Was Ukraine a threat to Russia before start of Russian military operation?

[Dissident]

Ukrainian legislation provides that ethnic Russians are third-grade citizens in Ukraine – compared with first-grade ethnic Crimean Tatars or second-grade ethnic Hungarians and Romanians (see Aren't these Ukrainian laws the Nazi ones?).

But at the same time, Ukrainian authorities demanded Russia to give back the Crimean Peninsula where most of people are ethnic Russians (Russia considers this Peninsula to be its own).

On the official web-site of the Ukrainian President you can read that Ukraine was preparing a package of measures – including military ones – for “de-occupation and reintegration of Crimea” (see here).

Please translate in Google Translator the following phrase

Этот документ определяет комплекс мер дипломатического, военного, экономического, информационного, гуманитарного и иного характера, направленных на восстановление территориальной целостности, государственного суверенитета Украины в международно признанных границах путем деоккупации и реинтеграции Крыма.

Cannot we conclude that Ukrainian preparation of military measures for “de-occupation and reintegration of Crimea” could provoke the start of the Russian military operation in Ukraine?

 

[Dayton3]

Ukrainian legislation provides that ethnic Russians are third-grade citizens in Ukraine – compared with first-grade ethnic Crimean Tatars or second-grade ethnic Hungarians and Romanians (see Aren't these Ukrainian laws the Nazi ones?).

But at the same time, Ukrainian authorities demanded Russia to give back the Crimean Peninsula where most of people are ethnic Russians (Russia considers this Peninsula to be its own).

On the official web-site of the Ukrainian President you can read that Ukraine was preparing a package of measures – including military ones – for “de-occupation and reintegration of Crimea” (see here).

Please translate in Google Translator the following phrase


Cannot we conclude that Ukrainian preparation of military measures for “de-occupation and reintegration of Crimea” could provoke the start of the Russian military operation in Ukraine?

don't be ridiculous

 

[Oldestyle]

Ukrainian legislation provides that ethnic Russians are third-grade citizens in Ukraine – compared with first-grade ethnic Crimean Tatars or second-grade ethnic Hungarians and Romanians (see Aren't these Ukrainian laws the Nazi ones?).

But at the same time, Ukrainian authorities demanded Russia to give back the Crimean Peninsula where most of people are ethnic Russians (Russia considers this Peninsula to be its own).

On the official web-site of the Ukrainian President you can read that Ukraine was preparing a package of measures – including military ones – for “de-occupation and reintegration of Crimea” (see here).

Please translate in Google Translator the following phrase


Cannot we conclude that Ukrainian preparation of military measures for “de-occupation and reintegration of Crimea” could provoke the start of the Russian military operation in Ukraine?

So what was it that prompted the Russian take over of Crimea, Dissident? Because there was a population of ethnic Russians living there? That was the same excuse that Hitler used to seize territory before WWII. It would be like Mexico seizing Texas because it has a large population of ethnic Mexicans living there!

Be honest here, this has nothing to do with Ukrainian legislation...this is about Putin's dream of reconstituting the former Russian Empire.

 

[Dissident]

don't be ridiculous

Have you translated the text from the official web-site of the Ukrainian President who is the Supreme Commander-in-Chief of the Ukrainian Army?

Are there words about military measures for “de-occupation and reintegration of Crimea” on this web-site or there aren’t such words?

Mr. Baiden constantly calls the Russian military operation an “unprovoked and unjustified attack” (for example, see here).

But is a military operation of a country A against a country B really unprovoked and unjustified when the country B prepares military measures to take from the country A a part which the country A considers to be its own?

 

[Oldestyle]

Have you translated the text from the official web-site of the Ukrainian President who is the Supreme Commander-in-Chief of the Ukrainian Army?

Are there words about military measures for “de-occupation and reintegration of Crimea” on this web-site or there aren’t such words?

Mr. Baiden constantly calls the Russian military operation an “unprovoked and unjustified attack” (for example, see here).

But is a military operation of a country A against a country B really unprovoked and unjustified when the country B prepares military measures to take from the country A a part which the country A considers to be its own?

After country A invaded country B to TAKE that part? With all due respect, Dissident...your premise makes little to no sense. What right does Russian have to take any part of Ukraine? It's a sovereign nation! Then you turn around and view a plan by Ukraine to take back what Russia stole from it as an excuse for Russia to come in and take all of Ukraine? That's absurd on its face!

 

[para bellum]

Cannot we conclude that Ukrainian preparation of military measures for “de-occupation and reintegration of Crimea” could provoke the start of the Russian military operation in Ukraine?

Um, no. We can't. Crimea is part of Ukraine. Internationally recognized borders and all that good stuff...

Also note, Zelensky is not the Commander in Chief of the AFU. That position is held by Valerii Zaluzhnyi. Zelensky makes the appointments, Zaluzhnyi gives the orders.

 

[Dissident]

So what was it that prompted the Russian take over of Crimea, Dissident?

This thread isn’t about reasons why “Crimea has joined Russia” – it is the Russian wording for your “take-over”.

This question is not so simple as you have described “It would be like Mexico seizing Texas because it has a large population of ethnic Mexicans living there!”, “this has nothing to do with Ukrainian legislation” etc.

Citizens of Mexican origin aren’t the majority in Texas; there isn’t division of Texas citizens into first-grade, second-grade and third-grade citizens according to their ethnic origin like in Ukraine and so on.

This thread deals with the question: Is a military operation of a country A against a country B really unprovoked and unjustified when the country B prepares military measures to take from the country A a part which the country A considers to be its own?

 

[Dissident]

Also note, Zelensky is not the Commander in Chief of the AFU. That position is held by Valerii Zaluzhnyi. Zelensky makes the appointments, Zaluzhnyi gives the orders.

Please read in English Wikipedia which functions the Ukrainian President has – the article is called “President of Ukraine”, read the sixth line under the picture of the present President.

 

[Oldestyle]

This thread isn’t about reasons why “Crimea has joined Russia” – it is the Russian wording for your “take-over”.

This question is not so simple as you have described “It would be like Mexico seizing Texas because it has a large population of ethnic Mexicans living there!”, “this has nothing to do with Ukrainian legislation” etc.

Citizens of Mexican origin aren’t the majority in Texas; there isn’t division of Texas citizens into first-grade, second-grade and third-grade citizens according to their ethnic origin like in Ukraine and so on.

This thread deals with the question: Is a military operation of a country A against a country B really unprovoked and unjustified when the country B prepares military measures to take from the country A a part which the country A considers to be its own?

So a "plan" to take back part of Ukraine that was taken by force by Russia...is your justification for Russan to take MORE of Ukraine? I'm totally failing to see any justification for that! Russia is simply stealing from a weaker neighbor.

 

[Oldestyle]

As for my analogy with Mexico and Texas? The thing you have to understand about Crimea is that at the time of the Russian Empire Russians were a distinct minority in Crimea. The majority were actually Muslim Tatars. When the Soviet Union took control of Crimea after WWII they essentially wiped out the Tatars and replaced them with Russians. So do the Russians REALLY have a claim to Crimea because of a genocide that eliminated a majority? Should they be allowed to create genocide again in Ukraine?

 

[Dissident]

After country A invaded country B to TAKE that part? With all due respect, Dissident...your premise makes little to no sense. What right does Russian have to take any part of Ukraine? It's a sovereign nation! Then you turn around and view a plan by Ukraine to take back what Russia stole from it as an excuse for Russia to come in and take all of Ukraine? That's absurd on its face!

In your wording - Russia invaded Ukraine to take Crimea; after that Ukraine did have a plan to take back Crimea by military force; but Russia was the first to start its military operation.

Even your variant differs very much from the standard Western thesis about peaceful Ukraine.

P. S.
And Western countries did support Ukrainian plans to turn the majority of Crimean population into people of third-grade.
This remark is about the standard Western thesis about democratic Ukraine.

 

[Oldestyle]

In your wording - Russia invaded Ukraine to take Crimea; after that Ukraine did have a plan to take back Crimea by military force; but Russia was the first to start its military operation.

Even your variant differs very much from the standard Western thesis about peaceful Ukraine.

P. S.
And Western countries did support Ukrainian plans to turn the majority of Crimean population into people of third-grade.
This remark is about the standard Western thesis about democratic Ukraine.

Again...what right does Russia have to invade a sovereign nation and take part of it's territory?

 

[Oldestyle]

In your wording - Russia invaded Ukraine to take Crimea; after that Ukraine did have a plan to take back Crimea by military force; but Russia was the first to start its military operation.

Even your variant differs very much from the standard Western thesis about peaceful Ukraine.

P. S.
And Western countries did support Ukrainian plans to turn the majority of Crimean population into people of third-grade.
This remark is about the standard Western thesis about democratic Ukraine.

You're accusing Ukraine of not being "peaceful" simply for defending itself against a more powerful neighbor who attacked it not once...but twice!

 

[Dissident]

,,, at the time of the Russian Empire Russians were a distinct minority in Crimea.

It’s a difficult question which nation and when had the majority in Crimea.

In English Wikipedia, in the article “Demographics of Crimea” you can read that for almost 100 last years (since 1926 census) ethnic Russians are the largest ethnic group in Crimea and for more than 60 years (since 1959 census) they are majority there.

