Putin's Hmn Rghts Cncil Accidentally Posts Real Crimean Election Results; Only 15% Voted For Annexa

a reply to: thegeck

The difference is no nation tried to annex Kosovo. Secondly Russia was a part of those missions. Third it occurred to stop mass ethnic killings.

No worries on the opinion part... we all have em

Ah. Kosovo. Where our CIA was training the kla. Where our intervention killed almost twice the number of people as the later confirmed 3000 claimed by the "genocide"/civil war. Where the ethnic cleansing of Serbs continued after we left. Another debatable example of our media being colored by our motives.

a reply to: Xcathdra

Wait. Mass ethnic killings? Did you just say that?
Lol, Xcathdra, you stepped in a puddle here. Let's see. Serbia. 83% are Serbians and the rest are of other ethnic groups. Now Ukraine. Ukranians ammount to around 75% of the population, the rest, again, are of other ethnic groups. 13,5 % are RUSSIANS. And as intelligent people know, the bulk of the Russian population lives where? Exactly. East Ukraine. Same situation as in Kosovo.
The're Russians, an ethnical minority in Ukraine, the Ukranians are killing them, using tanks, airforce and *Nazi*onal guard. A bunch of people were burnt alive in Odessa, where there is an enormous Jewish diaspora btw(FYI, they hate nazis). Excuse me, but what are you talking about here? Please, Xcathdra, do more research.
No nation tried to annex Kosovo? Well, the EU. Not a nation, but a strong political block. Does that count? After Kosovo announced it's independance, it was IMMEDIATELY accepted in the EU. What a coincidence, huh? While Serbia is still NOT an EU member.
EU annexed Kosovo. De facto. Big EU sent in UN Peacekeepers with guns, on APCs, and did what the "Little green men" did in Crimea. EXCEPT the fact that in Crimea there WAS a referendum, while there was no referendum in Kosovo. EU just put their guy in charge and pulled Kosovo into the EU. Huurah, democracy.
What did Russia say back then? "It's unconstitutional." World said : "Yes it is. Shut up, Russia, noone cares." Russia said : "OK. No problem." And did ABSOLUTELY THE SAME in Crimea. "It's unconstitutional", the world shouts out. "Yes it is!", says Russia "Same was done in Kosovo. Shut up."
Now Kosovo's internal affairs are decided in Brussels. Kosovo is now EU. EU is a European anlogue of the United States of America, if you were't aware (I happened to dig a bit too deep into this matter some 3-4 years ago. I know it all.). There are States(EU states) and there is the government. The EU government, which resides in Brussels. Kosovo gets money grants forom the EU, so it is largely dependant on it. Important thing is, that these grants are specifically designated for programs whithin the EU State, which are specified by the EU. In other words, you don't get grants which don't benefit the EU in general. There is also a let of rules, regarding this. All in all, EU states have little to na say in the matter. Put on caller, call it "my wings". Oh, and the budget is split...welm that is if you HAVE a budget. If I'm not mistaken, Kosovo has a budget deficit. A, quote "severy budget deficit". So there we go.
And Russia WAS part of those missions. I agree. But they were'nt there when Kosovo declared independace in 2008. They left Serbia in 2003. NO RUSSIAN PEACEKEEPERS IN SERBIA SINCE 2003. I want to emphasize that. But the UN troops stayed. The "little blue men" stayed where they were, so we could have Kosovo State in the EU. Job well done . I always say, that people who know history are a lot stronger than those who don't. And I spent quite a lot of time on learning the Arab history. Among all, I came to like August Muller. I am most sure, that if the American establishment cared a slightest bit about the Middle East, they would have what they have now - a Burning Middle East. Yes, they have always been boiling in one way or another, but never all at once and in the state of civil war. Every day dozens of people die in Iraq. Much more than in the times of Saddaam. Lots of people die in Syria. My dad's been to Syria back in 2004-2005. Damascus. "One of the most beautiful cities I've ever been to" - he said. And he's been all around the world. Now it's in ruins. I will probably never see it in it's former glory. A pity. (Lucky me, I've seen Taj Mahal. You can bomb it now if you like.) Constant terrorist acts in Lybia. And so on. Is that what you would like to see in Ukraine, Xcathdra? You are half a world away from Ukraine. What do you know about this country to say what it should and shouldn't do? Do you at least know it's history? And if so, what source have you chosen? I would very much appreciate an answer. Because, like in medicine, before diagnosis, there is reseach.
Do keep in mind, that I've read many of your posts and articles and will continue to do so. I admire many of your ideas, yet I cannot agree with all of them, as you see. I guess, that is why we're all here.

