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.
People were patiently standing in lines for hours to vote ( those who wanted to vote of course,) and in some areas the miners who were working second shift have asked to extend hours for voting.
The turnout was very high ( that's what everyone is saying on-line,) about 75%.
So far it's not about joining Russia, it's about getting away from Kiev.
Can't say I blame them.
- people were allowed and encouraged to vote multiple times
- some people had to vote right on the barricades next to heavily armed thugs
- the vote took only place in 14 towns, representing only half of the people living in the Donbass region
- no observers
- police intercepted a car with 100.000 used ballots way before the referendum
Seriously, those results are laughable. But kudos for trying hard to escalate the civil war.
The referendum was fraudulent. It was organised by Pro Russian activists, controlled by pro Russian activists, and the votes counted by pro Russian activists. In short it was a sham.
The only so called crime that the people of Kiev were guilty of erasure was getting rid of a corrupt leader who's strings were being pulled by Moscow. The people had voted for closer ties with Europe, all they wanted was a better life, but it seems the Russian government were determined to deny the majority of Ukrainians just that.
One thing is now certain, Russia has not changed it's stripes, it's a bully that threatens it's neighbours and invades their territory. That's why the people of Eastern Europe hate Russia.
The referendum was fraudulent. It was organised by Pro Russian activists, controlled by pro Russian activists, and the votes counted by pro Russian activists. In short it was a sham.
The referendum was less fraudulent than the Maiden revolt, and the unelected president that now presides making decisions for the entire country while being in a position he was not elected in.
The sham is an unelected president makign decisions impacting all of Ukraine for years to come without being elected. The sham is a revolt removing a fairly elected president instead of waiting for the next election. The sham is expecting people who voted for Yanukovich to just sit back and peacefully go along with the situation where the leader they voted for in a fair election was ousted in a revolt in which an unelected president was installed.
And how in the heck do you think pro-Russian (and more accurately anti-Kiev) activits even have infleunce? Oh yes, the president they elected got overthrown and removed unconstiutionally, and the new gov decided to target E. Ukraine's people and economic power. Who in the world would want ot be attached to a gov in which their first act after overthrowing the president wa to enact a language law? Who would want to be attached to a gov that signed a trade deal with the EU that basically will gut the economic strength of E. Ukraine?
Ukraine is a failed state, borders in which were drawn by Soviet leaders in the interest of the Soviet Union, not as an independent country. These border issues should have been resolved during the USSR break-up, and I have no idea why people so dearly want to hold onto these borders. The West was all more the willing to let South Sudan and Kosovo form their own country, E. Ukraine has much more legitimate reasons for it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by albion
The only so called crime that the people of Kiev were guilty of erasure was getting rid of a corrupt leader who's strings were being pulled by Moscow. The people had voted for closer ties with Europe, all they wanted was a better life, but it seems the Russian government were determined to deny the majority of Ukrainians just that.
That corrupt leader was voted in a fair election. There are constitutional ways to get rid of the elader, none of which were followed. 2015 elections are right around the corner, but Maiden protesters knew they could never field a candidate that would win.
The people did not vote for closer ties with Europe, they voted for Yanukovoich. If peoplle want a different path, they are free to vote for their candidate in the next election.
And a better life? You mean like the one promised when the Orange revolt happened? What happened after that? Oh yes, five years of even worse conditions to the point people wanted Yanukovich back. Maiden protesters can never field a candidate that will win an election, so they had to put one in undemocratically.
Quote:
Originally Posted by albion
One thing is now certain, Russia has not changed it's stripes, it's a bully that threatens it's neighbours and invades their territory. That's why the people of Eastern Europe hate Russia.
People of Europe hate Russia because th epoliticans there turn Russia into an easy scapegoat to deflect from internal problems. E. Europe had more than its fair share of Soviet supporters as well. E. Europe and Europe in general have been in a constant state of war for centuries until the Cold War; people act like Europe was some sort of utopia before the big bad Soviets came along (funny how Russia gets blamed for all Soviet activity, completely ignoring every other Soviet republic.)
Russia and Russian territories has been invaded by Europe in its history far more times than it has invaded Europe; who should be watching who? What countries in the last 23 years has Russia invaded? And this accusation is even more funny considering you state you are in England, how many countries has England invaded in their history?
People were patiently standing in lines for hours to vote ( those who wanted to vote of course,) and in some areas the miners who were working second shift have asked to extend hours for voting.
The turnout was very high ( that's what everyone is saying on-line,) about 75%.
So far it's not about joining Russia, it's about getting away from Kiev.
Can't say I blame them.
Impossible. Cities with hundreds of thousands people eligible to vote had some 4-5 polling stations. Donetsk metropolitan area has 2 million people, which I guess 80% are over 18. So 75% of 1.6 million = 1,200,000.
I'll be generous and say there's 30 polling stations (in reality maybe 10-15). All 30 stations have to process 40,000 voters from 8am to 8pm. 3333 an hour, or 0.93 voters per second! Not bloody likely.
Of course people waited for hours, as there were a handful of polling stations in cities with hundreds of thousands of voters. For example in the Euro election my city of 180,000 inhabitants has 60 polling stations (3000 people a station), so with Ukrainian effectivity they could serve 2.4 million voters in 12 hours.
Reports from Mariupol estimate the real turnout in the city to been around 5%.
Russia invaded Georgia (South Ossetia) in 2008. You have a very short memory boxus! The reason that most Europeans dislike Russians is because they do not trust them. Russia's actions in the Ukraine & Georgia only reinforce that lack of trust.
Russia invaded Georgia (South Ossetia) in 2008. You have a very short memory boxus! The reason that most Europeans dislike Russians is because they do not trust them. Russia's actions in the Ukraine & Georgia only reinforce that lack of trust.
Russia's response came because Georgia launched in invasion of the break away areas, in which there were internationally recognized Russian peacekeepers. Russian peacekeepers came under attack, thus Russia responded.
I expect any country to respond to an attack on its peacekeeping troops.
The OSCE determined Georgia was at fault for the conflict. Saakaskvili was a nut case, he also was responsible for the oppression of non-Georgians like Azeris and Armenians and opposition parties. He at last was voted out because everyone was tired of his nut-case ways of doing things.
Russia should be the ones that do not trust Europe, Europe after all has invaded Russia how many times?
Also, South Oseetia is not part of Georgia, was not even part of it during Soviet times. Georgia made a claim on the area during the USSR break-up. Russia did not "invade" S. Ossetia, they had peacekeepers there as part of an internationally accepted agreement for maintaining epacekeeping troops in the area. Georgia invaded the area and underestimated Russia's response.
[quote]This Lviv. Ukrainian capital of Nazism.
[/QUOTE
ramzes...
Not for anything I'd suggest this is bordering on pathological rhetoric. It's a lie and you and others who promote this are contributing to its dissemination.
Really this crisis will be fodder later on for those who study the construction of lies, lies and more lies in political discourse during wartime. It is ironic that as Russia celebrates the victory over the Nazis in World War II it doesn't preclude them from taking a page from their dire enemy to do as they do now and that is to lie through their teeth as they sought power. 'Back to the future' again. If 'pro-Russians' seek legitamacy in their goals one part of it emanates from the formation of lies and bombastic rhetoric said to the masses. Thsoe ho agree lap it up. Those who don't cringe as they have to hear the nightmare again.
Russia should be the ones that do not trust Europe, Europe after all has invaded Russia how many times?
And vice versa how many times? Stop playing the victim. Russia has invaded already my country some 20 times.
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.
