The Invasion of Ukraine, Russia Threatens Finland/Sweden

[Heloin]

You are an anarchist, you have no zone.

You understand this doesn't refute the point?

And it’s not even true. Anarchists do have a zone, it’s called the O-Zone.

[FNU]

"Abrasive language" such as these?

Hurling insults definitely doesn't help.

Memes are hardly the worst insult you could throw against a nation.

[Novo Rossiya]

Hurling insults definitely doesn't help.

Memes are hardly the worst insult you could throw against a nation.

I know. That said, I still don't think that it helps.

[Genivaria]

Hurling insults definitely doesn't help.

Memes are hardly the worst insult you could throw against a nation.

And if a leader of a sovereign nation bases their foreign policy on being mocked via memes than they deserve mockery.

[Vassenor]

So what we're supposed to believe is that Ukraine's entire purpose is to be a buffer for Russia against the West. No matter what the people living there actually want.

Basically Putin really does want to assert himself as Tsar by reclaiming the old Russian Empire.

[Untecna]

So Ukraine has no right to self determination?

Do Crimea, Donetsk or Lugansk have the right to self-determination?

Donetsk and Lugansk are pro-Russian and Russian-backed separatist provinces, and are unrecognized by about everyone else. In short, no.

Crimea had an extremely rigged referendum and then got annexed by Russia when everyone knew the referendum was bogus. The fact that they asserted troops into the territory made it far worse than the BS referendum. In short, no.

[Novo Rossiya]

Do Crimea, Donetsk or Lugansk have the right to self-determination?

Donetsk and Lugansk are pro-Russian and Russian-backed separatist provinces, and are unrecognized by about everyone else. In short, no.

Crimea had an extremely rigged referendum and then got annexed by Russia when everyone knew the referendum was bogus. The fact that they asserted troops into the territory made it far worse than the BS referendum. In short, no.

The referendum wasn't rigged at all.

If another referendum were held tomorrow, it would return the same result.

[FNU]

So what we're supposed to believe is that Ukraine's entire purpose is to be a buffer for Russia against the West. No matter what the people living there actually want.

Basically Putin really does want to assert himself as Tsar by reclaiming the old Russian Empire.

While I'm not opposed to the rise of old Monarchies (I think it'd spice up the hellhole we call this world), I agree that the means in which he's taking are, questionable.

[Vassenor]

Do Crimea, Donetsk or Lugansk have the right to self-determination?

Donetsk and Lugansk are pro-Russian and Russian-backed separatist provinces, and are unrecognized by about everyone else. In short, no.

Crimea had an extremely rigged referendum and then got annexed by Russia when everyone knew the referendum was bogus. The fact that they asserted troops into the territory made it far worse than the BS referendum. In short, no.

But those weren't Russian troops. They were a bunch of Concerned Local Militiamen. The Russians said so and everything.

[The Two Jerseys]

Donetsk and Lugansk are pro-Russian and Russian-backed separatist provinces, and are unrecognized by about everyone else. In short, no.

Crimea had an extremely rigged referendum and then got annexed by Russia when everyone knew the referendum was bogus. The fact that they asserted troops into the territory made it far worse than the BS referendum. In short, no.

The referendum wasn't rigged at all.

If another referendum were held tomorrow, it would return the same result.

Illegal referendum is by default rigged.

[Novo Rossiya]

The referendum wasn't rigged at all.

If another referendum were held tomorrow, it would return the same result.

Illegal referendum is by default rigged.

So you disagree with me saying that a referendum tomorrow would return the same result?

[Saiwania]

Donetsk and Lugansk are pro-Russian and Russian-backed separatist provinces, and are unrecognized by about everyone else.

There is nothing much more to think about, other than to conclude that most of the people there are possibly traitors who should be stripped of Ukrainian citizenship; if not voluntarily given over to Russia if they're going to throw their lot in with them instead. Their fate should be decided by whichever conquest prevails in the end.

[Untecna]

Illegal referendum is by default rigged.

So you disagree with me saying that a referendum tomorrow would return the same result?

Yes, for two reasons:

1. Illegal referendum=rigged referendum. I can't see how you don't understand that.

2. Why would Russia want to hold another referendum if they claim to own Crimea after said bogus referendum and invasion?

[Genivaria]

Donetsk and Lugansk are pro-Russian and Russian-backed separatist provinces, and are unrecognized by about everyone else. In short, no.

Crimea had an extremely rigged referendum and then got annexed by Russia when everyone knew the referendum was bogus. The fact that they asserted troops into the territory made it far worse than the BS referendum. In short, no.

The referendum wasn't rigged at all.

If another referendum were held tomorrow, it would return the same result.

According to BBC News the campaign leading up to the referendum was "almost entirely pro-Russian".[79] Pro-Russia election posters often featured crossed-out swastikas in an alleged attempt to be saying "No" to the Ukrainian government, who they alleged to be neo-Nazis.[79] Shortly after the referendum was called, Ukrainian TV channels were made unavailable for Crimean viewers, some of them were replaced with Russian stations.[79] BBC News also stated it had received reports of violence against pro-Ukrainian activists.[79]

Unsigned billboards and leaflets campaigning for the referendum, describing new Ukraine government as fascists and showing economic reasons to join Russia, appeared throughout Crimea.[101][102][103]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Crim ... m#Campaign

Allegations of fraud
A Russian journalist claimed that she was allowed to vote even after admitting she was a Russian citizen with only a temporary one-year permit to live in Crimea.[121] "According to all the laws, this is illegal," she said in one interview. "I am a foreign citizen. How can I decide the destiny of the Crimean Autonomous Republic of Ukraine?"[121]