originally posted by: thegeck
a reply to: Xcathdra

Wait. Mass ethnic killings? Did you just say that?
Lol, Xcathdra, you stepped in a puddle here. Let's see. Serbia. 83% are Serbians and the rest are of other ethnic groups. Now Ukraine. Ukranians ammount to around 75% of the population, the rest, again, are of other ethnic groups. 13,5 % are RUSSIANS. And as intelligent people know, the bulk of the Russian population lives where? Exactly. East Ukraine. Same situation as in Kosovo.
The're Russians, an ethnical minority in Ukraine, the Ukranians are killing them, using tanks, airforce and *Nazi*onal guard.

Lol at the Ukrainians are killing the pro Russian minority, I think not... Pro Russian gangs have killed many Ukrainians and injured and beaten 1000s prior the the "one" incident you speak off... How you have come to this conclusion is mind boggling and not to mention extremely biased

Yes... 13.5% are Russian speaking indeed... Bit there NOT Russian... And NOT 13.5% of Russian speaking Ukrainians agree to the separatist movement that Russia is funding, training, and arming, just as they did in the Crimea... The same tactic are trying to be imposed in the East of Ukraine...

Here is a recent poll taken in the East



As you can see Russia is failing to find separatists support

Now lets revert back to international laws and Ukraine's constitution, Crimea's referendum was illegal in both Ukraine's constitution and international laws, and is unanimously agreed upon within the UN community that it is not recognised.

A funded terrorist organisation amongst a handful of Eastern Ukrainians is NOT in anyway shape or form a legitimate state under itself it is a failed Russian coup in Ukraine...

a reply to: TritonTaranis


Poll? Vote!

Video from RADA, the ukrainian Parlament.

Why do people continuously try to turn around the truth?? It is obviously an instigated American coup, as per our OWN OFFICIALS WORDS, where we stated we had spent 5 billion to overthrow the government and forcibly install Yatsenyuk a MONTH before it happened in exactly that way. There were no Russian officials who's tapped phone calls demonstrated premeditated intent, and EVERY SINGLE piece of evidence that has been posted in our newspapers has later quietly been redacted, as have our statements about Russians "massing on the borders". This whole thing is a propaganda pitch in order to justify what will be our coming actions in order to continue to try to encircle and isolate Russia, all so they cannot act as a polar balance (along with China, Iran, and Brazil) to American unipolar hegemony.

a reply to: pexx421

I love when people use the term "truth" followed up with "it obvious".

If its an American coup Russia would have presented evidence to the UN.
Just as when Russia made all the claims about Ukraine and Russia's justification for what they did. They were given multiple chances by the UN to present their side of the story and evidence to support it - Russia failed to do so.

Putin admitted masked armed no insignia men in Crimea were Russian military.

What's obvious is Russian fingerprints all over the situation in Ukraine.


You tell me -
Putin consistently went on and on and on about Ethnic Russians being in danger and that he would act to protect them.

If he gave a fig about Ethnic Russians why did he stop at only invading Ukraine in the Crimea region? Are the ethnic Russians there more important than those in the south or east. What about the ethnic Russians living in west Ukraine.

This has never been about protecting anything but Putin's vanity. The fact he stopped in Crimea told the world what Putin's game plan is. The only people who seem to be lost is Putin and his blind cheerleaders.

???? seriously? Its was all over the news, Victoria Nuland, stating our intent, actions, and goals. A month later it goes down just like she said. How can this be interpreted any other way? If someone says "hey, im going to go shoot this guy, with a 50 cal, and stuff a fifty dollar bill in his mouth", and a week later he's found dead, with a 50 cal slug in his chest, and a fifty dollar bill in his mouth, I think its pretty silly to say that suzy that was driving by and stopped to try to perform cpr is the one who shot him. Like that. Then another leaked phone call gives evidence that it was those fomenting the uprising who did the sniping (killing both the official party and their own people, I might add) to set it off. Then it comes out that many of those right sector thugs (yeah, neo Nazi's) who moved in and took charge were being trained for several months before hand in Poland for this event they knew was coming.....and largely funded by us. Then we immediately step in, with no election, and declare their government legitimate, and offer them more funding. To sum up....we said exactly what we were doing, it was tapped, it played out exactly the way we said we were trying to make it, we blame someone else. ?? oh. Yeah. Of course it was Russia. Because having to take over crimea, or even all of Ukraine, is such a strategic benefit to them. And they also "invaded" Georgia.

a reply to: Xcathdra

“We did have legitimate election before, and the legitimate president was removed after we had major street violence. There were pictures of people running around that we were told were neo-Nazis,” Rohrabacher challenged Nuland.

Nuland faced a hard time coming up with answers.

More lies here:

Nuland has tough time justifying US involvement in Ukraine

a reply to: maghun

lol

feel free to support your "its a lie comment". Here is a hint. You cant call a statement a lie and then link to a source that has nothing to do with your claim. If that's what Russia is teaching its people its no wonder why they are heading backwards instead of forwards.

Parliament elected in 2012 in Ukraine - Yes
Russia accepted results of election in Ukraine - Yes
Return to 2004 Constitution - Yes
Lawful impeachment of Yanukovych - Yes

Russia / Yanukovych / Russian minions throwing temper tantrum - priceless.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: thegeck

The difference is no nation tried to annex Kosovo. Secondly Russia was a part of those missions. Third it occurred to stop mass ethnic killings.

No worries on the opinion part... we all have em

LOL

Could have sworn the nationstate of Kosovo did not even exist without western recognition. You talk about national annexation as if that's still relevant to the modern geopolitical paradigm where economic annexation defines imperialism.

a reply to: Vovin

The difference is no nation tried to annex Kosovo. Secondly Russia was a part of those missions. Third it occurred to stop mass ethnic killings.

a reply to: Xcathdra



Clearly you don't understand sarcasm... In your favor I labeled RT source as "lies".

No problems here, the Russians are responsible for everything...

Where are the sources?

www.president.gov.ua...

originally posted by: Catacomb

originally posted by: RadiationAndCancer
a reply to: Xcathdra

EVERYONE

READ THE FIRST PARAGRAPH OF FORBES ARTICLE

Why would a Russian Official Site post a BLOG Report for 5 min,

what really happened is that they were hacked, and those few minutes of false report was taken as PROOF by the Coordinated Western Propaganda Artists to slander Russia.
And it is NO accident that OP is the one pushing this, no coincidence at all.

Everyone knew the election was rigged. From past elections the numbers were so skewed, in comparison, it was the only logical conclusion. You had pictures of ballots already marked for the annexation choice, and pictures of people ballot stuffing.

C'mon...

The real question is: Why do people believe this report is true and that the Crimean election was rigged? The Crimeans are mostly ethnically Russian and Russian speaking. They have always wanted to be part of Russia. The Tatars boycotted the election. They are the largest minority. The Tatars plus those Ukrainian speakers that did not want to be part of Russia boycotted the election. 83% of the people voted. 97% voted to join Russia. These are the real numbers. The election was not rigged. The US propaganda machine never made a serious attempt to say that the election was rigged because they knew that would be ridiculous. It is interesting that they are going to these lengths, hacking websites, the closer it gets to the referendum in Donetsk. The numbers in Donetsk should be closer. If everybody who opposes joining Russia boycotts the election, however, then we will have another 97% number. The American people are being brainwashed when it comes to what is going on in Ukraine. The US spent $5 billion to fund NGOs to topple the democratically elected leader of Ukraine. They used the same tactic they are using in Syria, supplying weapons and logistics to fanatics. Why did the US topple a democratically elected leader and now opposes democracy (referendums) in Crimea and Donetsk? The US orchestrated coup in Kiev was an attack on Russia by the United States just as the attempted overthrow of the legitimate leader Bashar al Assad in Syria is an attack on Russia. Now with Ukraine they are getting closer to Russia because they want to put ABM systems in places like Poland, Czech Republic, Georgia, and Ukraine so that they can destroy ICBMs soon after launch, in the boost phase. This allows NATO to invade Russia while neutralizing the land based nuclear threat. It also allows a nuclear strike on Russia while eliminating a retaliatory strike. Now we are seeing the US military getting more actively involved in the Asian Pacific region because they want to weaken China. The plan is to control the entire world. Russia and China must be defeated for this to happen. World War III has been happening for a while now. No nuclear weapons have been used so far. The United States is the aggressor. The American people have no say so in US foreign policy. Neither does the Congress. The US warmongers no longer needs Congress to declare these wars. If they decided to get the approval of Congress for any of the future wars that they plan to start they could easily get it because that entire body is manipulated, bought and paid for. The US policy makers no longer make an attempt for Congressional approval because they can do whatever they want with no consequences.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: maghun

lol

feel free to support your "its a lie comment". Here is a hint. You cant call a statement a lie and then link to a source that has nothing to do with your claim. If that's what Russia is teaching its people its no wonder why they are heading backwards instead of forwards.

Parliament elected in 2012 in Ukraine - Yes
Russia accepted results of election in Ukraine - Yes
Return to 2004 Constitution - Yes
Lawful impeachment of Yanukovych - Yes

Russia / Yanukovych / Russian minions throwing temper tantrum - priceless.

How is the impeachment of Yanukovich lawful? Yanukovich was forced to flee by armed thugs who started the killing by shooting police officers, setting them on fire, and taking them hostage. The police were only armed with rubber bullets before this. Parliament voted to remove Yanukovich from office in an atmosphere of beatings by fascist Right Sector thugs. Under the constitution of Ukraine there are three ways to remove the President from office. The first way is impeachment and removal after being convicted in a trial. I didn't see any lawyers arguing. What witnesses were called? The second way is death. He did not die. The third way is resignation. He did not resign. Under the Ukrainian constitution Yanukovich is still the legitimate President of Ukraine. The US spent $5 billion to fund non-governmental agencies (NGOs) to overthrow a democratically elected government in Europe, the Yanukovich government. They now oppose democracy (referendums) in Crimea and Donetsk. Ukraine is now a failed state. It is a failed state because the junta in Kiev does not have control over the eastern half of the country. This means the US sponsored coup has not been successful. Yanukovich is funding the freedom fighters in the east of Ukraine. They are receiving aid from Russian citizens who are ex military, some of them ex special forces. There is not a single active duty Russian military member fighting in Ukraine. This would be an act of war by Russia, and Russia has not decided to start a war yet. If they do it will be a full war. Since the junta has failed to control the east, it will eventually be subject to a counter coup. Then we will see Yanukovich in Kiev, and there will be retribution.

a reply to: TritonTaranis

Ah, I see you using Ukranian MM. 8-) Lol. Mr T pities you. Ukranian mass media is AAA propaganda. There are numerous European, American and Russian sources, which provide adequate info. Thousands of political analysts, available on youtube and news sites links. And you chose THIS ? Why, TritonTaranis? How gullible does one have be be to believe Ukranian MM, owned by the guys currently in power?
What kind of poll did they hold there? The Ukranian government donesn't control the region. How can they possiblty hold an official poll there? Don't be silly, the MM is just playing with your brain, hoping you won'p put it to question, which I think, worked. When OSCE observers came to Donbass, they were intercepted and locked in. Ukraine has no power there. Nor do they have adequate instruments to carry out polls there. Because, excuse me, they're shooting and bombing there. Women walked out on balcony and got shot be sniper. Guy drove in a car and got shot at by APC. Car is a pile of junk. Guy was lucky to survive. What poll can one hold under these circumstances?

Oh, and you want to talk about international laws. Let's talk about them. Np. I studied it for 2 years. Might as well put it to use.
Let's start with the basics. What is Crimea? Crimea is an "autonomous republic", a status it had voted for back in the day, when the Soviet Union fell apart, which means that technically, a "partner" to the country called "Ukraine". It does not belong to Ukraine. This detail is essential. Because autonomous regions have the right for self-governance. In Russia, autonomous republics have a president, in US, states, which are, basically, autonomous States, hence the name UNITED STATES of America. Luckily, the American government does a bettor job at governing the US, so there are no states, longing to separete from this Union. Mostly because they understand that together they HAVE a future. Unlike in Ukraine.



So what is a referendum. Here. Oxford Public international law(since you wanted to talk about international law).
Oh, and lets start with this : legitimacy.
Yanukovich has never been impeached, so, ACCORDING TO INTERNATIONAL LAW *and* Ukraine's constitution, he is still de facto President of Ukraine. Lol. Who are the guys currently in power? Nobody chose them. There was no vote. They just rolled in and called themselves Rulers of Ukraine, one guy called himself President. Lol, I appoint myself Master of the Universe, bow before me. "All your base are belong to us." Is that how it works? I walk into your house and say "I own it now. Get out." Your actions? C'mon, you'll beat me senseless, no? Or shoot me. Or both.
Or maybe not. Hey! 8-) Maybe you'll call my actions legitimate and let me sleep in your bed and crap in your toilet. And if your wife says she wants to leave with you, I'll go : "Separatist! Come back here or I'll shoot you." You ok with that? Because it's madness. You shouldn't be OK with that.

Moving on.
A nice breakdown of international laws and precedents on the subject of referendum.
opil.ouplaw.com...:epil/9780199231690/law-9780199231690-e1088

Read clause A4. External self determination (in simpler words, the right to decide, which country to join).

"External self-determination is defined as:
The right to decide on the political status of a people and its place in the international community in relation to other states, including the right to separate [secede] from the existing state of which the group concerned is a part, and to set up a new independent state. (van Walt and Seroo)

A claim to external self-determination raises the issue of its interrelation with the principle of territorial integrity, ‘… one of the most fundamental and well-established principles of international law’ (Musgrave 181). It is based on the principle of non-interference in the internal affairs of States, and by establishing the status quo it serves for the maintenance of stability and peace in the relations between States. The principle of territorial integrity was enshrined in the Covenant of the League of Nations (Art. 10) and in the UN Charter (Art. 2)."

Now next clause, so you get the grip of it.

"The principle of self-determination of peoples is one of the fundamental human rights firmly established in international law. The UN Charter refers to the ‘principle … of self-determination of peoples …’ (Art. 1 (2)), and the conditional right to self-determination has been affirmed in UN Covenants and Declarations and UN General Assembly resolutions."


If you don't like the article I provided and think this guy packs too much bull, well, here is the guy.
Yves Beigbeder, a professor working in Webster University, participated in the Nurnberg process. Guy's a legend.
www.youtube.com...


So, Crimea, is an AUTONOMOUS region, which voted to be separate from Ukraine back in the 90s, but to remain under Ukranian governance. I.E. Ukraine is Executive Director, while the people of Crimea, as per the autonomy status, is the OWNER. Now it decided to spin off. They are legally not part of Urkraine, they are autonomous. They carried out a referendum, in compliance with international law, and separated.
But what you're trying to tell me, is that that if you want to leave your current job, the boss can LEGALLY come up to you and say : "No! You can't leave. I own you."

