Putin aims to Divide and Conquer

[Sbiker]

Eloy, please, lend me a thousand bucks for a three days...

And at Thursday we'll discuss your ANNEXATION of MY 1000 bucks....

Forgive me but your posts are becoming less coherent.

.

Prove it

I'm sorry but you lost me with the 1000 bucks analogy to justify the annexation of Krim.


.

Crimea was Russian for centuries. Ukraine got it by corrupted Khrushev for a time to use - and now returned it. It's a FULL analogy, instead of your doublespeak force you to use "annexation" word. There are no need to "annexate", what's already have been yours...

History cannot be changed. How Krim came to be part of Ukraine does not change the map and its annexation by ex-KGB operative Putin is illegal.


.

Let's be how you say. History cannot be changed. So, Crimea is a part of Russia for two years and cannot be returned. YOU SAID. Dixi.

 

[Art__Allm]

If Putin did not like what was happening in Ukraine, he still had no authority to order troops to annex Crimea.

The population of Crimea is happy with this "annexation", they asked for that. Nobody was ethnically cleansed, everybody was glad to throw away the Ukrainian citizenship and get Russian citizenship.

On the other hand the population of Palestine is ethnically cleansed by Zionists, but the lying media does not mind.

Unlike Russia, the European media do not lie.

Do you live in Europe?
What languages do you speak?
Do you speak Russian?
If not, how can you know anything about Russia?
I can speak 6 European languages, and I can tell you, that most European media is owned by a couple of globalist oligarchs who hate the European national states.
Why should these people, who hate us, Europeans, tell us the truth?

I cannot say that Russian media can be trusted 100%, but it can be trusted more than the lying media in Western countries.

 

[Eloy]

If Putin did not like what was happening in Ukraine, he still had no authority to order troops to annex Crimea.

The population of Crimea is happy with this "annexation", they asked for that. Nobody was ethnically cleansed, everybody was glad to throw away the Ukrainian citizenship and get Russian citizenship.

On the other hand the population of Palestine is ethnically cleansed by Zionists, but the lying media does not mind.

Unlike Russia, the European media do not lie.

Do you live in Europe?
What languages do you speak?
Do you speak Russian?
If not, how can you know anything about Russia?
I can speak 6 European languages, and I can tell you, that most European media is owned by a couple of globalist oligarchs who hate the European national states.
Why should these people, who hate us, Europeans, tell us the truth?

I cannot say that Russian media can be trusted 100%, but it can be trusted more than the lying media in Western countries.

The ethnic Germans in Böhmen und Märin were happy to become part of the Third Reich but that did not give Hitler the right to annex the Sudetenland from Czechoslovakia in 1936.

.

 

[ESay]

The lands of so-called Novorossia began to be populated by Ukrainians (or Malo-Russians as then official authorities called them)...

They called themselves Russians, dude. The conflict between some Ukrainians and Russians is based on the notion that people who today call themselves Ukrainians are more Russian, than the Russians from today Russian Federation. So Malo-Russians was what the population of this provinces called themselves. And the population of today RF called themselves Veliko-Russians, because they had a bigger landmass.

And the All-Russian Tsars called themselves "Tsar of all Russia, Veliko-Russia, Belo-Russia and Malo-Russia".

They did not call themselves "Ukrainians" two hundred yeas ago, though some of them called their Malo-Russian province "Ukraine" (which literally means Province).

All people of Malo-Russia called themselves RUSSIANS, and most inhabitants of today Ukraine still call Themselves RUSSIANS.

In fact Malo-Russians (Ukrainians) believe that they are themselves more Russian, than Russians from the RF, though they lost their original language and religion due to the centuries of Polish occupation.

If you speak Russian, please explain this nuances to these American idiots who do not have any idea about the history of Old Russia and who do not understand what the conflict of Russians and Ukrainians is about. These American fools believe that if they instigate hate against Russians, they are pleasing Ukrainian people.



Ukrainians call themselves RUSSIANS!

In fact, if a Ukrainian wants to insult a Russian, he calls him a Katzap, speak a non-Slavic Russian-speaking mongrel. Ukrainian Nationalists believe that Peter The Great had stolen the "Name" Russia from the Kievan Rus, and most Ukrainians hate the name of their today state, which literally means "Province". They claim the name "Russia" for themselves.

But how can idiots from the USA, who are unable to locate Ukraine on the map, understand such nuances or Russian history!?

This map shows the mostly Ukrainian-spoken territories. I hope you can compare them with the territory of contemporary Ukraine.

This map was faked.
There were no"Ukraine" and no "Ukrainians" back then, there were Malo-Russians, these people spoke Malo-Russian dialects. Gogol, the great Russians writer, also spoke a Malo-Russian dialect. There were also Belo-Russian and Veliko-Russian dialects.

Peasants in different Russian provinces spoke different Russian dialects, but these Dialects were more similar, than say the Bavarian and Prussian dialects of the German language.

The today official Russian language was originally created by intellectuals in Sankt Petersburg, it was hugely influence by the French and German languages, because the Russian aristocracy used French to communicate with each other, and German was once the official language of the first Russian Universities, created by Peter the Great.

Gradually, the language, spoken in Sant Petersburg, became the official language of the Russian Empire, all intellectuals, including those in Malo-Russia switched to the Russian language of Santk Petersburg. That is why Gogol wrote his works in this language, not in his Malo-Russian dialect.

But the peasants in all Russian provinces, including Belo-Russia, Malo-Russia and Veliko-Russia (speak Great Russia) still used their old dialects, because they were illiterate.

Because Malo-Russia and Belo-Russia were more backward, than Great Russia, the peasants remained illiterate there for a longer time, than in Great Russia. In fact, the word "Ukraine", means "Province" or "Rimland", it was just a backward province of the Russian empire, that is why the name "Ukraine" (Province) eventually became the name of this Russian province.

The Bolsheviks used this backwardness of Malo-Russian and Belo-Russian peasantry to divide and conquer Russia.

That is the reason why the peasant dialects in Belo-Russia and Malo-Russia eventually became new Russian languages. The Bolsheviks used the illiteracy of peasants in Russian provinces and created the "Ukrainian" and "Belorussian" languages and national identities, which did not exist 200 years ago.

