Crimea Referendum
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
10-03-2014, 05:49 PM
RE: Crimea Referendum
(10-03-2014 08:38 AM)cjlr Wrote:  That's funny, Hughsie; if I recall correctly, the votes in the Falklands were only held after the foreign military occupation ended. Or were you thinking that a referendum during the Argentine invasion (with foreign observers barred and native media suppressed) would have been possessed of any democratic legitimacy?

Define a foreign military occupation. According to Argentina the Falklands are under a foreign military occupation; a British one.

Plus, the Russians didn't just wander in. Their presence was requested by both Ukraine's ousted President (who both Russia and Crimea both still recognise as the legitimate leader) and the Government in Crimea I think.

Perhaps a fair solution would be the the Russian troops withdraw with a guarantee that no other Ukrainian or Western troops enter Crimea until Crimea hold their own referendum. I don't see the West/Kiev going for that one though.

Best and worst of Ferdinand .....
Best
Ferdinand: We don't really say 'theist' in Alabama. Here, you're either a Christian, or you're from Afghanistan and we fucking hate you.
Worst
Ferdinand: Everyone from British is so, like, fucking retarded.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-03-2014, 05:52 PM
RE: Crimea Referendum
(10-03-2014 05:37 PM)earmuffs Wrote:  But what I'm saying is, the vast majority of the population in the Crimea DO want to be integrated back into Russia.

Citation needed.

The Russian-annexationist party in the Crimean parliament were a perennial joke. It's facile to confuse language rights issues with actual secessionism.

(10-03-2014 05:37 PM)earmuffs Wrote:  I understand your pov that Russia is occupying the Crimea BUT like I just said, a vast majority do want to be integrated back into Russia. It wouldn't be a far fetched thing that this referendum succeeds.

No shit the referendum will "pass".

The friendly Russian troops self-defense militias will be on hand to dispense a few friendly "suggestions" to the public about what's good for them. In the name of brotherly solidarity, of course.

(10-03-2014 05:37 PM)earmuffs Wrote:  And besides, do you really believe that if Russian troops weren't occupying the Crimea that if they were to have this referendum that the west and particularly Kiev would allow the Crimea to be integrated back into Russia?
Kiev is already heavily denouncing the referendum, which is political by the way and ignoring what the people want, and asking the EU and US to do something.

Crimea was already possessed of far more autonomy and leeway than the other regions of Ukraine. Do I think an armed mob of nebulous malcontents and reactionaries overthrowing a legitimately elected government in Kyiv is bad? Yes. Do I think that justifies unilateral military intervention? No. If, and only if - and it's one heck of an if - the provisional government took actual steps towards reversing that would any such action even begin to be justifiable.

Ukraine is hardly the epitome of democracy but their last several elections were above board. The south and east actually have the demographic weight on their side (not to mention economic weight). And the Crimeans knew that.

(10-03-2014 05:37 PM)earmuffs Wrote:  tl;dr, yes shit is political but the people of Crimea do want to be integrated back into Russia and that's all that matters so fuck the politics and let them join back with Russia.

You seem to be stuck on the ludicrous fantasy that a people under foreign military occupation can somehow be treated as though they were exercising free self-expression.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-03-2014, 11:36 PM
RE: Crimea Referendum
(10-03-2014 05:49 PM)Hughsie Wrote:  Their presence was requested by both Ukraine's ousted President (who both Russia and Crimea both still recognise as the legitimate leader) and the Government in Crimea I think.

I think ol' Putin can engineer an invitation to most countries around his borders. No surprise that the ex-pres who got kicked out went crying to him. He found a ready shoulder to weep on, no doubt. What I don't get is this: if you're the ex-pres, then massive, violent, anti-government protests show that sure as shit, no one really likes you.

He didn't just flee to Crimea either, please note, he done fucked off *right* out the country. Which I interpret to mean that he didn't have a hell of a lot of confidence that he'd be fine anywhere in Ukraine. Which means that he couldn't count on support anywhere in Ukraine, much less enough support to continue in power. So the only way he'll be back as lord of his little chunk of heaven will be as a Russian puppet backed by the threat of force.

How'd you like it if the Republic of Ireland sent a bunch of non-descript unidentified troops to Northern Ireland and held a 'referendum'. You think UK government would recognize it as legit? You think *any* government would recognize it? What if the Northern Ireland main guy had been kicked out shortly before and then 'invited' the Republic of Ireland into Northern Ireland?

That's the actions of a very few being used as justification for a clear violation of international law...

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-03-2014, 03:36 PM
RE: Crimea Referendum
(10-03-2014 08:27 AM)earmuffs Wrote:  
(06-03-2014 09:42 PM)Chas Wrote:  Bad comparison. The Falklands were part of the UK; Crimea is not part of the Russian Federation.