"Pro Russian gangs have killed many Ukrainians and injured and beaten 1000s prior the the "one" incident you speak off" What? Rly? Isn't the Ukranian army killing people with tanks and planes? Wasn't it the maidan guys who killed cops? And who's beating up the people celebrating the victory in WW2? Who's the aggressor?
www.youtube.com...
Here, that's 2013. Last year. Veterans beating up followers of Stepan Bandera? There is no "ONE" incident. Ukraine is burning, brother killing brother. The death toll would be around 500 now. Thousands behind bars and many just disappeared.
And BTW, that "ONE INCIDENT" was, official info - 45 pople burnt alive; unofficial - around a 100 burnt alive. Nice little "INCIDENT", Triton. I "like" your choice of words.

And forget about Russia. They are not the ones who started this mess. And sure as hell they don'l want it to continue any longer. Russian coup in Ukraine...baaah...choice BS. "Russia" and "coup in Ukraine" in one sentence looks awkward for any intelligent human being.

Triton, please diverse your sources.

a reply to: Adaluncatif


www.abovetopsecret.com...

All Russian sources.
The streamlined impeachment section is also included (separate section from the 2004 constitution).
The agreement Yanukovych signed is also included, where it states the 2004 constitution is reinstated within 48 hours.

Also - You stated Yanukovych fled, as did Putin. The problem with that -
Ukraine crisis: "I didn't flee" says Yanukovych as he calls for Russia to act

He gave few clear indications of his future plans, saying only that he was staying at the residence of an “old friend” in Rostov-on-Don.

Throughout the press conference Yanukovych insisted that he had not abandoned Ukraine, but was forced to leave because of threats against himself and his family, including his young grandson.

“I did not flee,” he said. “I will return to Ukraine as soon as my security can be guaranteed.”

So which is it? You and Putin stated he fled. Yanukovych said he did not flee.

Either way I know we are opposite sides on the constitution and that's fine. The info above explains it on the off chance you are interested in how I arrived at my position on the matter.


* - Just a few of the investigations into Yanukovych that have been ongoing -
* - If he fled then that action is impeachable as well.
* - The 2004 elections (parts of it) were tossed out by the courts for election fraud, committed by Yanukovych. Those areas had to hold another round of elections.
* - Yanukovych has also been under investigation for corruption / fraud since 2004.
* - There were 2 investigations into Yanukovych's trip to Moscow on 2 separate occasions. What those meetings were for no one seems to know. Parliament on the other hand was looking at the possibility the meetings were in contrast to Ukraine law (This part is speculation and the Parliament, to my knowledge, still have those investigations open / froze.

A question / hypothetical (I maintain the lawfulness of the impeachment but for this section we will try and compare apples to apples.

What is the difference between
* - the argument by Pro Russians (general term) that Crimea and the South / East of Ukraine are allowed to overthrow the elected governments in those regions because they don't like the government in power / don't recognize it.

and

Couldn't the very same argument be made by the Pro Kiev (general term) government in that they don't want closer ties to Russia and that Yanukovych was selling out the peoples position for his own gain?

The one other major red flag in all of this that has never been explained -
If Yanukovych formally requested Russia restore him to power, why did Russia annex Crimea and why are they trying to get the South / East in the same manner as Crimea.

A request to be restored to power normally means they help restore / stabilize and leave. It does not mean they take a few chunks of the country and then start annexing those parts.

Its obvious Russia is not going to support Yanukovych now that they have what they want - Crimea and possibly the 2 other regions.

