Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > World Forums > Europe
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-23-2015, 10:16 AM
 
862 posts, read 1,171,051 times
Reputation: 327

Advertisements

The majority there are Russians. Well, fight for "moral rights" till Apocalypse. All this story about moral rights, "historical truth" is absolute bs.

Besides, the Crimea belonged to us in the interwar period. If you insist on the borders of Romania in the interwar period - why can't we insist on our "historical truth"?

Otherwise, you should live in Romania without Moldova and be happy.Truth to be told, I've never cared about the Crimea before the last year. I just think, that it might be a pragmatic scenario. That's all. All this "historical truth" is a bs, used by politicians.

Last edited by Muscovite; 01-23-2015 at 10:37 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-23-2015, 10:57 AM
 
862 posts, read 1,171,051 times
Reputation: 327
Quote:
Originally Posted by CARPATHIAN View Post
Most entitled people to Crimea are the Crimean Tatars. They're the oldest people in the area, have historical cities and landmarks. After them, the Ukrainians, who in a way or other have had things in common with the peninsula in history.

So, perhaps we should restore their Hanligi? Or pehaps, we should restore Ottoman Empire in the borders of the 18th century?

And how on earth can we deduct, who were the Eastern Slavic people in the peninsula in Russian Empire? Not in the Union, but in the Empire?

Well, perhaps, all this story about "historical truth" is a bad one indeed.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-24-2015, 10:40 AM
 
Location: france
827 posts, read 620,827 times
Reputation: 900
Does someone know if there is a kind of transnistria culture?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-24-2015, 10:58 AM
 
Location: Romania
1,460 posts, read 2,544,630 times
Reputation: 873
Quote:
Originally Posted by Muscovite View Post
The majority there are Russians.
This was achieved by colonisation, genocide, deportation and other heinous crimes:



The Crimean Tatars emerged as a Turkic-speaking ethnic group native to Crimea in the early modern period, during the lifetime of the Crimean Khanate, and by the annexation of the Crimean Khanate by the Russian Empire in 1783, they formed the clear majority of Crimean population. The colonization "New Russia" (the Novorossiysk Governorate, of which the later Taurida Governorate formed a part) at the end of 18th century was led by Prince Grigori Potemkin who was granted the powers of an absolute ruler over the area by Catherine the Great. The lands were generously given to the Russian dvoryanstvo (nobility), and the enserfed peasantry mostly from Ukraine and fewer from Russia were transferred to cultivate what was a sparsely populated steppe.
...
By the 1879 Russian Empire Census, Crimean Tatars continued to form a slight plurality (35%) of Crimea's still largely rural population, but there were large numbers of Russians (33%) and Ukrainians (11%).
...
The upheavals and ethnic cleansing of the 20th century vastly changed Crimea's ethnic situation. In 1944, 200,000 Crimean Tatars were deported from Crimea to Central Asia and Siberia, along with 70,000 Greeks and 14,000 Bulgarians and other nationalities. By the latter 20th century, Russians and Ukrainians made up almost the entire population. However, with the fall of the Soviet Union, exiled Crimean Tatars began returning to their homeland and would become 10% of the population by the beginning of the 21st century.





The forcible deportation of the Crimean Tatars from Crimea was ordered by Joseph Stalin as a form of collective punishment for alleged collaboration with the Nazi occupation regime in Taurida Subdistrict during 1942-1943. The state-organized removal is known as the Sürgünlik in Crimean Tatar.
...
A large number of deportees (more than 100,000 according to a 1960s survey by Crimean Tatar activists) died from starvation or disease as a direct result of deportation. Tatars and Soviet dissidents consider it to be genocide.







Demographics of Crimea - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Deportation of the Crimean Tatars - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-24-2015, 12:40 PM
 
26,750 posts, read 22,239,302 times
Reputation: 9994
Quote:
Originally Posted by CARPATHIAN View Post
This was achieved by colonisation, genocide, deportation and other heinous crimes:



The Crimean Tatars emerged as a Turkic-speaking ethnic group native to Crimea in the early modern period, during the lifetime of the Crimean Khanate, and by the annexation of the Crimean Khanate by the Russian Empire in 1783, they formed the clear majority of Crimean population. The colonization "New Russia" (the Novorossiysk Governorate, of which the later Taurida Governorate formed a part) at the end of 18th century was led by Prince Grigori Potemkin who was granted the powers of an absolute ruler over the area by Catherine the Great. The lands were generously given to the Russian dvoryanstvo (nobility), and the enserfed peasantry mostly from Ukraine and fewer from Russia were transferred to cultivate what was a sparsely populated steppe.
...
By the 1879 Russian Empire Census, Crimean Tatars continued to form a slight plurality (35%) of Crimea's still largely rural population, but there were large numbers of Russians (33%) and Ukrainians (11%).
...
The upheavals and ethnic cleansing of the 20th century vastly changed Crimea's ethnic situation. In 1944, 200,000 Crimean Tatars were deported from Crimea to Central Asia and Siberia, along with 70,000 Greeks and 14,000 Bulgarians and other nationalities. By the latter 20th century, Russians and Ukrainians made up almost the entire population. However, with the fall of the Soviet Union, exiled Crimean Tatars began returning to their homeland and would become 10% of the population by the beginning of the 21st century.





The forcible deportation of the Crimean Tatars from Crimea was ordered by Joseph Stalin as a form of collective punishment for alleged collaboration with the Nazi occupation regime in Taurida Subdistrict during 1942-1943. The state-organized removal is known as the Sürgünlik in Crimean Tatar.
...
A large number of deportees (more than 100,000 according to a 1960s survey by Crimean Tatar activists) died from starvation or disease as a direct result of deportation. Tatars and Soviet dissidents consider it to be genocide.



Demographics of Crimea - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Deportation of the Crimean Tatars - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I've read a joke on Russian sites another day, and it goes something like this - "Before his death, Stalin left two sealed letters, one he told to open "in difficult times," and the other one - in "critical times."

When the nineties came with all the neoliberals and their accusations of the Soviet state, the Russians opened the first letter, which was very short. It said "Blame it all on me."

Then the critical times came. The Russians opened the second letter and it said "And now start doing everything the way I did."

As a big paradox as it is, ( and as the history recently proves us,) Stalin's action brought a lot of misery on the inhabitants of the Soviet Union. Yet they undoubtedly reinforced the strength of the state.
With another word - the "rights" of "indigenous people" in Russia threatens the well-being of the Russian state. In a very interesting way, the "preferential status of Russian ethnicity as the "superior one" ( a desire expressed by some Russian nationalists) threatens the interests of the state in the same manner.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-24-2015, 01:14 PM
 
2,969 posts, read 1,947,493 times
Reputation: 1077
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrcricket300 View Post
Moldova itself shouldn't exist as a country. It should be part of Romania.
I agree!! Romania, Moldova, and Transnistria should unite into a single nation.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-24-2015, 01:27 PM
 
26,750 posts, read 22,239,302 times
Reputation: 9994
Quote:
Originally Posted by citoyen View Post
Does someone know if there is a kind of transnistria culture?
If I can describe it the best way I can ( from what I saw on Youtube) - it's the Soviet culture.
My jaw dropped, kinda. I didn't even know that such thing as "Transdnistria" existed. I came across this fact by accident, browsing the Youtube videos.
(I was surprised in the same manner sort of, watching Eastern Ukraine - Kharkov and all. How reminiscent of Soviet times the area was, comparably, say, to Moscow.)
People don't want to let go of their past.
I can understand why, kinda.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-25-2015, 06:01 AM
 
862 posts, read 1,171,051 times
Reputation: 327
CARPATHIAN

If you care so much about the indigenous people -you should be for the idea of Hanligi.

If we were the invaders in Crimea, Ukrainians were the invaders too. And they never were the majority. At first the majority were Crimean Tatars, later - Russians.

The peninsula belongs to Ukraine, if we respect the latest borders, the borders that existed in the second half of the 20th century.

But if so - than Romanians should respect the borders between Romania and Moldova too.

That's all.

Have a nice day!

Last edited by Muscovite; 01-25-2015 at 06:50 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-25-2015, 02:49 PM
 
Location: Romania
1,460 posts, read 2,544,630 times
Reputation: 873
Quote:
Originally Posted by Muscovite View Post
But if so - than Romanians should respect the borders between Romania and Moldova too
Why should they respect a border, if both want to unite?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-26-2015, 04:34 AM
 
862 posts, read 1,171,051 times
Reputation: 327
Quote:
Originally Posted by CARPATHIAN View Post
Why should they respect a border, if both want to unite?
Well, some people want, some other don't. Besides, again, what to do with Transnistria?

I'm not so sure that Transnistria will be ready to be in Ukraine. They connected more with Moldova.

Perhaps the scenario in which Moldova remains independent will be more comfortable for everyone. Perhaps it's the comfort that should be put in the first place. Not history, but comfort and convenience.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > World Forums > Europe

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top