You could easily do this in Germany, too, and declare that Bavarian dialect is a separate language, because the inhabitants of Berlin cannot understand a Bavarian peasant, if this peasant did not manage to learn the official German languauge.

Перепись населения Российской империи (1897) — Википедия
Демоскоп Weekly - Приложение. Справочник статистических показателей.

This link fully support my arguments, there were no "Ukrainians" in the Russian Empire. There were different kinds of Russians. Belo-Russians, Malo-Russians and Veliko(Great)-Russians. Peasants in different Russian provinces spoke different kinds of Russian dialects, but these dialects were more similar, than different German dialects that are still spoken today by illiterate German peasants.

BTW, the "Ukrainian" language of Shevchenko was very different from the Ukrainian language, installed now by the Catholic Ukrainian Junta from the West-Ukraine. These parts of ancient Russia were for centuries under Polish domination, that is why the population of this region lost its original Orthodox Russian language (called Old Russian), and is now speaking a bizarre pigeon language, a mixture of Polish and Russian dialects.

Well, to talk about all of that one should start from the very beginning, I think. The very beginning means the times when the Slavic tribes began to appear in these lands and when later the first principalities were founded. If I am not mistaken, there were 7 or so East-Slavic tribes at that time which settled in various parts of the Old Rus. After some time passed, they grew up economically, culturally and politically; mixed up with various ethnic groups which surrounded them. Later, the first principalities of the Old Rus were created which despite economical and cultural proximity, were de facto sovereign states. Later, these principalities were united by Kiev in a single state which is known now as Kievan Rus. This state existed as a single one during the time of Vladimir the Great and Yaroslav the Wise, after them there were wars between their descendants and the Kievan Rus de facto broke on independent principalities. After the Mongol invasion, the Moscow principality began to rise and its rulers claimed themselves as tsars of All Rus, though during the times of Kievan Rus it didn’t even existed.

Later, the most lands of Kievan Rus were incorporated in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania which after some time was transformed in Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. In the mid-17th there began a war between the Cossack Hetmanate and Poland. During this war hetman Khmelnitskiy signed a treaty with Russian tsar and the Hetmanate was eventually joined to the Tsardom of Russia.

So, what I want to say by posting all that staff. The Old Rus never was a monolith. Several tribes created Old-Rus ethnos and there were differences between people who lived in different parts of these lands, the differences kinda those we have now. There was political disunity and so on. Though the people of these lands called themselves a common name – Rusichi (Rusy, Rusiny), these differences existed. When the people of contemporary Ukraine began to call themselves Ukrainians rather than Russians, I can’t say for sure. Some say that this process began during the Hetmanate (though Khmelnitskiy called himself a Russian, if I remember correctly). Some say that it began much later. But one thing can be said for sure – eventually the term Ukrainians replaced the term Russians in self-determination. Also, one more thing can be said for sure – contemporary Ukrainians are descendants of the people of Old Rus who lived on this land and who have every right on it. All claims of ‘Moscovits’ on these lands are laughable.

Ukrainians call themselves RUSSIANS!

In fact, if a Ukrainian wants to insult a Russian, he calls him a Katzap, speak a non-Slavic Russian-speaking mongrel. Ukrainian Nationalists believe that Peter The Great had stolen the "Name" Russia from the Kievan Rus, and most Ukrainians hate the name of their today state, which literally means "Province". They claim the name "Russia" for themselves.

I understand what you are trying to say. But I wouldn’t agree with you on this case. Now most people of Ukraine (even those who speak Russian in everyday life) consider themselves as Ukrainians. But again, we (Ukrainians) don’t draw a distinction between a Ukrainian and a Rusich of the old time; we draw a distinction between a Ukrainian and a Russian (ie that one who live in contemporary Russia).

BTW, the "Ukrainian" language of Shevchenko was very different from the Ukrainian language, installed now by the Catholic Ukrainian Junta from the West-Ukraine. These parts of ancient Russia were for centuries under Polish domination, that is why the population of this region lost its original Orthodox Russian language (called Old Russian), and is now speaking a bizarre pigeon language, a mixture of Polish and Russian dialects.

Unless I am mistaken, the basis of the modern Ukrainian language is so-called Poltava dialect.

 

[ESay]

Ukrainians did not exist 200 years ago! Ukraine was an artificial creation of anti-Russian and anti-Christian Commies, who were on the payroll of American banksters!

Actually, the Ukrainians began to consider themselves as a nation at least from the times of Hetmanate, if you know what this term means.

Here is a historical map, do you see any Ukraine there?

What about a historical map of North America?

And if you look on the ethno-linguistic map of what was "Soviet Ukriane", then you will realise that big chunks of Russian land were given to Ukraine by the anti-Russian Soviet leaders.

The lands of so-called Novorossia began to be populated by Ukrainians (or Malo-Russians as then official authorities called them) almost from the times they were incorporated by the Russian Empire. Read about All-Russian census in 1897 referring to languages. This map shows the mostly Ukrainian-spoken territories. I hope you can compare them with the territory of contemporary Ukraine.

Could you give link to source of 1897 year, please?

Перепись населения Российской империи (1897) — Википедия
Демоскоп Weekly - Приложение. Справочник статистических показателей.

Really? Maybe, let's compare with source?

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a4/East_Slavs_in_Russia_1897.JPG

You included in Malorossian territories where malorossian dialect consist of less than 50%.

"Mister, if you ain't any slicker with that pistol than you were with that bottom deal, you'd better not have at it."

Woody, unlike your map which shows distribution of Ukrainian-speakers by governorates my map shows the Ukrainian-speaking population not by governorates, but by actual territories where Ukrainian-speaking people were majority. For example, despite the Tavria governorate was mostly Ukrainian-speaking, the Crime peninsula is mostly depicted in grey because the Ukrainian-speakers were the minority there, though it belonged to the Tavria governorate. The same is true for some lands that now belongs to Russia, but in this case some counties is depicted as Ukrainian-speaking, though the governorates they belonged to had mostly Russian-speaking population.

 

[Sbiker]

Ukrainians did not exist 200 years ago! Ukraine was an artificial creation of anti-Russian and anti-Christian Commies, who were on the payroll of American banksters!

Actually, the Ukrainians began to consider themselves as a nation at least from the times of Hetmanate, if you know what this term means.

Here is a historical map, do you see any Ukraine there?

What about a historical map of North America?

And if you look on the ethno-linguistic map of what was "Soviet Ukriane", then you will realise that big chunks of Russian land were given to Ukraine by the anti-Russian Soviet leaders.

The lands of so-called Novorossia began to be populated by Ukrainians (or Malo-Russians as then official authorities called them) almost from the times they were incorporated by the Russian Empire. Read about All-Russian census in 1897 referring to languages. This map shows the mostly Ukrainian-spoken territories. I hope you can compare them with the territory of contemporary Ukraine.

Could you give link to source of 1897 year, please?

Перепись населения Российской империи (1897) — Википедия
Демоскоп Weekly - Приложение. Справочник статистических показателей.

Really? Maybe, let's compare with source?

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a4/East_Slavs_in_Russia_1897.JPG

You included in Malorossian territories where malorossian dialect consist of less than 50%.

"Mister, if you ain't any slicker with that pistol than you were with that bottom deal, you'd better not have at it."

Woody, unlike your map which shows distribution of Ukrainian-speakers by governorates my map shows the Ukrainian-speaking population not by governorates, but by actual territories where Ukrainian-speaking people were majority. For example, despite the Tavria governorate was mostly Ukrainian-speaking, the Crime peninsula is mostly depicted in grey because the Ukrainian-speakers were the minority there, though it belonged to the Tavria governorate. The same is true for some lands that now belongs to Russia, but in this case some counties is depicted as Ukrainian-speaking, though the governorates they belonged to had mostly Russian-speaking population.

You could think up what you want, but I'm just using sources, YOU pointed. If this sources show statistic by region, how could you operate with statistic by territory? You either "mistaken" about statistic, either about sources...


And another point, making all this statistic useless. It's not about "ukrainian" language, using as standard in Kiev. It's about "surzhik" - local dialect, different in different regions. You point, for example, people in Korocha and people in Lviv as "ukrainian" language but if they could try to speak "at ukrainian" - they wouldn't understand either... Why, do you think, ukrainians use Russian so frequently? And they have, at least, standard of "Ukrainian" now...

 

[Art__Allm]

The ethnic Germans in Böhmen und Märin were happy to become part of the Third Reich but that did not give Hitler the right to annex the Sudetenland from Czechoslovakia in 1936.
.

Playing the old and tired Nazi-Card?
Does this still work?
BTW, There was no Czechoslovakia in 1936, you missed your history classes.

This monster of Versailles, called Czechoslovakia, collapsed before the Sudetengermans asked for reunification with Germany. Slovaks declared their independence first, and that was the end of pre-war Czechoslovakia.

Forget your Mickey-Mouse-Version of history, read primary sources, and you will find out that I am right.

After WWII Czechoslovakia was restored, but this artificial creation could only exist under Communist dictatorship. As soon as people in this artificial state got the opportunity to vote for their self determination, they separated into Slovakia and Czechia.

I think that Ukraine should do the same: just peacefully separate into different states, like it did the people of former Czechoslovakia.

According to your crazy logic it is something bad when people have the right to self-determination.

In Palestine Zionists ethnically cleans native Semites from their land, keep them in open air concentration camps, like Gaza, and then "treat" these Semitic civilians with white phosphor and cast lead, but the lying media does not call for a war with Israel.

What do you want to do with the people of Crimea who are happy with Russian citizenship? How can you force them again into Ukraine?
Do you not realise that they will not accept that?

They will rather die, than become Ukrainian citizens.

Are you advocating for WWIII and an ethnic cleansing of the Crimean Peninsula and New Russia, like it was the case after WWII with German civilians, who were ethnically cleansed from their land?

Do you not realise that these crimes are now condemned by the international law?

Well, I hope that Europeans have learned from history and will not be stampeded into WWIII and into new ethnic cleansing.

We just have to accept the right of Crimean population to self-determination, the same with the people of New Russia.

I hope that the warmongers, who instigate hate among Europeans and push for WWIII, will this time not get their way.

 

[Art__Allm]

Later, these principalities were united by Kiev in a single state which is known now as Kievan Rus. This state existed as a single one during the time of Vladimir the Great and Yaroslav the Wise, after them there were wars between their descendants and the Kievan Rus de facto broke on independent principalities. After the Mongol invasion, the Moscow principality began to rise and its rulers claimed themselves as tsars of All Rus, though during the times of Kievan Rus it didn’t even existed.

Well, in medieval times the land was inherited by the ruling dynasty. The throne passed from father to son.
The Kievan Rus was created by Rurik, he was a Viking.
His descendants had the right to call themselves Tsars.
They moved their capital many times, after Kiev it was Moscow, after Moscow it was Sankt Petersburg.
As you said, Kievan Rus was destroyed, speak there were no rulers from Rurik's dynasty any more who lived in Kiev.
And that is precicely the reason why Ukraine became a province: Украина = Окраина. There was still old Russian population, but they were peasants, ruled by Polish pans.

Later, the most lands of Kievan Rus were incorporated in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania which after some time was transformed in Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. In the mid-17th there began a war between the Cossack Hetmanate and Poland. During this war hetman Khmelnitskiy signed a treaty with Russian tsar and the Hetmanate was eventually joined to the Tsardom of Russia.

Yes, and these Cossacks did not call themselves "Ukrainians", they were Orthodox Christians. That is why they joined the Tsardom.

So, what I want to say by posting all that staff. The Old Rus never was a monolith. Several tribes created Old-Rus ethnos and there were differences between people who lived in different parts of these lands, the differences kinda those we have now. There was political disunity and so on. Though the people of these lands called themselves a common name – Rusichi (Rusy, Rusiny), these differences existed.

The same with Bavarians and Prussians in today Germany, they were and still are more different, than different Russian tribes in Russia, who could easily understand each other, because their languages were very similar.
Different German dialects are so different, that Germans can only communicate with each another using the Hochdeutsch (official German language).

When the people of contemporary Ukraine began to call themselves Ukrainians rather than Russians, I can’t say for sure. Some say that this process began during the Hetmanate (though Khmelnitskiy called himself a Russian, if I remember correctly). Some say that it began much later.
But one thing can be said for sure – eventually the term Ukrainians replaced the term Russians in self-determination

Yes, because Bolsheviks needed the support of separatists, they used the divide and conquer tactics against the Tsar. They supported the minorities against the majority, and created new identities, like Ukrainians.

The same can be done with Germany. You can call the Bavarians a sepate nation and support Bavarian separatists (they exist), support the Bavarian dialect, call this dialect a separate language, and eventually you will create a separate Bavarian nation. The same was done with Austrians after WWII. All Austrians called themselves Germans before WWII, after WWII there was a massive anti-German propaganda and eventually Austrian Germans decided that they are not German any more, though they speak the same language the Germans do.

Also, one more thing can be said for sure – contemporary Ukrainians are descendants of the people of Old Rus who lived on this land and who have every right on it. All claims of ‘Moscovits’ on these lands are laughable.

I think that different provinces of Ukraine have different identities, Crimean population asked for reunification with Russia. The population of Novo-Russia did the same, but Russian parliament refused the request.

The people in Western provinces may ask Polish parliament for re-unification with Poland, and I do not think that Russia will mind this.

Some central provinces of Ukraine may vote for remaining an Independent state, and I do not think that Moscow will mind this.

So I think that Ukrainians should be as clever, as Czechoslovakians. The people of this artificial state peacefully separated, because they had different identities, and this was the best solution.

I understand what you are trying to say. But I wouldn’t agree with you on this case. Now most people of Ukraine (even those who speak Russian in everyday life) consider themselves as Ukrainians.

I do not see any contradiction. Most Bavarians consider themselves Bavarians, but they do not mind when they are called Germans, too.

But again, we (Ukrainians) don’t draw a distinction between a Ukrainian and a Rusich of the old time; we draw a distinction between a Ukrainian and a Russian (ie that one who live in contemporary Russia).

Well, that depends from the region of Ukraine. There is no sharp boarder between the Ukraine and today RF, because this boarder is an artificial boarder. It is obvious that some parts of Ukraine did not feel like remaining in a state that is hostile to Russia. They may just become an independent state, say Tavria or New Russia. And the people of the Crimean Peninsula have a Russian identity, that is a fact.

The problem with Ukrainian identity is that it is very difficult to create a modern culture. Russian culture is very rich, it has deep roots, there were many world known Russian writers, Gogol is also known as a Russian writer, though Ukrainians may claim that he was a Ukrainian.

You cannot create a culture in a couple of decades, that is why most Ukrainians watch Russian television and they can express themselves better, when they speak Russian.

The Ukrainian TV is very boring. You cannot create a national culture per political decision, the process of cultural growth is very subtile, and you need centuries to create a culture.

 

[theHawk]

Fear-mongering. Russia is a good partner.

President Assad of Syria would agree with you.

Is he supposed to disagree and prefer Obama who tried to have him killed.

 

[Eloy]

The ethnic Germans in Böhmen und Märin were happy to become part of the Third Reich but that did not give Hitler the right to annex the Sudetenland from Czechoslovakia in 1936.

Playing the old and tired Nazi-Card?
Does this still work?
BTW, There was no Czechoslovakia in 1936, you missed your history classes.

And in what school did you learn that "There was no Czechoslovakia in 1936", I wonder.

Ethnic German area marked in red.

I think that Ukraine should do the same: just peacefully separate into different states, like it did the people of former Czechoslovakia.

There is nothing peaceful about a Russian-backed army of rebels belligerently declaring they are part of Russia.

According to your crazy logic it is something bad when people have the right to self-determination.

Ukraine was a country which got independence from the Soviet with a clearly defined border and which included Krim and its eastern region. It is for the government of all Ukraine in Kiev to sort-out the need for communities within its sovereign border to accommodate wishes of self-determination. It sjould be done legally and peacefully, not from Russian invasion.

In Palestine Zionists ethnically cleans native Semites from their land, keep them in open air concentration camps, like Gaza, and then "treat" these Semitic civilians with white phosphor and cast lead, but the lying media does not call for a war with Israel.

I do not see a comparison with the Israel problem and what is happening in Ukraine.

What do you want to do with the people of Crimea who are happy with Russian citizenship? How can you force them again into Ukraine?
Do you not realise that they will not accept that?

They are Ukrainian citizens. If they have a case for secession, it is best worked-out with Kiev.

They will rather die, than become Ukrainian citizens.

They are Ukrainian citizens and they were not dying.

Are you advocating for WWIII and an ethnic cleansing of the Crimean Peninsula and New Russia, like it was the case after WWII with German civilians, who were ethnically cleansed from their land?

No.

Do you not realise that these crimes are now condemned by the international law?

It is against international law for Russia to annex Crimea and foment civil war in eastern Ukraine.

Well, I hope that Europeans have learned from history and will not be stampeded into WWIII and into new ethnic cleansing.

The Russians know that Europeans do not want war but they should also know that we will resist a new Russian Empire to be established again in Europe.

We just have to accept the right of Crimean population to self-determination, the same with the people of New Russia.

This is a matter for the Ukrainian people, not the Russians.

[QUOTE="Art__Allm, post: 16567891, member: 46985"I hope that the warmongers, who instigate hate among Europeans and push for WWIII, will this time not get their way.[/QUOTE]
The only war mongering has come from the Russians and the rebels in the east. It is pitiful that the Russians have not yet learned to talk instead of making war.

 

[Sbiker]

Ukraine was a country which got independence from the Soviet with a clearly defined border and which included Krim and its eastern region.

First lies of your propaganda. In January 1991 Crimea had referendum for creation of autonomous Crimea Republic, like a subject of USSR. But local Ukrainian authorities in February ignored results of this referendum, in-fact, annexed Crimea back to Ukraine. It was ANNEXATION OF CRIMEA BY UKRAINE. SO, then were a several steps, where Ukraine forced Crimean citizens to accept Ukrainian citizenship, they cancelled Crimea president, destroyed Crimea parlament and so on.

So, Crimea people now know, there are no inrenational law in Europe, except brute force. It's logically, they asked to defend Crimea population from nazi aggression - and got it.

If you want to back to lafwul solution - Ukraine is third in a queue, after Osman Empire )

They are Ukrainian citizens.

Lies of Western propaganda. Acts of March 1995 year of cancelling Crimea autonomous status were accepted with a violation of international law. They are not valid, so Crimean citizens didn't have Ukrainian citizenship anywhere...

It is against international law for Russia to annex Crimea and foment civil war in eastern Ukraine.

Ukraine annexed Crimea first. Why don't you start to defend "international law" from Ukraine, heh? )

It is pitiful that the Russians have not yet learned to talk instead of making war.

How double-faced )) Every Russian knosw, Europeans are a beasts, which don't ruled by laws, don't keep agreements and understand only brute force. If someone has a doubts - they just have to look on Crimea, where EU propaganda ignores ALL law considerations, on Donetsk, where EU commitee corrupted by nazi, continuing to murdering civilians, and on Baltic countries, where NATO increasing naval forces.... Will YOU believe to EU, being Russian?

 

[Eloy]

Ukraine was a country which got independence from the Soviet with a clearly defined border and which included Krim and its eastern region.

First lies of your propaganda. In January 1991 Crimea had referendum for creation of autonomous Crimea Republic, like a subject of USSR. But local Ukrainian authorities in February ignored results of this referendum, in-fact, annexed Crimea back to Ukraine. It was ANNEXATION OF CRIMEA BY UKRAINE. SO, then were a several steps, where Ukraine forced Crimean citizens to accept Ukrainian citizenship, they cancelled Crimea president, destroyed Crimea parlament and so on.

So, Crimea people now know, there are no inrenational law in Europe, except brute force. It's logically, they asked to defend Crimea population from nazi aggression - and got it.

If you want to back to lafwul solution - Ukraine is third in a queue, after Osman Empire )

They are Ukrainian citizens.

Lies of Western propaganda. Acts of March 1995 year of cancelling Crimea autonomous status were accepted with a violation of international law. They are not valid, so Crimean citizens didn't have Ukrainian citizenship anywhere...

It is against international law for Russia to annex Crimea and foment civil war in eastern Ukraine.

Ukraine annexed Crimea first. Why don't you start to defend "international law" from Ukraine, heh? )

It is pitiful that the Russians have not yet learned to talk instead of making war.

How double-faced )) Every Russian knosw, Europeans are a beasts, which don't ruled by laws, don't keep agreements and understand only brute force. If someone has a doubts - they just have to look on Crimea, where EU propaganda ignores ALL law considerations, on Donetsk, where EU commitee corrupted by nazi, continuing to murdering civilians, and on Baltic countries, where NATO increasing naval forces.... Will YOU believe to EU, being Russian?

I think you must read the government newspapers and TV in Russia.
I do not see anything in what you write that resembles truth.

 

[Sbiker]

Ukraine was a country which got independence from the Soviet with a clearly defined border and which included Krim and its eastern region.

First lies of your propaganda. In January 1991 Crimea had referendum for creation of autonomous Crimea Republic, like a subject of USSR. But local Ukrainian authorities in February ignored results of this referendum, in-fact, annexed Crimea back to Ukraine. It was ANNEXATION OF CRIMEA BY UKRAINE. SO, then were a several steps, where Ukraine forced Crimean citizens to accept Ukrainian citizenship, they cancelled Crimea president, destroyed Crimea parlament and so on.

So, Crimea people now know, there are no inrenational law in Europe, except brute force. It's logically, they asked to defend Crimea population from nazi aggression - and got it.

If you want to back to lafwul solution - Ukraine is third in a queue, after Osman Empire )

They are Ukrainian citizens.

Lies of Western propaganda. Acts of March 1995 year of cancelling Crimea autonomous status were accepted with a violation of international law. They are not valid, so Crimean citizens didn't have Ukrainian citizenship anywhere...

It is against international law for Russia to annex Crimea and foment civil war in eastern Ukraine.

Ukraine annexed Crimea first. Why don't you start to defend "international law" from Ukraine, heh? )

It is pitiful that the Russians have not yet learned to talk instead of making war.

How double-faced )) Every Russian knosw, Europeans are a beasts, which don't ruled by laws, don't keep agreements and understand only brute force. If someone has a doubts - they just have to look on Crimea, where EU propaganda ignores ALL law considerations, on Donetsk, where EU commitee corrupted by nazi, continuing to murdering civilians, and on Baltic countries, where NATO increasing naval forces.... Will YOU believe to EU, being Russian?

I think you must read the government newspapers and TV in Russia.
I do not see anything in what you write that resembles truth.

I think govermnent newspapers and TV in Russia can lie, as in other countries. Don't be a zombie, let's discuss a FACTS. Starting with it:

wiki: Crimean sovereignty referendum, 1991 - Wikipedia

So, question, really interesting to me. Will YOU believe to EU, being Russian?

 

[Eloy]

Ukraine was a country which got independence from the Soviet with a clearly defined border and which included Krim and its eastern region.

First lies of your propaganda. In January 1991 Crimea had referendum for creation of autonomous Crimea Republic, like a subject of USSR. But local Ukrainian authorities in February ignored results of this referendum, in-fact, annexed Crimea back to Ukraine. It was ANNEXATION OF CRIMEA BY UKRAINE. SO, then were a several steps, where Ukraine forced Crimean citizens to accept Ukrainian citizenship, they cancelled Crimea president, destroyed Crimea parlament and so on.

So, Crimea people now know, there are no inrenational law in Europe, except brute force. It's logically, they asked to defend Crimea population from nazi aggression - and got it.

If you want to back to lafwul solution - Ukraine is third in a queue, after Osman Empire )

They are Ukrainian citizens.

Lies of Western propaganda. Acts of March 1995 year of cancelling Crimea autonomous status were accepted with a violation of international law. They are not valid, so Crimean citizens didn't have Ukrainian citizenship anywhere...

It is against international law for Russia to annex Crimea and foment civil war in eastern Ukraine.

Ukraine annexed Crimea first. Why don't you start to defend "international law" from Ukraine, heh? )

It is pitiful that the Russians have not yet learned to talk instead of making war.

How double-faced )) Every Russian knosw, Europeans are a beasts, which don't ruled by laws, don't keep agreements and understand only brute force. If someone has a doubts - they just have to look on Crimea, where EU propaganda ignores ALL law considerations, on Donetsk, where EU commitee corrupted by nazi, continuing to murdering civilians, and on Baltic countries, where NATO increasing naval forces.... Will YOU believe to EU, being Russian?

I think you must read the government newspapers and TV in Russia.
I do not see anything in what you write that resembles truth.

I think govermnent newspapers and TV in Russia can lie, as in other countries. Don't be a zombie, let's discuss a FACTS. Starting with it:

wiki: Crimean sovereignty referendum, 1991 - Wikipedia

So, question, really interesting to me. Will YOU believe to EU, being Russian?

I agree with what the European media reported about the Russian annexation of Crimea. It was illegal, not how things should be done.

 

[Tehon]

Ukraine was a country which got independence from the Soviet with a clearly defined border and which included Krim and its eastern region.

First lies of your propaganda. In January 1991 Crimea had referendum for creation of autonomous Crimea Republic, like a subject of USSR. But local Ukrainian authorities in February ignored results of this referendum, in-fact, annexed Crimea back to Ukraine. It was ANNEXATION OF CRIMEA BY UKRAINE. SO, then were a several steps, where Ukraine forced Crimean citizens to accept Ukrainian citizenship, they cancelled Crimea president, destroyed Crimea parlament and so on.

So, Crimea people now know, there are no inrenational law in Europe, except brute force. It's logically, they asked to defend Crimea population from nazi aggression - and got it.

If you want to back to lafwul solution - Ukraine is third in a queue, after Osman Empire )

They are Ukrainian citizens.

Lies of Western propaganda. Acts of March 1995 year of cancelling Crimea autonomous status were accepted with a violation of international law. They are not valid, so Crimean citizens didn't have Ukrainian citizenship anywhere...

It is against international law for Russia to annex Crimea and foment civil war in eastern Ukraine.

Ukraine annexed Crimea first. Why don't you start to defend "international law" from Ukraine, heh? )

It is pitiful that the Russians have not yet learned to talk instead of making war.

How double-faced )) Every Russian knosw, Europeans are a beasts, which don't ruled by laws, don't keep agreements and understand only brute force. If someone has a doubts - they just have to look on Crimea, where EU propaganda ignores ALL law considerations, on Donetsk, where EU commitee corrupted by nazi, continuing to murdering civilians, and on Baltic countries, where NATO increasing naval forces.... Will YOU believe to EU, being Russian?

I think you must read the government newspapers and TV in Russia.
I do not see anything in what you write that resembles truth.

I think govermnent newspapers and TV in Russia can lie, as in other countries. Don't be a zombie, let's discuss a FACTS. Starting with it:

wiki: Crimean sovereignty referendum, 1991 - Wikipedia

So, question, really interesting to me. Will YOU believe to EU, being Russian?

I agree with what the European media reported about the Russian annexation of Crimea. It was illegal, not how things should be done.

There was nothing wrong with it. The International Court of Justice ruled as much on Kosovo's declaration of independence.

 

[Art__Allm]

And in what school did you learn that "There was no Czechoslovakia in 1936", I wonder.

Ethnic German area marked in red.

You talked about annexing Sudetenland in 1936, not me. I just quoted your post.


The Sudetenland was relegated to Germany between 1 October and 10 October 1938, the Western powers accepted this deal.

In 1936 the artificial creation of Versatile still existed.

On 14 March 1939 the Slovak Parliament unanimously declared Slovak independence, in other words Czechoslovakia existed only till 14 March 1939.

On the morning of 15 March German troops entered Bohemia and Moravia, but there was no Czechoslovakia at this time any more.

So German troops could not invade Czechoslovakia, this artificial state collapsed a day before. Can you get my drift?

There is nothing peaceful about a Russian-backed army of rebels belligerently declaring they are part of Russia.

These freedom fighters are supported by the majority of the population in East Ukraine, and you know that. The Junta did not accept their declaration of independents and declared a war against their own former citizens, killing civilians. If the Russian state really supported these freedom fighters, they would have already destroyed the Junta in Kiev.
No, the Russian state does not support these freedom fighters, they are only supported by volunteers from Russia.

Ukraine was a country which got independence from the Soviet with a clearly defined border and which included Krim and its eastern region.

That were the boarders of the Soviet Republic Ukraine, created by Communist dictators, like Stalin and Khrushchev, who were not Russians, and Russian people in what became Soviet Ukraine were not asked, if they are happy with these artificial boarders.

Do you really believe that the decision of Communist dictators, like Stalin and Khrushchev, was a just decision?

It is for the government of all Ukraine in Kiev to sort-out the need for communities within its sovereign border to accommodate wishes of self-determination. It sjould be done legally and peacefully, not from Russian invasion.

Russia did not invade the Crimean peninsula, it is idiotic to repeat this nonsense. Russian troops were already there, so there was no invasion.

Well, there was no legal and peaceful transition of power from the elected Ukrainian government to the Junta. Junta violated the Ukrainian constitution, speak the old Ukraine was destroyed by the Junta. It is idiotic to talk about a "peaceful" and "legal" process, after the Putsch in Kiev.

If there was a Putsch in the USA, if there would be such a transition of power in America, many states would declare their Independence from the Junta, and you could not blame them for this decision.

I do not see a comparison with the Israel problem and what is happening in Ukraine.

What?
You are talking about international law and order, and say that Crimean population illegally separated from the Junta in Kiev.
But in the case of Israel you close the eye on the fact that Israel ethnically cleansed Palestine and annexed Palestinian land AGAINST the will of the native Semitic population. Is this not double standard?

They are Ukrainian citizens. If they have a case for secession, it is best worked-out with Kiev.

They have rejected Ukrainian citizenship, that was forced upon them after the collapse of the SU, and they are now citizens of the RF, which was really their own free choice since Khrushchev sold them to the Soviet Ukraine.

It is against international law for Russia to annex Crimea and foment civil war in eastern Ukraine.

Well, there was no peaceful and legal transition of power from the elected Ukrainian government to the Junta, they got power via violation of the Ukrainian constitution. De Jure Ukrainian state did not exist after the Putsch, and the population of Crimea did not have any obligation to the Jutna. Their decision to reunite with Russia is understandable, and international law grants the right to self determination to people. There was no ethnic cleansing, the population is happy with its new status.

Where is the problem?

On the other hand, Israel ethnically cleansed Palestinian land.

The annexation of this cleansed Palestinian land was against the will of the native Semitic population, and that is a clear violation of the international law.

So before accusing Russia of any violation, the international community should solve the Palestinian problem, where people really suffer.

The Russians know that Europeans do not want war but they should also know that we will resist a new Russian Empire to be established again in Europe.

The Soviet Union was an anti-Russian empire. If it was a Russian Empire, Soviet Leaders would not sell parts of Russia to Ukraine.

This is a matter for the Ukrainian people, not the Russians.

Ukraine was an artificial creation, and Ukrainian people, too. Parts of Ukraine do not want to be ruled by the Junta in Kiev, and nobody can blame them for that.

In the USA the most states would separate from Washington, if the elected American president was replaced by a violent Putsch, and the constitutional judges were imprisoned by the Junta.

The only war mongering has come from the Russians and the rebels in the east. It is pitiful that the Russians have not yet learned to talk instead of making war.

Do not blame the internal problems of Ukraine on Russians.
The Putsch in Kiev was not financed by Russians, it was financed by the Obama administration, by the "Fuck-the-EU-Nuland", by Soros and Co.
And it is understandable that parts of Ukrainian population were not happy with this violent and illegal transition of power.

The lying media wined about the supposed "Russian hacking" of American elections, the presstitutes claimed that there was no just transition of power from Obama to Trump, because some hackers exposed the crimes of DNS and Clintons.

Some warmongers wanted to declare war on Russia, because they believed that Russian hackers exposed the crimes of Killary, and that because of that she was not elected.

But compare this to the transition of power from the elected Ukrainian government to the Junta?

The Putsch was literally financed by Soros and Co, protesters were literally on the payroll of foreign governments.

What were Ukrainians, who did not support this anti-Russian hate campaign, supposed to do?

Sorry, but your argumentation is so dishonest, the double standard is right in your face.

 

[Eloy]

And in what school did you learn that "There was no Czechoslovakia in 1936", I wonder.

Ethnic German area marked in red.

You talked about annexing Sudetenland in 1936, not me. I just quoted your post.


The Sudetenland was relegated to Germany between 1 October and 10 October 1938, the Western powers accepted this deal.

In 1936 the artificial creation of Versatile still existed.

On 14 March 1939 the Slovak Parliament unanimously declared Slovak independence, in other words Czechoslovakia existed only till 14 March 1939.

On the morning of 15 March German troops entered Bohemia and Moravia, but there was no Czechoslovakia at this time any more.

So German troops could not invade Czechoslovakia, this artificial state collapsed a day before. Can you get my drift?

There is nothing peaceful about a Russian-backed army of rebels belligerently declaring they are part of Russia.

These freedom fighters are supported by the majority of the population in East Ukraine, and you know that. The Junta did not accept their declaration of independents and declared a war against their own former citizens, killing civilians. If the Russian state really supported these freedom fighters, they would have already destroyed the Junta in Kiev.
No, the Russian state does not support these freedom fighters, they are only supported by volunteers from Russia.

Ukraine was a country which got independence from the Soviet with a clearly defined border and which included Krim and its eastern region.

That were the boarders of the Soviet Republic Ukraine, created by Communist dictators, like Stalin and Khrushchev, who were not Russians, and Russian people in what became Soviet Ukraine were not asked, if they are happy with these artificial boarders.

Do you really believe that the decision of Communist dictators, like Stalin and Khrushchev, was a just decision?

It is for the government of all Ukraine in Kiev to sort-out the need for communities within its sovereign border to accommodate wishes of self-determination. It sjould be done legally and peacefully, not from Russian invasion.

Russia did not invade the Crimean peninsula, it is idiotic to repeat this nonsense. Russian troops were already there, so there was no invasion.

Well, there was no legal and peaceful transition of power from the elected Ukrainian government to the Junta. Junta violated the Ukrainian constitution, speak the old Ukraine was destroyed by the Junta. It is idiotic to talk about a "peaceful" and "legal" process, after the Putsch in Kiev.

If there was a Putsch in the USA, if there would be such a transition of power in America, many states would declare their Independence from the Junta, and you could not blame them for this decision.

I do not see a comparison with the Israel problem and what is happening in Ukraine.

What?
You are talking about international law and order, and say that Crimean population illegally separated from the Junta in Kiev.
But in the case of Israel you close the eye on the fact that Israel ethnically cleansed Palestine and annexed Palestinian land AGAINST the will of the native Semitic population. Is this not double standard?

They are Ukrainian citizens. If they have a case for secession, it is best worked-out with Kiev.

They have rejected Ukrainian citizenship, that was forced upon them after the collapse of the SU, and they are now citizens of the RF, which was really their own free choice since Khrushchev sold them to the Soviet Ukraine.

It is against international law for Russia to annex Crimea and foment civil war in eastern Ukraine.

Well, there was no peaceful and legal transition of power from the elected Ukrainian government to the Junta, they got power via violation of the Ukrainian constitution. De Jure Ukrainian state did not exist after the Putsch, and the population of Crimea did not have any obligation to the Jutna. Their decision to reunite with Russia is understandable, and international law grants the right to self determination to people. There was no ethnic cleansing, the population is happy with its new status.

Where is the problem?

On the other hand, Israel ethnically cleansed Palestinian land.

The annexation of this cleansed Palestinian land was against the will of the native Semitic population, and that is a clear violation of the international law.

So before accusing Russia of any violation, the international community should solve the Palestinian problem, where people really suffer.

The Russians know that Europeans do not want war but they should also know that we will resist a new Russian Empire to be established again in Europe.

The Soviet Union was an anti-Russian empire. If it was a Russian Empire, Soviet Leaders would not sell parts of Russia to Ukraine.

This is a matter for the Ukrainian people, not the Russians.

Ukraine was an artificial creation, and Ukrainian people, too. Parts of Ukraine do not want to be ruled by the Junta in Kiev, and nobody can blame them for that.

In the USA the most states would separate from Washington, if the elected American president was replaced by a violent Putsch, and the constitutional judges were imprisoned by the Junta.

The only war mongering has come from the Russians and the rebels in the east. It is pitiful that the Russians have not yet learned to talk instead of making war.

Do not blame the internal problems of Ukraine on Russians.
The Putsch in Kiev was not financed by Russians, it was financed by the Obama administration, by the "Fuck-the-EU-Nuland", by Soros and Co.
And it is understandable that parts of Ukrainian population were not happy with this violent and illegal transition of power.

The lying media wined about the supposed "Russian hacking" of American elections, the presstitutes claimed that there was no just transition of power from Obama to Trump, because some hackers exposed the crimes of DNS and Clintons.

Some warmongers wanted to declare war on Russia, because they believed that Russian hackers exposed the crimes of Killary, and that because of that she was not elected.

But compare this to the transition of power from the elected Ukrainian government to the Junta?

The Putsch was literally financed by Soros and Co, protesters were literally on the payroll of foreign governments.

What were Ukrainians, who did not support this anti-Russian hate campaign, supposed to do?

Sorry, but your argumentation is so dishonest, the double standard is right in your face.

Your post is too long and too full of errors to answer every detail.

You missed the salient point that the Third Reich moved into Czechoslovakia to unite the German speakers to the Reich. This is what Putin is doing with Crimea and eastern Ukraine.

 

[Sbiker]

Ukraine was a country which got independence from the Soviet with a clearly defined border and which included Krim and its eastern region.

First lies of your propaganda. In January 1991 Crimea had referendum for creation of autonomous Crimea Republic, like a subject of USSR. But local Ukrainian authorities in February ignored results of this referendum, in-fact, annexed Crimea back to Ukraine. It was ANNEXATION OF CRIMEA BY UKRAINE. SO, then were a several steps, where Ukraine forced Crimean citizens to accept Ukrainian citizenship, they cancelled Crimea president, destroyed Crimea parlament and so on.

So, Crimea people now know, there are no inrenational law in Europe, except brute force. It's logically, they asked to defend Crimea population from nazi aggression - and got it.

If you want to back to lafwul solution - Ukraine is third in a queue, after Osman Empire )

They are Ukrainian citizens.

Lies of Western propaganda. Acts of March 1995 year of cancelling Crimea autonomous status were accepted with a violation of international law. They are not valid, so Crimean citizens didn't have Ukrainian citizenship anywhere...

It is against international law for Russia to annex Crimea and foment civil war in eastern Ukraine.

Ukraine annexed Crimea first. Why don't you start to defend "international law" from Ukraine, heh? )

It is pitiful that the Russians have not yet learned to talk instead of making war.

How double-faced )) Every Russian knosw, Europeans are a beasts, which don't ruled by laws, don't keep agreements and understand only brute force. If someone has a doubts - they just have to look on Crimea, where EU propaganda ignores ALL law considerations, on Donetsk, where EU commitee corrupted by nazi, continuing to murdering civilians, and on Baltic countries, where NATO increasing naval forces.... Will YOU believe to EU, being Russian?

I think you must read the government newspapers and TV in Russia.
I do not see anything in what you write that resembles truth.

I think govermnent newspapers and TV in Russia can lie, as in other countries. Don't be a zombie, let's discuss a FACTS. Starting with it:

wiki: Crimean sovereignty referendum, 1991 - Wikipedia

So, question, really interesting to me. Will YOU believe to EU, being Russian?

I agree with what the European media reported about the Russian annexation of Crimea. It was illegal, not how things should be done.

Please, ask my question, I'm trying to ask you third time. Will YOU believe to EU, being Russian? Just imagine what do you want, and tell.

 

[Sbiker]

The Soviet Union was an anti-Russian empire.

At least, Soviet Union didn't suffer competitors in anti-Russian politics )))

It's interesting, what are they thinking about, continuing to suppress Russia in current situation?

 

[Billo_Really]

Vladimir Putin learned well as he trained to be a KGB agent how to find a weakness in his opponents and exploit it. An example is how he is managing the European Union parts of which rely on Russia for energy, such as Germany. He knows Germany and the Germans well, having been a secret agent in Dresden when Angela Merkel, who speaks fluent Russian, lived in the Deutsche Demokratische Republik (DDR).

Putin in Dresden mid-1980s

In 1989 the wall in Berlin came down and the people in Dresden were feeling that their nationalism was in the ascent. The mob moved on the Ministry for State Security (Stasi) and then headed across the road to the KGB headquarters but before they could enter they were met by Vladimir Putin who told them that his men were armed and had permission to shoot. The small crowd left. Putin was seeing a type of German nationalism which was discouraged in the DDR under the thumb of Moscau. He left Germany and returned to Leningrad which people even there were beginning to call St. Petersburg. Like East Germany, nationalism was on the rise in the imploding Soviet Union. Putin saw first hand what this people power can do and he put his future in it with the contacts he had made with other KGB agents from Dresden. They are all now directors of former Soviet industries, now privatized and whose wealth goes into the pockets of Putin and pals.

Putin hates the European Union (EU) which has imposed hurting sanctions on Russia for invading Ukraine and annexing Crimea. EU member states in the east were under Soviet rule and, like East Germany, they have put their future into a partnership of nations but they are nervous of Russia. The Baltic states have native Russian speakers and Putin might just make a move. Poland and Hungary too throw a glance at Russia and wonder. Putin knows the weakness of the Europeans is their nationalism and he will work on this to pull asunder the EU just as it did in the DDR. The racism which is fundamental to nationalism can be exploited so that individual members who are rejecting the EU in favor of their own sense of identity as distinct from neighbors and better without them. Putin must be overjoyed that Britain is about to leave the EU (Brexit) and what a gift Donald Trump has given him by declaring that Nato is obsolete and he likes Putin.

This will be how the Kremlin will undermine the EU, making individual relationships with European nationalists, picking them off one at a time. This week Heinz-Christian Strache, Austria's far right leader has signed an alliance with President Putin's United Russia party and has offered to act as a go-between for the Kremlin and Donal Trump. Well, what do you know, the birthplace of Aryan nationalist, Adolf Hitler, Austria's neo-Nazis might just be next to have an exit.

Heinz-Christian Strache leader of Austria's Freedom Party signed a co-operation agreement with Sergei Zheleznyak, United Russia's deputy leader who is subject to travel bans and asset freezes by the EU.

You think the United States can be conquered? We have enough nukes to kill the population of the entire planet 37 times, yet you think we are in danger? Do I need to remind you, we're the ones who kicked Germany's ass?