That's not assistance - its exploiting a situation to make a land grab and nothing more.

respects

Why did Putin stop with Crimea?

and Finally, being Ukraine is still recognized at the UN and still retain their seat, the government in Kiev is valid and lawful.

a reply to: Xcathdra

C'mon, Xcathdra, why are you repeating it over and over again? Like a mantra. 8-)
Ommmmmmm no nation tried to annex ommmmmmm. 8-)

How do you look at Kosovo joining the EU soon after separating? Waka-waka-waka - and Kosovo is part of the EU, a big European USSR. "Govorit Brussels, Tovarisch General Secretary iVan Rumpoi, dosvidanya!"

There's an ultimately intelligent eurosceptic, Nigel Farage, a GB rep. in the EU.
www.youtube.com...
A brilliant spokesman. Massage for the brain. Just in case you haven't seen him.
A sort of British Ron Paul.

a reply to: thegeck

International law faces the issues of it conflicting with the laws of a sovereign nation. The laws of the country will trump the international law portion (see international court of justice as well as the non UN International Criminal Court for jurisdictions / adjudications).

While you are correct Article II there is this -

All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.

Most importantly - Article 2 Section 7 - UN Charter

Nothing contained in the present Charter shall authorize the United Nations to intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state or shall require the Members to submit such matters to settlement under the present Charter; but this principle shall not prejudice the application of enforcement measures under Chapter Vll.

Chapter 7 Article 51

Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security. Measures taken by Members in the exercise of this right of self-defence shall be immediately reported to the Security Council and shall not in any way affect the authority and responsibility of the Security Council under the present Charter to take at any time such action as it deems necessary in order to maintain or restore international peace and security.

The info above points out some of the info that also impacts the situation.

invasion

Houghton Mifflin

n.noun

1.The act of invading, especially the entrance of an armed force into a territory to conquer.


2.A large-scale onset of something injurious or harmful, such as a disease.


3.An intrusion or encroachment.

The last one is important -
Putin acknowledges Russian military serviceman were in Crimea

The armed men in military uniform without insignia, dubbed “the little green men” or “the polite people,” who were present in Crimea before and during the referendum there, were Russian troops, Vladimir Putin acknowledged speaking at a Q&A session with on Thursday. The president said he never concealed the fact from his foreign counterparts, and explained to them that it was the only way to ensure the referendum on the region’s status would be carried out peacefully.

“Crimean self-defense forces were of course backed by Russian servicemen,” Putin said. “They acted very appropriately, but as I’ve already said decisively and professionally.”

Russia invaded Ukraine and violated the treaty.
RT - Russian Duma denounces Black Sea Fleet deal with Ukraine - agreement details

Armed Russian troops are not to be outside their bases except for transit. While Russia can raise / lower the forces, they cant do it arbitrarily - Ukraine must approve.
Removing insignias compounded that issue.

that's my position.

originally posted by: thegeck
a reply to: Xcathdra

C'mon, Xcathdra, why are you repeating it over and over again? Like a mantra. 8-)
Ommmmmmm no nation tried to annex ommmmmmm. 8-)


How do you look at Kosovo joining the EU soon after separating? Waka-waka-waka - and Kosovo is part of the EU, a big European USSR. "Govorit Brussels, Tovarisch General Secretary iVan Rumpoi, dosvidanya!"

There's an ultimately intelligent eurosceptic, Nigel Farage, a GB rep. in the EU.
www.youtube.com...
A brilliant spokesman. Massage for the brain. Just in case you haven't seen him.
A sort of British Ron Paul.

For starters how is Kosovo relevant?
Secondly, compare Crimea to Kosovo and explain how the 2 are 1 in the same.
3rd - Nations run their own affairs and frankly the US / Russia, in addition to a few members on this site, need to stop trivializing Ukraine by trying to argue how NATO / West / EU and Russia should partition the country to end the problems.

As an example Russia trying to tell Kiev they must go to a Federation style government. That would work fine for Russia since we know the South and East would go there. It would not work well for Ukraine, who should be making these types of decisions.


There is absolutely no reason for one nation to dictate to another nation who thy can and cannot have relations with. There is absolutely no reason a nation cannot have relations with 2 countries who are at odds.