Try again.

60% of the Crimean population would say otherwise.

And they would be wrong.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-03-2014, 03:39 PM
RE: Crimea Referendum
(10-03-2014 05:49 PM)Hughsie Wrote:  
(10-03-2014 08:38 AM)cjlr Wrote:  That's funny, Hughsie; if I recall correctly, the votes in the Falklands were only held after the foreign military occupation ended. Or were you thinking that a referendum during the Argentine invasion (with foreign observers barred and native media suppressed) would have been possessed of any democratic legitimacy?

Define a foreign military occupation. According to Argentina the Falklands are under a foreign military occupation; a British one.

Plus, the Russians didn't just wander in. Their presence was requested by both Ukraine's ousted President (who both Russia and Crimea both still recognise as the legitimate leader) and the Government in Crimea I think.

Perhaps a fair solution would be the the Russian troops withdraw with a guarantee that no other Ukrainian or Western troops enter Crimea until Crimea hold their own referendum. I don't see the West/Kiev going for that one though.

There is no legality under the Ukrainian constitution of a referendum for separation.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-03-2014, 03:42 PM
RE: Crimea Referendum
(10-03-2014 09:04 AM)earmuffs Wrote:  
(10-03-2014 08:38 AM)cjlr Wrote:  That's funny, Hughsie; if I recall correctly, the votes in the Falklands were only held after the foreign military occupation ended. Or were you thinking that a referendum during the Argentine invasion (with foreign observers barred and native media suppressed) would have been possessed of any democratic legitimacy?

The difference between the Falklands and the Crimea is that Falklands have always been British. I mean yea they were Argentinian for a short while, but the people that lived there were British and had been for some time and very much considered themselves to be British.
Ukraine only came into existence in 1991 and the Crimea has a fairly decent history as being part of Russia. A decent amount of the population would favor Russia over Ukraine. I don't see why this referendum is a bad thing and I don't see why that if the population want it, the Crimea shouldn't be integrated back into Russia.

History as part of Russia? Not really.
Quote:The Cimmerians, Bulgars, Greeks, Scythians, Goths, Huns, Khazars, the state of Kievan Rus', Byzantine Greeks, Kipchaks, Ottoman Turks, Golden Horde Tatars and the Mongols each controlled Crimea in its earlier history. In the 13th century, it was partly controlled by the Venetians and by the Genoese; they were followed by the Crimean Khanate and the Ottoman Empire in the 15th to 18th centuries, the Russian Empire in the 18th to 20th centuries, Germany during World War II and the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic and later the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, within the Soviet Union during the rest of the 20th century until Crimea became part of independent Ukraine with the breakup of the Soviet Union in 1991.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-03-2014, 03:45 PM
RE: Crimea Referendum
(11-03-2014 03:39 PM)Chas Wrote:  There is no legality under the Ukrainian constitution of a referendum for separation.

Which is barely even a technicality...

There's no such provision in Canada or the UK either, but a legitimate democratic state is willing to engage with separatists who might control a regional parliament.

Self-determination is one thing - appalling cynicism of most global actors aside, recognition of such is justifiable cause for outside intervention in international law.

The pathetic sham now ongoing in Crimea is entirely another.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-03-2014, 04:04 PM
RE: Crimea Referendum
I don't know where to stand on it. There seems to be a bit of hypocrisy from both sides.

[img]

via GIPHY

[/img]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Sam's post
11-03-2014, 04:17 PM
RE: Crimea Referendum
(11-03-2014 03:39 PM)Chas Wrote:  There is no legality under the Ukrainian constitution of a referendum for separation.

That shouldn't matter, we should be fighting for the right of Crimea to self-determine. Perhaps we should be putting pressure on Ukraine to amend their constitution so the Crimean people can have an officially recognised referendum.

Best and worst of Ferdinand .....
Best
Ferdinand: We don't really say 'theist' in Alabama. Here, you're either a Christian, or you're from Afghanistan and we fucking hate you.
Worst
Ferdinand: Everyone from British is so, like, fucking retarded.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-03-2014, 04:29 PM
RE: Crimea Referendum
(11-03-2014 04:17 PM)Hughsie Wrote:  
(11-03-2014 03:39 PM)Chas Wrote:  There is no legality under the Ukrainian constitution of a referendum for separation.

That shouldn't matter, we should be fighting for the right of Crimea to self-determine. Perhaps we should be putting pressure on Ukraine to amend their constitution so the Crimean people can have an officially recognised referendum.

No, we shouldn't in this case.

This is an outside power fomenting civil war.

What we should be doing is supporting military intervention and forcing Putin's thugs out of Ukraine.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: