Russian seizure of Ukranian Warships

[Senkaku]

If I made this argument after the US sent unmarked tanks into Coahuila or Cuba or British Columbia and held a "referendum" on whether they wanted to become the 51st state, I'm guessing you'd suddenly have a different opinion on the validity of referendums held while occupying foreign troops are marching around.

Ukraine isn't British Columbia.

Correct! Almost by definition! Ukraine is not British Columbia.

Ukraine is more like Haiti.

Tiny, isolated, pretty much irrelevant country that barely has a military or an economy hundreds of miles away from the main regional power's borders whose government could probably be toppled by a bigger-than-average hurricane?

Nah, that's a bad analogy.

Where the USMC roll into Port-au-Prince about once every twenty years to remove a dictator who courted the wrong faction in DC.

Not how I would characterize it, but still a hell of a lot different from rolling in to annex the juicy bits.

Poroshenko in Ukraine "controls" a government so unpopular, unrepresentative, economically illiterate and corrupt that a Russian occupation of Kiev could only improve it.

Bahahahahahahaha!

Yeah, military conquest and occupation of a country usually does so much to improve its fortunes, especially when it's done by a dictatorial foreign power!

Sadly for the Ukrainians, Putin limited his efforts to taking back Crimea (the Puerto Rico in our analogy)

Puerto Rico is not part of Haiti (if you weren't aware), so no, it is not at all part of your garbage analogy.

and offering some half-hearted assistance to anti-Coup protestors-turned-rebels in the Donbass. Not enough for them to win, but enough to prevent them from losing.

So, couple things-

Firstly, though I do have strong opinions on it that I think everyone knows, I didn't actually make an argument on whether or not the Russian invasion and annexation was legitimate or not. I said I think Shof would hold a very different position from the one he holds now if the United States behaved in a similar way towards one of its neighbors on the subject of the integrity of elections. Right now, he argues that there was nothing illegitimate about the Crimean referendum and the circumstances it occurred under, but were the United States to hold such a referendum in Coahuila, under similar circumstances, Shof would be screaming bloody murder.

Secondly, your analogy is stupid and bad for a variety of reasons- Ukraine is a large, populous, strategically located, economically relevant country with a military directly on Russia's frontier that Russia has seized a part of, whereas Haiti is a tiny, distant, economically irrelevant, and pretty much defenseless island hundreds of miles away from the United States that has had its government changed by American interventions in the past. They are a mismatch in every conceivable way.

A better comparison might be Mexico- large, populous, economically relevant, with a government known for rampant mismanagement, sharing a large and strategically vital border, that has historically been in America's sphere of influence and has had strategic chunks of it seized by the US in the past.

[Novus America]

If I made this argument after the US sent unmarked tanks into Coahuila or Cuba or British Columbia and held a "referendum" on whether they wanted to become the 51st state, I'm guessing you'd suddenly have a different opinion on the validity of referendums held while occupying foreign troops are marching around.

Ukraine isn't British Columbia.

Ukraine is more like Haiti. Where the USMC roll into Port-au-Prince about once every twenty years to remove a dictator who courted the wrong faction in DC.

Is this a desirable state of affairs? No.

Is this always a bad thing? Well, it depends how bad the overthrown government was.

Poroshenko in Ukraine "controls" a government so unpopular, unrepresentative, economically illiterate and corrupt that a Russian occupation of Kiev could only improve it.

Sadly, perhaps, for the Ukrainians, Putin limited his efforts to taking back Crimea (the Puerto Rico in our analogy) and offering some half-hearted assistance to anti-Coup protestors-turned-rebels in the Donbass. Not enough for them to win, but enough to prevent them from losing.

I think there should be elections all round, and after the landslide "Leave" vote they can all break for vodka. No credit to Putin, but who would vote to remain in Ukraine (or Haiti) if there was another option?

The Ukrainian government is unpopular and corrupt but it was elected in mostly free and fair elections.
And the government the Russians were supporting before was even more unpopular and corrupt.

So no, I doubt replacing corrupt and unpopular government with a forcefully imposed one sure to be more unpopular and problem more corrupt will help.

And many Ukrainians are quite patriotic and love their country despite the poor governance.

Ukraine does have elections, so they could elect parties supporting that. But they do not.

And last I checked the US never annexed Haiti.
(We did consider annexing the Domican Republic in the 1869 at their government’s request but the US Senate did not approve it, actually the US could have annexed many different places but chose not to)

[Auze]

Ukraine isn't British Columbia.

Correct! Almost by definition! Ukraine is not British Columbia.

Ukraine is more like Haiti.