Therefore, the Ukrainian attempt to turn them into third-grade people is utterly ridiculous.

 

[para bellum]

Please read in English Wikipedia which functions the Ukrainian President has – the article is called “President of Ukraine”, read the sixth line under the picture of the present President.

It is an administrative role. Not reflected in the 2010 Constitution: Zelensky created the position of Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces in 2020.

From Wiki:

The position of the C-in-C AFU has been established by the Law "On the Transformation of the Joint Command and Control System of the Defence Forces" ("Про трансформацію системи об'єднаного керівництва силами оборони")[10] as the supreme professional authority on matters of national defence and security, therefore the incumbent holder has direct control over the Chief of the General Staff, Commander of the Joint Forces, commanders of the various armed services, separate arms and branches and separate military units, as well as shared authority with the Minister of Interior Affairs and the chiefs of the various national security services on matters of strategic planning, generation of forces and principles for their actions in case of a state of a martial law, as well as operational control during wartime.

The role of the President under the Constitution:

Appoints high officials. Forwards to the Rada the recommendations of the Council of Nat'l Security. Can declare Martial Law.

• is the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of Ukraine; appoints to office and dismisses from office the high command of the Armed Forces of Ukraine and other military formations; administers in the spheres of national security and defense of the State;
• heads the Council of National Security and Defense of Ukraine;
• forwards the submission to the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine on the declaration of a state of war, and adopts the decision on the use of the Armed Forces in the event of armed aggression against Ukraine;
• adopts a decision in accordance with the law on the general or partial mobilisation and the introduction of martial law in Ukraine or in its particular areas, in the event of a threat of aggression, danger to the state independence of Ukraine;

 

[xyz]

By the way, shit name. Dissidents are put in jail in Russia these days.

 

[SavannahMann]

Have you translated the text from the official web-site of the Ukrainian President who is the Supreme Commander-in-Chief of the Ukrainian Army?

Are there words about military measures for “de-occupation and reintegration of Crimea” on this web-site or there aren’t such words?

Mr. Baiden constantly calls the Russian military operation an “unprovoked and unjustified attack” (for example, see here).

But is a military operation of a country A against a country B really unprovoked and unjustified when the country B prepares military measures to take from the country A a part which the country A considers to be its own?

So Russia would be justified in attacking Alaska?

Recapturing Alaska! Russia Threatens To Seize Its 'Lost Territory' If US Continued To Grab Its Resources

On July 7, Vyacheslav Volodin, the speaker of the Russian parliament’s lower house, warned that if the US continued to seize Russian resources abroad, Moscow could reclaim Alaska, formerly a part of the Russian territory. Outpacing US At ‘Hypersonic Speed’, China’s Military Acquisition ‘5 Times...

eurasiantimes.com

 

[Dissident]

I am very glad that nobody here denies 2 points which, in my opinion, are the most important ones.

1. There really were Ukrainian plans to use military force for “de-occupation and reintegration of Crimea”.
   
   
2. If these plans have succeeded, the majority of Crimean population would be turned into third-grade people.

These 2 points together, in my opinion, could justify the Russian military operation in Ukraine.

All other remarks of yours – e.g. about Crimean population in the 19th century or about functions of Ukrainian President – are, in my opinion, not so important.

 

[Oldestyle]

It’s a difficult question which nation and when had the majority in Crimea.

In English Wikipedia, in the article “Demographics of Crimea” you can read that for almost 100 last years (since 1926 census) ethnic Russians are the largest ethnic group in Crimea and for more than 60 years (since 1959 census) they are majority there.

Therefore, the Ukrainian attempt to turn them into third-grade people is utterly ridiculous.

Once again, Dissident...prior to WWII the Muslim Tatars were the majority in Crimea but following WWII Stalin conducted a program of genocide against them...basically wiping them out as you can see from census reports after 1950. So if Russia's claim to Crimea is based on a "majority" of ethnic Russians there...then that's a claim that's staked on the dead bodies of those Tatars! When you wipe out the people who WERE the majority in an area and fill it with your own people it's hard to claim the moral high ground as you excuse your land grab!

 

[Oldestyle]

It’s a difficult question which nation and when had the majority in Crimea.

In English Wikipedia, in the article “Demographics of Crimea” you can read that for almost 100 last years (since 1926 census) ethnic Russians are the largest ethnic group in Crimea and for more than 60 years (since 1959 census) they are majority there.

Therefore, the Ukrainian attempt to turn them into third-grade people is utterly ridiculous.

Ah yes...so can you explain why it was OK for Stalin to starve millions of Ukrainians to death so that he could feed ethnic Russians? This is just one more example of Russia treating Ukraine as if its people don't matter.