what happens to them affects us. Having a 21st century Slavic Mussolini equivalent invading sovereign nations and seizing their territory under the guise of invented legitimacy is something the entire [i]international community[/i] cares about-- never mind those of us just here in the West.

I cant believe people still defend this bs. You can pretty much see how spineless these "neutral" people are. Look, the independent Crimea is not gonna work because they saw how South Ossetia and Abkhazia got shafted by Russia with their self rule deal. Annexation was a last minute improv. On the referendum itself, the Crimean separatists actually has a very very good chance, but they idiotically blew it all away with that 100% bullshit referendum. Fuck, you know Russia fucked up when China refuses to recognise the ref and Belarus is trying to cut its dependency on Russia.

[QUOTE=Teddybeer;50862647]Historical revisionism is one hell of a drug. Oh the annexation found that much support because everyone a lot of people evacuated by car and later by train when other options were blocked skewing any results. Not that you care as Crimea had some support for join the Ukrainian SSR but that does of course not fit your agenda. And if it's our duty as Westerners to put aside a rivalry to bring them on the liberalization/Westernization path why are the LGBT now worse off on the the glorious Russian banner? The entire post and debating style reminds me of Neo-Nazis forums I used to visit. You really don't give a shit about any people involved and just want to stick it to the west because Putin can have his repressive shit show and you can't.[/QUOTE] It was a pew poll, not the referendum result. Your second point doesn't follow, I'm not sure what you're trying to say. LGBT is worse off because they didn't liberalize, and why they didn't is another story ...nazis? First of all, what the hell are you doing on these forums? Secondly, what nazi is anti-western? They're fundamentally pro-western, that's why they're nazis. [quote]If ukranians dont like Ukraine, they can move to russia. If i dont like the US and want to live in Canada, canada cant just invade to protect my idea.[/quote] Yea, that was intelligent. The world works in these simplified, abstracted principles, right? Everyone developed equally, right? I have no idea why this got so many upvotes, the point I was making obviously went clear over your head. Read my post again. [quote]If you go by that logic then, theoretically, the UK could invade France and seize Normandy because at one point long ago our ancestors held it, or Mexico could seize back Texas because it was stolen from them almost 200 years ago. Based on that logic any country could annex another sovereign nation's territory just because at some point long ago that country or its predecessor touched it.[/quote] No, that doesn't follow. I forgot these places existed in Eastern Europe, which had no enlightenment and thus struggled until modernity with feudal empires and national questions, and went straight from that to being part of an international socialist union in a transition that took place during a world war. No phase of nationhood like in the West, no phase of liberal-democracy, nothing. My country, Poland, had one of the strongest senses of nationhood from that time and was exposed to the Enlightenment and liberalism, and it [i]still[/i] underwent many territorial changes until it arrived at something that wouldn't piss off a neighbor. The former soviet space needs to do that, and crimea is part of it. If you oppose that, you're repressing a contradiction not unlike that of the Balkan powder keg, and we know were that led. I don't want to hear any more bullshit like the above, acknowledge the gap between East and West on the spread of the enlightenment and capitalism, exposure to the USSR, and therefore national development and the borders thereof. Acknowledge this calls into question current borders. Acknowledge after WW1 Eastern Europe fought its war of pygmies in Churchill's words, and then similarly after soviet collapse the fSU broke out into all sorts of national conflicts over territory and such (particularly thanks to the system of autonomous oblasts for minorities and the how meaningless borders were overall). Consider that maybe then current borders aren't perfect and don't reflect the needs of the populace, then we can talk. 'Hurr then I get normandy' isn't an argument, and I'm not going to state why again

Imagine being a socialist and being so delusional that you shill for a homophobic nationalist who annexes foreign countries for literally no money at all Conscript, you're a disgrace. Go join the American Nazi Party. I'm no socialist or left-winger but in my conversations with even anarcho-communists, you would be more at home there with your indulgences of racists and proper imperialists than in any socialist organisation.

[QUOTE=FlashMarsh;50863860]Imagine being a socialist and being so delusional that you shill for a homophobic nationalist who annexes foreign countries for literally no money at all Conscript, you're a disgrace. Go join the American Nazi Party. I'm no socialist or left-winger but in my conversations with even anarcho-communists, you would be more at home there with your indulgences of racists and proper imperialists than in any socialist organisation.[/QUOTE] Yea, because if I don't support the Western liberal position I must support the Russian nationalist position. There's obviously no continuity of my views with the revolutionaries that ditched both, looked at a fucking map, saw a jailhouse of nations, and tried to judge what delineations would be best for a region with no traditions of national statehood, but instead a lot of ethnic tension. Get the fuck over it, plenty of progressives are highly critical of our policy towards Russia. I won't be shoehorned into your neat little liberal box of progressive and therefore pro-west, or reactionary and therefore anti-west. I can be pro-LGBT and think there's a better way to go about it then expanding NATO.

Your logic for supporting Russia is basically the same logic by which the Nazi Party invaded Czechoslovakia and did the anshluss. [editline]11th August 2016[/editline] Where does it end for you? What if Russia invaded half of Estonia? Or more and more of Ukraine? Or further parts of Georgia? Is there a limit?

