Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Not at all. It's quite common for people to say about both Russia and the US, "I hate the government's politics, but the people are very nice". Most people have no trouble distinguishing between gov't policy and the general population.
I have read a lot posts of this user and he blackened russian people many times with his mockery, sneers and jeers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruth4Truth
P.S. Crimea wasn't part of Russia "legally". There was an international border between it and Russia. Hello?
It's very hard to talk with people who misinterprets your words.
I wrote : "Crimea belongs Russia historically, ethnically, morally and legally."
There was democratic referendum held by crimeans. And they voted to join with Russia. Who cares about your borders if the referendum was the legal act by crimean people in accordance with all international laws and norms approved by the UN? That's mean, Crimea legally belongs to Russia.
Add me there too. I agree that "Crimea belongs to Russia historically, ethnically and morally."
When it comes to "legally" - it's a matter of WHO is in charge of writing those laws for the moment being in history.
I have read a lot posts of this user and he blackened russian people many times with his mockery, sneers and jeers.
It's very hard to talk with people who misinterprets your words.
I wrote : "Crimea belongs Russia historically, ethnically, morally and legally."
There was democratic referendum held by crimeans. And they voted to join with Russia. Who cares about your borders if the referendum was the legal act by crimean people in accordance with all international laws and norms approved by the UN? That's mean, Crimea legally belongs to Russia.
So by that logic then Russia could (should) do the same for:
Not saying there are not better reasons in the Crimea - just saying your justification logic is flawed and blatantly in violation of international norms.
There are Russians in America too. Did you ever think about it?
Quote:
Not saying there are not better reasons in the Crimea - just saying your justification logic is flawed and blatantly in violation of international norms.
Of course there are BETTER reasons why Crimea belongs to Russia, than just coz "Russians live there."
And as far as Eastern Ukraine goes - absolutely, Putin should have done the same as with Crimea.
The fact that he did not, and pretended that "Crimea is full of Russians that need protection" and Eastern Ukraine is not, only proves my opinion of him, that he protects first and utmost the mercantile interests of his upper class, not the national interests of Russia. Sometimes those two correlate, but for the most part they don't.
Not saying there are not better reasons in the Crimea - just saying your justification logic is flawed and blatantly in violation of international norms.
Don't think they haven't thought about it! They began setting the stage there and in other regions almost from the start.
Not saying there are not better reasons in the Crimea - just saying your justification logic is flawed and blatantly in violation of international norms.
It's clear to me that you didn't grasp my logic at all.
Moldova, Ossetia, Nagorno-Karabakh and so on were not any part of the Russian Federation. Never.
But Crimea was a part of RF that was illegally torn out from Russia. Crimea was illegally gifted to Ukraine in the soviet era by Khruschev who was ukrainian himself. Nobody cared about that then because it happened inside of same country, same nation etc. But situation is drastically changed after illegal coup in Kiev. Crimeans didn't support this coup, and after numerous threats from the kievan junta and ukrainian neo-nazis who promised to come and drown crimeans in their blood, crimeans decide to hold referendum to re-join with Russia. This referendum was held in accordance with the international laws. So this act was absolutely legal and Crimea joined to Russia legally. Crimeans said themselves : "we just back our home where we belong." And there was no violation of international norms.
Transnistria or Karabakh never can do this. Russia is not their home.
Of course there are BETTER reasons why Crimea belongs to Russia, than just coz "Russians live there."
And as far as Eastern Ukraine goes - absolutely, Putin should have done the same as with Crimea.
The fact that he did not, and pretended that "Crimea is full of Russians that need protection" and Eastern Ukraine is not, only proves my opinion of him, that he protects first and utmost the mercantile interests of his upper class, not the national interests of Russia. Sometimes those two correlate, but for the most part they don't.
No, Putin couldn't do the same thing with eastern Ukraine. It would have been an illegal act by international law. It would have been looked like illegal annexation of a country land for real.
In case of Crimea, it is part of Russia that never belonged Ukraine. But Eastern Ukraine legally belongs Ukraine by the Decree of her founder V. Lenin. Historically and legally Ukraine is what was enacted by soviet govt after WWI. Putin couldn't violate this. But again, Crimea is the different story.
Besides, the vast majority of crimeans wanted to be with Russia. But eastern Ukraine was not so homogeneous in Russia thing as Crimea was. Some of eastern Ukrainians wanted to stay in Ukraine as an autonomy, some of them wished a total independence from both Russia and Ukraine, some of them wanted to be with Russia, some of them said about federalization etc. Yeah, many eastern ukrainians are ethnic russians. But they are citizens of an other independent state, and Putin couldn't accept them with such discord, disagreement and dissonance. It would have been against the people will. But crimeans rejoined with Russia by their own will. So, it was not the same thing with E. Ukraine morally, legally and historically.
No, Putin couldn't do the same thing with eastern Ukraine. It would have been an illegal act by international law. It would have been looked like illegal annexation of a country land for real.
In case of Crimea, it is part of Russia that never belonged Ukraine.
No! Take eastern ukraine to RF!
Why no?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