The chairman of the electoral campaign of the Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People claimed officials did not check carefully whether voters' names were on the electoral register and that some voters were bussed in to Bakhchysarai to increase participation rates in the city.[122] Mejlis also stated that only 34.2% of Crimea residents participated in the referendum.[123][124]

There were a few reports of people confiscating identification documents before the voting day. Simferopol city administration confirmed these claims and declared these actions unlawful.[125]

A senior US official claimed there was "concrete evidence" of some ballots having been pre-marked.[126][127]

According to three Czech observers funded by the pro-Russian far-right[118][128] non-governmental organization Eurasian Observatory for Democracy & Elections,[129][130] deputy Stanislav Berkovec reported that the voting was free and the foreign deputies could move freely. According to his discussions with people, even the Tatars inclined towards Russia.[131] Another deputy Milan Šarapatka reported that the referendum was formally regular and that there was no evidence of pressure on voters.[132] According to Miloslav Soušek (the Vysoké Mýto mayor), the course of the referendum was comparable to the elections in the Czech Republic, he saw no soldiers in the town.[133]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Crim ... s_of_fraud
Nope not rigged at all nope.

[Genivaria]

So you disagree with me saying that a referendum tomorrow would return the same result?

Yes, for two reasons:

1. Illegal referendum=rigged referendum. I can't see how you don't understand that.

2. Why would Russia want to hold another referendum if they claim to own Crimea after said bogus referendum and invasion?

Also why would international observers be denied entry to a perfectly legitimate referendum? Even warned off with gunfire?
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-osce ... HJ20140308

[Segland]

Yes, for two reasons:

1. Illegal referendum=rigged referendum. I can't see how you don't understand that.

2. Why would Russia want to hold another referendum if they claim to own Crimea after said bogus referendum and invasion?

Also why would international observers be denied entry to a perfectly legitimate referendum? Even warned off with gunfire?
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-osce ... HJ20140308

To ensure that the dastardly Westerners couldn't counter-rig the referendum, of course

[The free romanians]

The only way to happen should be referendums
No forced exit

You understand this doesn't refute the point?

And it’s not even true. Anarchists do have a zone, it’s called the O-Zone.

How is o zone connexted to anarchism

[Novo Rossiya]

A Russian journalist claimed that she was allowed to vote even after admitting she was a Russian citizen with only a temporary one-year permit to live in Crimea.[121] "According to all the laws, this is illegal," she said in one interview. "I am a foreign citizen. How can I decide the destiny of the Crimean Autonomous Republic of Ukraine?"[121]

1. That lady referred to Crimea as being part of Ukraine. It obviously shows that she is biased towards Ukraine. Of course she would lie.

2. She is a journalist, so it's in her interest to make a big noise and drum up a story.

[Heloin]

The only way to happen should be referendums
No forced exit

And it’s not even true. Anarchists do have a zone, it’s called the O-Zone.

How is o zone connexted to anarchism

If I told you then you’d know the top secrets of anarchism that only the few select may know.

[Segland]

A Russian journalist claimed that she was allowed to vote even after admitting she was a Russian citizen with only a temporary one-year permit to live in Crimea.[121] "According to all the laws, this is illegal," she said in one interview. "I am a foreign citizen. How can I decide the destiny of the Crimean Autonomous Republic of Ukraine?"[121]

1. That lady referred to Crimea as being part of Ukraine. It obviously shows that she is biased towards Ukraine. Of course she would lie.

2. She is a journalist, so it's in her interest to make a big noise and drum up a story.

1. That's because before the annexation, Crimea was 100% a part of Ukraine.
2. So? Journalists can be a mixed bag, but that doesn't discredit her.

[Novo Rossiya]

1. That lady referred to Crimea as being part of Ukraine. It obviously shows that she is biased towards Ukraine. Of course she would lie.

2. She is a journalist, so it's in her interest to make a big noise and drum up a story.

1. That's because before the annexation, Crimea was 100% a part of Ukraine.
2. So? Journalists can be a mixed bag, but that doesn't discredit her.

1. Yes, but an independence supporter or pro-Russia Crimean would not say that.

2. It does. It immediately discredits her. Especially with the comments she made.

[United Nations of Gaia]

A Russian journalist claimed that she was allowed to vote even after admitting she was a Russian citizen with only a temporary one-year permit to live in Crimea.[121] "According to all the laws, this is illegal," she said in one interview. "I am a foreign citizen. How can I decide the destiny of the Crimean Autonomous Republic of Ukraine?"[121]

1. That lady referred to Crimea as being part of Ukraine. It obviously shows that she is biased towards Ukraine. Of course she would lie.

2. She is a journalist, so it's in her interest to make a big noise and drum up a story.

And your evidence to either is...?

[Heloin]

1. That's because before the annexation, Crimea was 100% a part of Ukraine.
2. So? Journalists can be a mixed bag, but that doesn't discredit her.

1. Yes, but an independence supporter or pro-Russia Crimean would not say that.

It’s not biased to support one cause but it’s bias to support another. Some 4D chess you’re working with there.

2. It does. It immediately discredits her. Especially with the comments she made.

What?

[Novo Rossiya]

It’s not biased to support one cause but it’s bias to support another. Some 4D chess you’re working with there.

She is a journalist, and is evidently supporting the Ukrainian government cause, owing to those comments that she made.

What?

She made a comment referring to Crimea as part of Ukraine.

[Segland]

It’s not biased to support one cause but it’s bias to support another. Some 4D chess you’re working with there.

She is a journalist, and is evidently supporting the Ukrainian government cause, owing to those comments that she made.

What?

She made a comment referring to Crimea as part of Ukraine.

If she was a journalist supporting the Russian government line, would she still be discredited?