[QUOTE=FlashMarsh;50863887]Your logic for supporting Russia is basically the same logic by which the Nazi Party invaded Czechoslovakia and did the anshluss.[/QUOTE] If you really believe this there's really nothing for us to say to each other. The funny part is you're equating the ability of communists to draw up borders in eastern europe of all places, and the same ability of the liberal-democracies to do so in already-developed central and western europe. Are you sure you want to do that? [quote]Where does it end for you? What if Russia invaded half of Estonia? Or more and more of Ukraine? Or further parts of Georgia? Is there a limit?[/quote] Estonia is well delineated and there's nothing questionable about it, accordingly it was one of the more developed and western places in the USSR. The historically recently settled 'wild lands' that became a multicultural tsarist colony called new russia, then simply attached to a soviet republic, then part of a post-soviet nation-state of Ukraine...that's not nearly as clear cut, and it shows in political divides of the country. Georgia is clear cut, South Ossetia and Abkhazia aren't Georgian, everything isn't Russian. It's not hard. The next logical step would be independent chechnya, actually. In the long run, I think asian parts of Siberia should be separate as well. We also need to look at moldova/transnistria. All the frozen conflicts are national questions that need to be resolved. But to Russia's credit, it already federalized and recognized the existence of these different regions and peoples. Countries like Georgia and Ukraine do not, they are nationalist unitary states that want to forcibly integrate and control minorities that enjoyed privileges in the soviet era, such as autonomous oblast or autonomous SSR status. [quote]There are times where Conscript can make good points, but more often than not he's just more of a nuisance to this forum than he's worth. Do yourself a favor and ignore him.[/quote] I feel the same exact way about you, actually. Many of the same people here I was arguing with two and a half years ago when maidan was happening.

You're right. There is nothing for us to say to each other.

So you got 2 sides, Pro-Ruskies appear to be rather nice and try to use logic, though it backfires on them immensely, with their logic turning against them, while the Pro-wests are rather malicious and angry in their approach, though they make a little bit more sense, and they value liberty more so I'll give them that. I just think if the Crimeans want to be totally independent thats their buisness, but they really fucked up trying to join an active Authoritarian nation.

If russia actually cared about russian speaking minorities they could've simply offered easy immigration.

this is one of the reasons why russia wants trump to win badly if you ever wonder why they go through such lengths to hack and leak shit to trump, there you go

[QUOTE=A B.A. Survivor;50861504]I think the most important question we can ask is what karimatrix is doing in Crimea.[/QUOTE] Crimea is a popular holiday destination. [editline]11th August 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=codemaster85;50862789]If ukranians dont like Ukraine, they can move to russia. If i dont like the US and want to live in Canada, canada cant just invade to protect my idea.[/QUOTE] It's not so easy to move countries, especially with how bad the Ukrainian economy is. I have a friend in Ukraine who is an ethnic Russian who doesn't like the current government following Maidan at all and he cannot leave because he needs money for that.

I'm convinced conscript is just someone working for the troll factories using a proxy

[QUOTE=Megadave;50864065]So you got 2 sides, Pro-Ruskies appear to be rather nice and try to use logic, though it backfires on them immensely, with their logic turning against them, while the [B]Pro-wests are rather malicious and angry in their approach[/B], though they make a little bit more sense, and they value liberty more so I'll give them that. I just think if the Crimeans want to be totally independent thats their buisness, but they really fucked up trying to join an active Authoritarian nation.[/QUOTE] It more has to do with the fact we're kinda fed up with their shit. I haven't argued with anyone in this thread, but I had this same arguments since 2014 on reddit. Yet conversation hasn't moved at all after 2 and half years, despite the fact that facts and logic is against pro-Russians.

[QUOTE=Megadave;50864065]Pro-wests are rather malicious and angry in their approach,.[/QUOTE] might be something to do with being exposed to this bullshit on a daily basis, watching on the news as russia invaded and annexed territory belonging to a neighbouring country.

[QUOTE=RG4ORDR;50860875]I mean is it really an incursion for Ukraine's own territory?[/QUOTE] It's not theirs anymore.

[QUOTE=Jame's;50865468]It's not theirs anymore.[/QUOTE] It is theirs, just under foreign military occupation. [editline]11th August 2016[/editline] [URL="https://twitter.com/Liveuamap/status/763667086212292609"]Crimean head: US State Department behind terrorist attempts in Crimea[/URL]

Watch out, it's the all-powerful US State Department! Holy shit, this pisses me off immensely. Our media (and, by extension, the people) has been using "The West" as a scapegoat for most of our problems. I do not have any idea why people think that the State Dept. is an entity hell-bent on destroying Russia, because that makes absolutely no fucking sense whatsoever. Just imagine for a second that Russian people would be a perfect audiece for the likes of Alex Jones. Even though the Crimean head destroyed his credibility in my eyes, the blame-shifting will continue on a national level as usual.

[QUOTE=Demeschik;50865851]Watch out, it's the all-powerful US State Department! Holy shit, this pisses me off immensely. Our media (and, by extension, the people) has been using "The West" as a scapegoat for most of our problems. I do not have any idea why people think that the State Dept. is an entity hell-bent on destroying Russia, because that makes absolutely no fucking sense whatsoever. Just imagine for a second that Russian people would be a perfect audiece for the likes of Alex Jones. Even though the Crimean head destroyed his credibility in my eyes, the blame-shifting will continue on a national level as usual.[/QUOTE] You're saying it like US State Department isn't involved. :^)

[media]https://twitter.com/poroshenko/status/763697830137561088[/media] seems like Ukrainian troops on Crimean border are going on higher alert levels