Tiny, isolated, pretty much irrelevant country that barely has a military or an economy hundreds of miles away from the main regional power's borders whose government could probably be toppled by a bigger-than-average hurricane?

Nah, that's a bad analogy.

Where the USMC roll into Port-au-Prince about once every twenty years to remove a dictator who courted the wrong faction in DC.

Not how I would characterize it, but still a hell of a lot different from rolling in to annex the juicy bits.

Poroshenko in Ukraine "controls" a government so unpopular, unrepresentative, economically illiterate and corrupt that a Russian occupation of Kiev could only improve it.

Bahahahahahahaha!

Yeah, military conquest and occupation of a country usually does so much to improve its fortunes, especially when it's done by a dictatorial foreign power!

Sadly for the Ukrainians, Putin limited his efforts to taking back Crimea (the Puerto Rico in our analogy)

Puerto Rico is not part of Haiti (if you weren't aware), so no, it is not at all part of your garbage analogy.

and offering some half-hearted assistance to anti-Coup protestors-turned-rebels in the Donbass. Not enough for them to win, but enough to prevent them from losing.

So, couple things-

Firstly, though I do have strong opinions on it that I think everyone knows, I didn't actually make an argument on whether or not the Russian invasion and annexation was legitimate or not. I said I think Shof would hold a very different position from the one he holds now if the United States behaved in a similar way towards one of its neighbors on the subject of the integrity of elections. Right now, he argues that there was nothing illegitimate about the Crimean referendum and the circumstances it occurred under, but were the United States to hold such a referendum in Coahuila, under similar circumstances, Shof would be screaming bloody murder.

Secondly, your analogy is stupid and bad for a variety of reasons- Ukraine is a large, populous, strategically located, economically relevant country with a military directly on Russia's frontier that Russia has seized a part of, whereas Haiti is a tiny, distant, economically irrelevant, and pretty much defenseless island hundreds of miles away from the United States that has had its government changed by American interventions in the past. They are a mismatch in every conceivable way.

A better comparison might be Mexico- large, populous, economically relevant, with a government known for rampant mismanagement, sharing a large and strategically vital border, that has historically been in America's sphere of influence and has had strategic chunks of it seized by the US in the past.

Almost right, just that Haiti only has 1/3 an island, the can’t even be as good as you say.

[Flawless Walruses]

Haiti's size is as irrelevant to this comparison as its weather.

The USA has never annexed Haiti. The Sugar Lobby would never permit that.

But the USA has regularly invaded Haiti (overtly and covertly), overthrown its government, held an election and declared a winner.

Anyone who doesn't see the parallels probably needs to brush up on history.

Read Max Boot's "Small Wars and the rise of American Power" if you need a right-wing perspective.

Not all those interventions were negative, even in my Liberal opinion, and there have been times the USMC was as popular in Haiti as Putin is in Crimea and Donbass.

[Shofercia]

You do know that soldiers can be present in an area where people vote, and not affect the vote, right? Are you able to comprehend that? Because there were Ukrainian military bases in Crimea, so those mysterious soldiers were probably somewhat busy protecting the native Crimeans against Ukraine's military, most of whom were loyal to Ukraine, rather than their own province. Once again, just to make sure you're able to grasp this: the voters, as polled by the Western Polling Agencies, did not seem to think that the mysterious soldiers affected the vote. "But muh soldiers" is not a valid rebuttal, when the people voting in the Referendum, do not think that mattered.

If I made this argument after the US sent unmarked tanks into Coahuila or Cuba or British Columbia and held a "referendum" on whether they wanted to become the 51st state, I'm guessing you'd suddenly have a different opinion on the validity of referendums held while occupying foreign troops are marching around.

Not really. I'd ask the locals what they thought, since they voted in a Referendum. It's the People's Referendum - let them vote!

I provided a bit of History, implying that you support Communism, but only when it suits your geopolitical needs.

You know what? In normal circumstances this kind of rebuttal would be devastatingly effective, but you made one catastrophically fatal error: my nation doesn't represent my political ideals at all, I only RP blind support for Western democracy. My ideals are actually very Socialist in many respects, my shelves are filled with the works of Marx et al. So using "you support Communism!!!1111" as a stick with which to beat me is ineffective as fuck, and actually just turns comically pathetic. Sorry. A major miscalculation on your part. Better luck next time though!

My point was that you were supporting policies made by Communist Dictators, policies that ignored the Will of the People. Crimea was illegally transferred. Furthermore, there was no Referendum of transfer. And to top it all off, this was done by Khrushchev in exchange for political support from Ukraine's Commissars. The equivalent would be Donald Trump transferring Southern California, (except the City of San Diego,) to Arizona in order to get the people of Arizona to recall Sinema, and replace her with McSally. In what World is that acceptable? That's what happened to Crimea.

