Ukraine Megathread: Crimea River Build a Bridge, Get Over It

[Laerod]

EDIT: On actually reading the source provided, it doesn't state that they were turned away by Russians, but by "unknown armed and uniformed military personnel". I am not sure where I got that from, though I would be unsurprised if it were the case.

Which Putin admits were Russians.

[Lyttenburg]

EDIT: On actually reading the source provided, it doesn't state that they were turned away by Russians, but by "unknown armed and uniformed military personnel". I am not sure where I got that from, though I would be unsurprised if it were the case.

Which Putin admits were Russians.

So, everyone was a "Kremlin's catspaw"? Both "Polite Men in Green" and local self defense were acting explicitly on Kremlins orders?

Proof, please.

[Washington Resistance Army]

The rebels must have gotten their fake ballots from somewhere, maybe it was Tsar Vlad?

First of all - who is Tsar Vlad? Second - did you ever entertained the notion that then separatists could print ballots?

As for your second statement, me saying Russia should hold an actual referendum with real observers (not ultra nationalists who oppose anything relating to NATO or the EU) has nothing to do with Russian troops turning away the few non biased observers that showed up.

Proof that it was "Russian troops turning away the few non biased observers that showed up"/

I was saying Russia should let the UN organize and hold a referendum in Crimea where people aren't held at gunpoint and actually let them have a free vote to see what they want. But we both know the Dear Leader won't allow such banderist things to happen.

Who exactly was held at hunpoint? Even thoroughly anti-Russian VICE coverage didn't provide anything of sort, au contraire - portray that majority of people were actually happy with referendum and voted for Russia.

Tsar Vladimir Putin the First of course, lord protector of innocent Russian's worldwide and destroyer of fascism. I did indeed entertain that notion, but both of them prove that the DonBass rebels aren't legitimate and have no basis for starting a civil war, so pick whichever you want. Who else would it have been who turned them away at gunpoint? The "self defense forces" who totally weren't confirmed to be Russian troops? As for the gunpoint thing, it's kind hard to have a free and fair election when one side has armed troops controlling areas If so many people in Crimea really do love Russia and voted overwhelmingly in favor of joining them what would be the harm in having another vote under UN control to make sure it was legitimate?

[Hindenburgia]

EDIT: On actually reading the source provided, it doesn't state that they were turned away by Russians, but by "unknown armed and uniformed military personnel". I am not sure where I got that from, though I would be unsurprised if it were the case.

Which Putin admits were Russians.

I'd meant that the article posted prior made no mention of the troops that turned them back being Russian troops, but yeah, it is probably the case that those were Russian troops, then.

[Laerod]

Which Putin admits were Russians.

So, everyone was a "Kremlin's catspaw"? Both "Polite Men in Green" and local self defense were acting explicitly on Kremlins orders?

Proof, please.

This is what I mean when I say you're so stuck in your anti-Western/pro-Russian worldview that presenting you with facts is a pointless exercise. It's right there in the article, by RT no less, and you still won't admit it.

[Laerod]

Which Putin admits were Russians.

I'd meant that the article posted prior made no mention of the troops that turned them back being Russian troops, but yeah, it is probably the case that those were Russian troops, then.

I really just wanted an excuse to post that even RT and Putin admit that those were Russian soldiers there under his orders.

[Occupied Deutschland]

Ceasefire has been 'in place' (to unknown levels of effectiveness) for twenty minutes and reporters are already getting invited to a 'How Ukraine broke the cease-fire' conference in Moscow.

[Gravlen]

Also - have you heard that actually it was Crimean parliament (with 93 out of 100 members present) which suggested the referendum in the first place?

Ah yes... This event:

After the demonstrations had continued for several weeks, the masked soldiers entered the Crimean parliament building. The elected representatives who showed up were stripped and had their cell phones confiscated. No journalists were allowed in. Behind closed doors – while armed soliders were watching – they sacked the government, announced a referendum on independence from Ukraine and elected Sergey Aksyonov to be prime minister. In the elections in 2010, Aksyonov’s party, Russian Unity, won only 4 per cent of the votes and 3 of the 100 seats in the assembly.

Rules require that at least 51 representatives be present in order to hold a qualified vote. The new goverment says 61 members of parliament took part. Aftenposten’s research shows, however, that only 36 were present.

- The system which registers who voted, and what we voted for or against, shows I did cast a vote. But I was not there. Neither were a large majority of my colleagues, says Sumulidi. Representative Irina Klyuyeva also participated in the vote, according to the official records, but she was not present either.

http://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?p=19626708#p19626708

Oh, Russia can have special snowflakes. It just doesn't. Being Russia doesn't preclude it from having valid cases, its lack of valid cases thus far does.

Given that after Donetsk and Lugansk oblasts proclaimed their independence from Kiev they were imediately invaded by the new Ukrainian government, which resulted in (at least) 1 million of refugees, definetly uch more then official "2600 dead" and not yet calculated damage to the infrastrucure, I can say that , yes, Russian troops defended people of Crimea form the treatment that only a few orders better then genocide.

It's ironic that you would make this claim, seeing as how reports of Russians/rebels committing torture, extralegal executions and serious human rights violations have surfaced. The mass graves found near Slavyansk doesn't suggest that Russians/rebels are particularly nice people. On the contrary, it suggests that the Kiev government has a legitimate interest in protecting the Ukranians from what one local inhabitant called "criminals who came here to steal money and cars".

As for Crimea, let's not forget that reports of human rights violations keep coming in. The situation for the tatars is deteriorating, and the human rights situation in general is worsening.
A snippet from the most recent report from the UN monitoring mission:

IX. HUMAN RIGHTS ISSUES IN CRIMEA
159. The situation in the Autonomous Republic of Crimea during the reporting period was
characterized by human rights violations and restrictions on freedoms affecting in particular
minority groups, and a tense security environment, compounded by fighting in the east of Ukraine.
Since the last report about 2,800 residents of Crimea were internally displaced from the peninsula
to mainland Ukraine.
160. Intimidation of political opponents, independent journalists and civic activists continued.
Crimean law enforcement agencies have conducted raids in order to identify cafés, sales outlets
and service providers operating illegally. Crimean Tatar representatives claimed that these actions
were aimed at intimidating their community which largely opposed the March “referendum”; most
of the cafés and facilities visited by the police and the Federal Security Service of the Russian
Federation (FSB) were owned by representatives of the Crimean Tatar Mejlis (Assembly) or had
been used for their meetings. On 22 July, the Mayor of Bakhchisaray initiated a procedure to
terminate the lease of the building where the regional Mejlis is located. Many facilities built by the
Crimean Tatars were constructed without authorization and have not been legalized and, according
to Crimean Tatar activists, this is used to exercise pressure on them.
161. Media outlets identified as being pro-Ukrainian are increasingly under threat. The chief
editor of the Crimean Tatar newspaper Avdet was summoned on 24 July by the Crimean FSB and
informed that a complaint had been lodged against the newspaper by a media monitoring body, the
Russian Federal Service for the Supervision of Communications, Information Technology and
Mass Media (Roskomnadzor). The complaint relates to the publication of information about the
decision of the Mejlis to boycott elections in Crimea scheduled for September 2014. A similar
complaint has been made against another Crimean Tatar newspaper, Qirim. Since March 2014, no
Ukrainian TV channels have been broadcast in Crimea and they were switched off by the Crimean
cable operators as of 1 July.
162. Human rights organisations report that freedom of expression; in particular freedom of the
media is being restricted in Crimea. Reportedly, journalists perceived to be pro-Ukrainian are not
allowed to attend official events of the Crimean authorities; according to a Crimean journalist
from the Chernomorskaya TV Company, they are not allowed in since they are not on the list of
so–called “approved journalists”. Journalists as well as ordinary Crimean residents are at risk to
incur criminal responsibility due to the recent Russian legislation concerning extremism and
separatism.
163. Priests and followers of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Kyiv Patriarchate (UOC-KP)
continued to report of harassment. For example, on 21 July, a house in the village of Mramornoye
(near Simferopol), which was the property of the UOC-KP, was burnt to the ground. A church and
buildings, also belonging to the UOC-KP and located on the same land plot, were not damaged. In
June, this church had been robbed. Four out of 12 churches of the UOC-KP have closed since
the March “referendum”.

http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Countries/UA/UkraineReport28August2014.pdf

Why doesn't Russia let the UN hold an open referendum in Crimea to see what people actually vote for? Because last time around it was full of problems, like how some areas had 120% voter turnout. After all those fake ballots were captured in Eastern Ukraine a few months ago I wouldn't be surprised if Russian troops just stuffed ballot boxes with yes votes.

Actually Crimea invited UN monitors to participate in the Referendum - it refused.

Incorrect. After "U.N. envoy Robert Serry was confronted by armed individuals while visiting the Crimea and ordered the leave the region", they tried to get new monitors in. "Mr Simonovic and other U.N. envoys" chose not to go to Crimea since "the airport doesn’t accept flights coming from anywhere, as we understand, anywhere but Russia" and that made it "impossible for him to travel.”

Though I suspect you're thinking of the OSCE observers whom attempted to enter the region four times but were turned away, sometimes after warning shots were fired.

Again, I'm asking this question since March, could someone prove that Crimeans wanted (and still want) to be part of the Ukraine, not Russia?

That's not the point. Maybe they do, maybe they don't, we don't know. What we do know, is that the process was horrible and dangerous, and how Russia went about it was completely unacceptable.

As to the fairness of the referendum:
The Venice Comission concluded that the referendum was not only illegal under the Ukranian and Crimean constitutions, but that the referendum itself violated international standards. This assessment was based, in part, on the presence o (para)military forces, the suppression of freedom of expression, the short time to campaign, lack of nautrality on the part of the Crimean authorities, that the wording of the referendum wasn't neutrally worded, with a lack of possibility to vote for the status quo, a lack of adherence to European democratic standards, and a failure to attempt serious negotiations before the referendum took place.

[Laerod]

Incorrect. After "U.N. envoy Robert Serry was confronted by armed individuals while visiting the Crimea and ordered the leave the region", they tried to get new monitors in. "Mr Simonovic and other U.N. envoys" chose not to go to Crimea since "the airport doesn’t accept flights coming from anywhere, as we understand, anywhere but Russia" and that made it "impossible for him to travel.”

Though I suspect you're thinking of the OSCE observers whom attempted to enter the region four times but were turned away, sometimes after warning shots were fired.

Actually, it's probably a reference to the OSCE office refusing to recognize the legitimacy of Aksyonov's Crimean regime upon being invited. It happened, but for quite understandable reasons.

[Gravlen]

I'm sorry, but what about this western notion of whatsitsname - "Presmption of Innocence"?

Do you think you're presently arguing in a courtroom? I'm sorry, you're not.

Thus, the presumption of innocence is not a relevant consideration here.

[Gravlen]

Incorrect. After "U.N. envoy Robert Serry was confronted by armed individuals while visiting the Crimea and ordered the leave the region", they tried to get new monitors in. "Mr Simonovic and other U.N. envoys" chose not to go to Crimea since "the airport doesn’t accept flights coming from anywhere, as we understand, anywhere but Russia" and that made it "impossible for him to travel.”

Though I suspect you're thinking of the OSCE observers whom attempted to enter the region four times but were turned away, sometimes after warning shots were fired.

Actually, it's probably a reference to the OSCE office refusing to recognize the legitimacy of Aksyonov's Crimean regime upon being invited. It happened, but for quite understandable reasons.

Yeah, I actually meant to include something about that, as well as how the OSCE was invited on certain unacceptable terms. (As in, they would only be allowed to enter Crimea only on the day of the referendum, and they would only be allowed to observe the voting taking place, and not the counting of the votes (which notably no journalists were allowed to observe either).)

[Laerod]

Actually, it's probably a reference to the OSCE office refusing to recognize the legitimacy of Aksyonov's Crimean regime upon being invited. It happened, but for quite understandable reasons.

Yeah, I actually meant to include something about that, as well as how the OSCE was invited on certain unacceptable terms. (As in, they would only be allowed to enter Crimea only on the day of the referendum, and they would only be allowed to observe the voting taking place, and not the counting of the votes (which notably no journalists were allowed to observe either).)

Hey, not like there's any Russian government offices saying there's something fishy about that referendum or anything either.

[Lyttenburg]

Tsar Vladimir Putin the First of course, lord protector of innocent Russian's worldwide and destroyer of fascism.

When was he crowned and anointed? Also, I suggest that you should refrain from the political nicknaming.

I did indeed entertain that notion, but both of them prove that the DonBass rebels aren't legitimate and have no basis for starting a civil war, so pick whichever you want.

Printing ballots (in the 3rd largest city of the Ukraine) = "not legitimate"? There must be a special, kosher place to print ballots, othervise they would be considered taref? And they didn't start anything - they were invaded.

Who else would it have been who turned them away at gunpoint? The "self defense forces" who totally weren't confirmed to be Russian troops?

If you have any proof, that Moscow ordere local self defense units to that - provide them.

As for the gunpoint thing, it's kind hard to have a free and fair election when one side has armed troops controlling areas

Define "one side has armed troops controlling areas". If there are an elections in a town near a military base, what - they are automatically illegitemate? And again - you provided no proof, just your insinuations.

If so many people in Crimea really do love Russia and voted overwhelmingly in favor of joining them what would be the harm in having another vote under UN control to make sure it was legitimate?

Because a) Referendums cost money. b) Crimeans and Russians don't feel that they conducted "illegal" referendum and has no desire to have another just to entertain the West.

[Kelinfort]

Let's hope this ceasefire holds so we can all stop caring about Ukraine.

[Lemanrussland]

The 12 point ceasefire plan that was negotiated in Belarus has been announced. There will be prisoner exchanges and a promise of federalization for the eastern territories.

The seperatists/Russian troops in southeast Ukraine began shelling the satellite towns of Mariupol in the hours before the ceasefire was called.

Almost everyone is expressing caution/measured optimism over the ceasefire, and the rebels have said the ceasefire is only an immediate measure to stop the bloodshed, they still intend to establish an independent pro-Russian state, by force if necessary. The ceasefire is to be monitored by the OSCE.

[Lyttenburg]

This is what I mean when I say you're so stuck in your anti-Western/pro-Russian worldview that presenting you with facts is a pointless exercise. It's right there in the article, by RT no less, and you still won't admit it.

You can differentiate between "polite men in green" and "local self-defense", do you? And instead of providing me with easily refutable "proof-links", you should tryyyy (just a little bit) harder, instead of telling "you just ignore me"!

[Laerod]

b) Crimeans and Russians don't feel that they conducted "illegal" referendum and has no desire to have another just to entertain the West.

Criminals rarely feel they committed crimes. Not a valid argument.

[Slavonian kingdom]

I feel sorry for the Russians. They have always been second class citizens in their own country for the last 150 years.

[Kelinfort]

I feel sorry for the Russians. They have always been second class citizens in their own country for the last 150 years.

Despite the fraud, the majority actually want conservatism. It's really a shame, cause I might be more sympathetic to Putin if he weren't as corrupt or socially conservative.

[Laerod]

This is what I mean when I say you're so stuck in your anti-Western/pro-Russian worldview that presenting you with facts is a pointless exercise. It's right there in the article, by RT no less, and you still won't admit it.

You can differentiate between "polite men in green" and "local self-defense", do you?

The whole point of the clandestine invasion was that you couldn't unless you got them to talk to you, revealing their Russian accents.

And instead of providing me with easily refutable "proof-links", you should tryyyy (just a little bit) harder, instead of telling "you just ignore me"!

The shoe fits. You blatantly ignored proof in the very thing you quoted.

[Laerod]

I feel sorry for the Russians. They have always been second class citizens in their own country for the last 150 years.

Second class to whom exactly?

[Lyttenburg]

I feel sorry for the Russians. They have always been second class citizens in their own country for the last 150 years.

Thank you, but I don't need you false pity, as neither me, nor anyone who I know consider themselves a "second class citizens in their own country for the last 150 years".

And why 150 years? Why not 500?

[Lyttenburg]

You can differentiate between "polite men in green" and "local self-defense", do you?

The whole point of the clandestine invasion was that you couldn't unless you got them to talk to you, revealing their Russian accents.[/quote]

Hey, lingustics-expert - can you differentiate a Kharkiv native from the Belgorod region native when they speak Russian? I've trouble - and I was in Kharkiv, and served together with guys from Belgorod.

[Slavonian kingdom]

I feel sorry for the Russians. They have always been second class citizens in their own country for the last 150 years.

Despite the fraud, the majority actually want conservatism. It's really a shame, cause I might be more sympathetic to Putin if he weren't as corrupt or socially conservative.

Well, it is not their faulth. I mean they expected democracy and a high economic standard after they voted to oust the communists in 1989, instead they got the opposite and even worse than in the USSR. So, it is not wondering that they are so conservative.

The last Russian ruler who was actually doing reforms was Tsar Alexander I. and yet hw lived in the 1860s.

It will pass generations when the Russians stabilize.

[United Marxist Nations]

Soryy - did Russia conduct the referendums in the Eastern Ukraine?



But wasn't you argung before that:

The rebels must have gotten their fake ballots from somewhere, maybe it was Tsar Vlad? As for your second statement, me saying Russia should hold an actual referendum with real observers (not ultra nationalists who oppose anything relating to NATO or the EU) has nothing to do with Russian troops turning away the few non biased observers that showed up. I was saying Russia should let the UN organize and hold a referendum in Crimea where people aren't held at gunpoint and actually let them have a free vote to see what they want. But we both know the Dear Leader won't allow such banderist things to happen.

The referendum may very well be fair: according to a Pew Research poll, 88% of Crimeans want Kiev to recognize the referendum. That, coupled with those opposing the referendum boycotting, could have easily led to the result.

Edit: source. Also, the turnout was in the 80%+, so that makes my theory quite possible.