Poroshenko in Ukraine "controls" a government so unpopular, unrepresentative, economically illiterate and corrupt that a Russian occupation of Kiev could only improve it.

Bahahahahahahaha!

Yeah, military conquest and occupation of a country usually does so much to improve its fortunes, especially when it's done by a dictatorial foreign power!

The lives of Crimeans improved quite a bit after the Russian Reclamation. Chechen election rigging aside, there are two regions where Putin is extremely popular - Dagestan, (which he saved from IIPB, forerunner of ISIS,) and Crimea.

So, couple things-

Firstly, though I do have strong opinions on it that I think everyone knows, I didn't actually make an argument on whether or not the Russian invasion and annexation was legitimate or not. I said I think Shof would hold a very different position from the one he holds now if the United States behaved in a similar way towards one of its neighbors on the subject of the integrity of elections. Right now, he argues that there was nothing illegitimate about the Crimean referendum and the circumstances it occurred under, but were the United States to hold such a referendum in Coahuila, under similar circumstances, Shof would be screaming bloody murder.

Not even close. First, I'd look at how the locals reacted to it. I support Direct Democracy more often than I support Russia's Government. If the US wanted to do to Coahuila, exactly what Russia did to Crimea - I'd say go for it.

Secondly, your analogy is stupid and bad for a variety of reasons- Ukraine is a large, populous, strategically located, economically relevant country with a military directly on Russia's frontier that Russia has seized a part of, whereas Haiti is a tiny, distant, economically irrelevant, and pretty much defenseless island hundreds of miles away from the United States that has had its government changed by American interventions in the past. They are a mismatch in every conceivable way.

Ukraine's military is relevant? Perhaps when we're talking about people being burned alive in Odessa, but when we're talking about the actual Russian Armed Forces, not some rag tag volunteers with some aid, Ukraine's military tends to do quite poorly. We've seen that in Crimea, repeatedly. Ukraine is struggling to get by, and is at SCO's mercy. Not exactly economically relevant. As for populous, don't worry, Poroshenko's recent demographic "reforms" will be sure to fix that.

[The National Salvation Front for Russia]

Dude, that's harsh.

I make all kinds of excuses for the Ukrainians.
- The Tartars, Mongols and Turks slave-raiding them for centuries.
- My Polish ancestors colonising the hell out of them for centuries
- The Russians colonising the hell out of them for slightly fewer centuries
- Soviet dictators of assorted ethnicities killing them in large numbers
- Post-independence, the FSB and NED/CIA pouring in "aid" and elevating "agents of influence", based on how much blackmail material the agency had on them rather than merit, integrity or even talent.

But yeah, Ukrainian society is corrupted from the pettiest clerk to the office of President. The depth and breadth of the problem cannot be principally the work of outsiders. At some point they need to take responsibility...

I laughed. But you know, there are people (Ukrainian nationalists) who actually think that. That the problems in Ukrainian society are everyone's fault but themselves.

[Phoenicaea]

..national socialists speak rainfalls of words, and I see they also win, in the chat forum, as always. in their literature. may we help? why do you always loose the war?

if you say your reasoning to us, we may help you. we may find where is the un-intelligence, in your minds. we can send you aid. how else may we help, so that you don t loose, for once?

[Rio Cana]

We all know the Russians are not keen in having Ukraine give NATO permission to dock NATO naval ships in Ukrainian ports in the sea of Azov. But it seems, I could be wrong, that Russian population increase near this conflict area could be the reason for the Russians to act so protective. Found out that there is a Russian city called Krasnodar which is growing at the rate of 100.000 people a year. The cities population has already reached one million. People are moving there from all over Russia. The climate is warmer and because of that better agriculture. With all this population growth the economy of the area must be booming. But this then places a large segment of the Russian population and economy near a Ukraine which is flirting with NATO. Do you see the problem for the Russians.

See this map - http://cisarbitration.com/wp-content/up ... 00x249.png

Found a well made video which shows and talks about Krasnodar - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VI4m2biisLE

[Greate Boston]

We all know the Russians are not keen in having Ukraine give NATO permission to dock NATO naval ships in Ukrainian ports in the sea of Azov. But it seems, I could be wrong, that Russian population increase near this conflict area could be the reason for the Russians to act so protective. Found out that there is a Russian city called Krasnodar which is growing at the rate of 100.000 people a year. The cities population has already reached one million. People are moving there from all over Russia. The climate is warmer and because of that better agriculture. With all this population growth the economy of the area must be booming. But this then places a large segment of the Russian population and economy near a Ukraine which is flirting with NATO. Do you see the problem for the Russians.

See this map - http://cisarbitration.com/wp-content/up ... 00x249.png

Found a well made video which shows and talks about Krasnodar - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VI4m2biisLE

Artificial population increase around an area you want to annex but have no logical claim on is like, the oldest trick in the "How to forge a claim on a land you plan on attacking" book

[Shofercia]

We all know the Russians are not keen in having Ukraine give NATO permission to dock NATO naval ships in Ukrainian ports in the sea of Azov. But it seems, I could be wrong, that Russian population increase near this conflict area could be the reason for the Russians to act so protective. Found out that there is a Russian city called Krasnodar which is growing at the rate of 100.000 people a year. The cities population has already reached one million. People are moving there from all over Russia. The climate is warmer and because of that better agriculture. With all this population growth the economy of the area must be booming. But this then places a large segment of the Russian population and economy near a Ukraine which is flirting with NATO. Do you see the problem for the Russians.

See this map - http://cisarbitration.com/wp-content/up ... 00x249.png

Found a well made video which shows and talks about Krasnodar - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VI4m2biisLE

Artificial population increase around an area you want to annex but have no logical claim on is like, the oldest trick in the "How to forge a claim on a land you plan on attacking" book

Krasnodar is located in Krasnodar Krai, which is located in the North Caucasian Region. Crimea is located in the Crimean Peninsula, which borders, but isn't a part of Krasnodar. It's also not a part of the North Caucasian Region. I take it that geography wasn't your favorite subject, right?

[Rio Cana]

Artificial population increase around an area you want to annex but have no logical claim on is like, the oldest trick in the "How to forge a claim on a land you plan on attacking" book

Krasnodar is located in Krasnodar Krai, which is located in the North Caucasian Region. Crimea is located in the Crimean Peninsula, which borders, but isn't a part of Krasnodar. It's also not a part of the North Caucasian Region. I take it that geography wasn't your favorite subject, right?

I do not think he looked at the map. The city of Krasnodar is 120 KM. from the Black Sea. Not inside the conflict zone but not far. Seems the Black Sea region is poised to become an important global commerce center. Very strategically located.

[Jarvises nation]

All the situation looks pretty suspicious. Poroshenko feels that he wouldn't win so exactly before elections this happens, martial law turns on. He says that it will continue only for 30 days and won't impact an election process, but who knows what is his plan?

[Violet Kingdom]

Artificial population increase around an area you want to annex but have no logical claim on is like, the oldest trick in the "How to forge a claim on a land you plan on attacking" book

Krasnodar is located in Krasnodar Krai, which is located in the North Caucasian Region. Crimea is located in the Crimean Peninsula, which borders, but isn't a part of Krasnodar. It's also not a part of the North Caucasian Region. I take it that geography wasn't your favorite subject, right?

That's just biased, Krasnodar has nothing to do with Crimea and how can someone connect the two is beyond me. >.<

[The National Salvation Front for Russia]

Artificial population increase around an area you want to annex but have no logical claim on is like, the oldest trick in the "How to forge a claim on a land you plan on attacking" book

Aside from Krasnodar being, you know, in Russia, Russia definitely has a logical claim to Crimea. Excluding the strategic reasons like control over the Sea of Azov, the port of Sevastopol, etc. Crimea has a large Russian majority which prefers living in Russia.

[Costa Fierro]

What many people missed is that prior to this happening, Russia and Ukraine had an agreement that was signed in 2004 that permitted freedom of navigation in the Sea of Azov. Now that Russia controls the only entry point to the sea, and built a bridge as to limit the kinds of ships that can enter and leave, this sets a dangerous precedent for other countries who have ambitions on the control of international shipping (read China).

[Novus America]

What many people missed is that prior to this happening, Russia and Ukraine had an agreement that was signed in 2004 that permitted freedom of navigation in the Sea of Azov. Now that Russia controls the only entry point to the sea, and built a bridge as to limit the kinds of ships that can enter and leave, this sets a dangerous precedent for other countries who have ambitions on the control of international shipping (read China).

True, and also international law guarantees Ukraine the right to freely transit the straits.
But in all fairness it is not like Russia gives a shit about honoring agreements or international law.

[Risottia]

What many people missed is that prior to this happening, Russia and Ukraine had an agreement that was signed in 2004 that permitted freedom of navigation in the Sea of Azov. Now that Russia controls the only entry point to the sea, and built a bridge as to limit the kinds of ships that can enter and leave, this sets a dangerous precedent for other countries who have ambitions on the control of international shipping (read ChinaTurkey, Sweden and Denmark).

You know, Black Sea and Baltic Sea.