Russia - worrying?

[Steve_uk]

One solution might be to restore the autonomous Crimean Republic, to which you allude. But this would have to be subject to negotiation.

   The Autonomous Republic of Crimea, commonly known as Crimea, is an autonomous republic of Ukraine encompassing most of Crimea that was annexed by Russia in 2014. The Autonomous Republic of Crimea occupies most of the peninsula, while the City of Sevastopol (a city with special status within Ukraine) occupies the rest.

    It already is an autonomous Republic within the Russian Federation. What is there to negotiate? Crimeans have no interest in negotiating anything with Ukraine or any other NATO stooge. Why should or would they?

What happened in February–March 2014 was a full-spectrum military operation executed on land and at sea and supplemented by sustained and targeted anti-Ukraine information operations. Finally, when a referendum was held – in effect at gunpoint – on 16 March 2014 to legitimize Russia’s takeover of Crimea, the Kremlin hijacked the principle of self-determination. Public opinion polling prior to Russia’s aggressive disinformation campaign spoke clearly in favour of Crimea remaining part of Ukraine. Yet ahead of the vote, those who supported remaining within Ukraine could not campaign freely. The ballot also excluded the option for Crimea to remain part of Ukraine as an autonomous republic, i.e. according to the constitution in force. Furthermore, the Kremlin substantially inflated voter turnout. While it said that 82 per cent of voters had cast their ballots, a member of Russia’s presidential Civil Society and Human Rights Council reported that turnout was likely to have totalled 30–50 per cent. Election fraud such as multiple voting was also reported.
Chatham House Report.

[gringo]

    Steve, you are delusional. Chatham house-ffs.
    You can't answer the questions I pose because you know the answers and they don't suit your narrative. Any transfer of Crimea into Ukraine would be against the wishes of the Crimeans and lead to civil war and genocide of Crimeans. You know this so avoid the questions and sound off about Russians in general.
    Do Ukraine/NATO plan to allow a referendum in Crimea? or just to seize the land with no concern for the inhabitants? You know the answers and can't be honest because it shatters your narrative.
    There is an abundance of evidence of the desires of Crimeans, which you choose to ignore and rely on a report by Chatham house (a UK intel mouthpiece).
    Three referendums spread over 30 years. What are you still confused about?
    Why did Ukrainians stay in their bases in Crimea in 2014? Why were there mass defections? NATO/Ukraine want to take Crimea against the will of the people. Why do you support this?

[Steve_uk]

    Steve, you are delusional. Chatham house-ffs.
    You can't answer the questions I pose because you know the answers and they don't suit your narrative. Any transfer of Crimea into Ukraine would be against the wishes of the Crimeans and lead to civil war and genocide of Crimeans. You know this so avoid the questions and sound off about Russians in general.
    Do Ukraine/NATO plan to allow a referendum in Crimea? or just to seize the land with no concern for the inhabitants? You know the answers and can't be honest because it shatters your narrative.
    There is an abundance of evidence of the desires of Crimeans, which you choose to ignore and rely on a report by Chatham house (a UK intel mouthpiece).
    Three referendums spread over 30 years. What are you still confused about?
    Why did Ukrainians stay in their bases in Crimea in 2014? Why were there mass defections? NATO/Ukraine want to take Crimea against the will of the people. Why do you support this?

But there's a difference between annexation by Russia at gunpoint and the dual citizenship option. How about the United Nations peacekeepers come in and Russia withdraws, then free and fair elections under the auspices of OECD?

[gringo]

But there's a difference between annexation by Russia at gunpoint and the dual citizenship option. How about the United Nations peacekeepers come in and Russia withdraws, then free and fair elections under the auspices of OECD?

    Steve, Ukraine/NATO have zero intention of offering this, as you well know. They know what the result will be but want the valuable real estate of Crimea.
    The whole "referendum at gunpoint" story is bollocks. The result was exactly as previous referendums. Crimeans have never been Ukrainian and never will be. They want nothing to do with Ukraine and never have. So your "solution" has no chance of being implemented. If Ukraine/NATO seize Crimea-do you believe that they then intend to allow the Crimeans to have their say? Of course they don't. Knowing this-do you still support the attempted seizure of Crimea? This is without the added complication that it would be seen as an "existential threat to the state of Russia which triggers their nuclear deterrence.
    They tried to seize it against the will of the Crimeans and Russia in 2014. Had they succeeded, there would have been no referendum. You are talking crap. Your supposed solution will never be on offer. Crimeans have already voted. It isn't a closely contested question.
     At least be realistic in your interventions. You are all over the place on the Crimean question and unwilling to approach it honestly.
   

[Steve_uk]

    Steve, Ukraine/NATO have zero intention of offering this, as you well know. They know what the result will be but want the valuable real estate of Crimea.
    The whole "referendum at gunpoint" story is bollocks. The result was exactly as previous referendums. Crimeans have never been Ukrainian and never will be. They want nothing to do with Ukraine and never have. So your "solution" has no chance of being implemented. If Ukraine/NATO seize Crimea-do you believe that they then intend to allow the Crimeans to have their say? Of course they don't. Knowing this-do you still support the attempted seizure of Crimea? This is without the added complication that it would be seen as an "existential threat to the state of Russia which triggers their nuclear deterrence.
    They tried to seize it against the will of the Crimeans and Russia in 2014. Had they succeeded, there would have been no referendum. You are talking crap. Your supposed solution will never be on offer. Crimeans have already voted. It isn't a closely contested question.
     At least be realistic in your interventions. You are all over the place on the Crimean question and unwilling to approach it honestly.
   

It wasn't a free and fair election. So I am delusional and you know the truth, despite rubbishing Chatham House and Dr. Eleanor Knott. Russia has form when it comes to general elections. https://www.voanews.com/a/russia-heading-for-least-free-elections-in-20-years-say-opposition-leaders-/6219574.html

[gringo]

It wasn't a free and fair election. So I am delusional and you know the truth, despite rubbishing Chatham House and Dr. Eleanor Knott. Russia has form when it comes to general elections. https://www.voanews.com/a/russia-heading-for-least-free-elections-in-20-years-say-opposition-leaders-/6219574.html

   There have been three  referendums(1991, 1994, 2014). Yes you are delusional and ignoring the truth. Do you think that the "solution" that you suggested is in Ukraine/NATO plans? Do they intend to hold a referendum? If not (they don't), why not? (they already know what the result would be).
    Do you believe, Steve, that if a new referendum were held it would have a result any different from the historical trend? Do you believe Ukraine/NATO would offer one?
    You can't/won't answer any of this. This is why your position is delusional. You ignore reality and this makes your position incoherent.

[Steve_uk]

   There have been three  referendums(1991, 1994, 2014). Yes you are delusional and ignoring the truth. Do you think that the "solution" that you suggested is in Ukraine/NATO plans? Do they intend to hold a referendum? If not (they don't), why not? (they already know what the result would be).
    Do you believe, Steve, that if a new referendum were held it would have a result any different from the historical trend? Do you believe Ukraine/NATO would offer one?
    You can't/won't answer any of this. This is why your position is delusional. You ignore reality and this makes your position incoherent.

Of course I will answer, without making personal attacks. I have already told you I thought a compromise would be for United Nations peacekeepers to become involved, the removal of all Russian troops and a referendum on Crimea's future be held. The status quo ante would have to be restored, however.

[gringo]

Of course I will answer, without making personal attacks. I have already told you I thought a compromise would be for United Nations peacekeepers to become involved, the removal of all Russian troops and a referendum on Crimea's future be held. The status quo ante would have to be restored, however.

    This is not on offer, Steve and nor will it ever be. Ukraine/NATO have no intention of offering this. So now answer the related questions. The "status quo" which you suggest returning to is that it is an autonomous republic already-re 1994 referendum with a Russian base that has existed since 1783. Crimeans have always, when given the opportunity, made clear that they want nothing to do with the government in Ukraine. Here is a quick rundown again just to show that your position is incoherent.

  1991-referendum held in Crimea where they voted for the re-instatement of the autonomous republic of Crimea. Vote not recognised internationally. Result 94.3% yes 5.7% no.
   
  1994- referendum held alongside Ukrainian elections. Crimeans voted on three questions;
           To re-instate the autonomous republic of Crimea(giving greater autonomy)- 78.4% yes 21.6% no
           The right of citizens of Crimea to dual citizenship- 82.8% yes 17.2% no
           Edicts of the President of the Republic of Crimea to become law- 77.9% yes 22.1% no

  2014- referendum 97% voted to rejoin Russian Federation as a sovereign state (Republic of Crimea)

    Do you believe that the Ukraine/NATO plans for Crimea include a referendum?
    If they don't and just intend to seize Crimea against the will of Crimeans and Russians-would you support this?

     

[David1819]

Yevgeny Prigozhin still faces charges, says Russian state media

https://www.ft.com/content/38ffbf18-9640-4694-9ebd-08f1bdb04de1

[gringo]

It wasn't a free and fair election. So I am delusional and you know the truth, despite rubbishing Chatham House and Dr. Eleanor Knott. Russia has form when it comes to general elections. https://www.voanews.com/a/russia-heading-for-least-free-elections-in-20-years-say-opposition-leaders-/6219574.html

    If it is "democracy" that you are concerned about, as you suggest, then why are you supporting the puppet Dictator "Zelensky"?

     Zelensky has banned 11 opposition parties in March 2022

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/mar/20/ukraine-suspends-11-political-parties-with-links-to-russia
      After banning all opposition parties;
      He had political opponents arrested and paraded on TV beaten and dishevelled (Medvedchuk)
      He banned "unfriendly" media
      He shut down Orthodox churches
      Even after all of this he still has felt the need to cancel next years Presidential election.

      What was it you were saying about free and fair elections, Steve?
      No opposition, media banned, lack of religious freedom and no opportunity to vote.
      Imagine getting elected on a promise to end the war and then doing all of the above and still having fuckwits defending you as a "Protector of Democracy". Surely no-one is that stupid?

[Steve_uk]

    If it is "democracy" that you are concerned about, as you suggest, then why are you supporting the puppet Dictator "Zelensky"?

     Zelensky has banned 11 opposition parties in March 2022

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/mar/20/ukraine-suspends-11-political-parties-with-links-to-russia
      After banning all opposition parties;
      He had political opponents arrested and paraded on TV beaten and dishevelled (Medvedchuk)
      He banned "unfriendly" media
      He shut down Orthodox churches
      Even after all of this he still has felt the need to cancel next years Presidential election.

      What was it you were saying about free and fair elections, Steve?
      No opposition, media banned, lack of religious freedom and no opportunity to vote.
      Imagine getting elected on a promise to end the war and then doing all of the above and still having fuckwits defending you as a "Protector of Democracy". Surely no-one is that stupid?

The parties are suspended. There would be no political campaigning in a time of war anyway, just as we suspended General Elections from 1935-45.

[Steve_uk]

    This is not on offer, Steve and nor will it ever be. Ukraine/NATO have no intention of offering this. So now answer the related questions. The "status quo" which you suggest returning to is that it is an autonomous republic already-re 1994 referendum with a Russian base that has existed since 1783. Crimeans have always, when given the opportunity, made clear that they want nothing to do with the government in Ukraine. Here is a quick rundown again just to show that your position is incoherent.

  1991-referendum held in Crimea where they voted for the re-instatement of the autonomous republic of Crimea. Vote not recognised internationally. Result 94.3% yes 5.7% no.
   
  1994- referendum held alongside Ukrainian elections. Crimeans voted on three questions;
           To re-instate the autonomous republic of Crimea(giving greater autonomy)- 78.4% yes 21.6% no
           The right of citizens of Crimea to dual citizenship- 82.8% yes 17.2% no
           Edicts of the President of the Republic of Crimea to become law- 77.9% yes 22.1% no

  2014- referendum 97% voted to rejoin Russian Federation as a sovereign state (Republic of Crimea)

    Do you believe that the Ukraine/NATO plans for Crimea include a referendum?
    If they don't and just intend to seize Crimea against the will of Crimeans and Russians-would you support this?

   

I've told you three times now that I would like to see a referendum in Crimea for the Crimeans to determine their own future, a referendum held under the auspices of the UN and OECD.

[gringo]

I've told you three times now that I would like to see a referendum in Crimea for the Crimeans to determine their own future, a referendum held under the auspices of the UN and OECD.

    Ok.
    The "solution" that you offer has no chance of being offered by Ukraine/NATO. The intention is to seize Crimea and "deal" with the hostile population. You know this and continue to ignore this inconvenient fact. So in the real world-one where the only options available are;

1) Accept that Crimeans have made their choice (3 times) and leave them to their own already decided (3 times) self determination to live as an autonomous republic within the Russian Federation. The first two of those referenda had no influence from Russia at all and it cannot be argued otherwise, so we do know the Crimeans wishes whatever you claim about 2014.

2) Invade and seize Crimea against the wishes of the Crimeans and allow Sevastopol to become a NATO base. Deal with the hostile population.

      However many times you repeat that you would like to see a UN/OSCE monitored referendum-it isn't an option and nor will it be. The only options are those two shown above. This is the real world and the real situation. It matters not how many times you repeat your preferred outcome if it isn't on offer. The two choices are as I have just stated. There is no third choice.
     Dealing purely in real world solutions-which of the two choices do you support?
     Your thrice stated position doesn't deal with this. Ignoring the reality is not a serious position. Your answer is a non-answer.
     The only realistic choices are 1 and 2 above. Which of the only two choices on offer do you support? Leave the Crimeans be or seize Crimea and impose a regime on them with no mandate or support?

[Steve_uk]

    Ok.
    The "solution" that you offer has no chance of being offered by Ukraine/NATO. The intention is to seize Crimea and "deal" with the hostile population. You know this and continue to ignore this inconvenient fact. So in the real world-one where the only options available are;

1) Accept that Crimeans have made their choice (3 times) and leave them to their own already decided (3 times) self determination to live as an autonomous republic within the Russian Federation. The first two of those referenda had no influence from Russia at all and it cannot be argued otherwise, so we do know the Crimeans wishes whatever you claim about 2014.

2) Invade and seize Crimea against the wishes of the Crimeans and allow Sevastopol to become a NATO base. Deal with the hostile population.

      However many times you repeat that you would like to see a UN/OSCE monitored referendum-it isn't an option and nor will it be. The only options are those two shown above. This is the real world and the real situation. It matters not how many times you repeat your preferred outcome if it isn't on offer. The two choices are as I have just stated. There is no third choice.
     Dealing purely in real world solutions-which of the two choices do you support?
     Your thrice stated position doesn't deal with this. Ignoring the reality is not a serious position. Your answer is a non-answer.
     The only realistic choices are 1 and 2 above. Which of the only two choices on offer do you support? Leave the Crimeans be or seize Crimea and impose a regime on them with no mandate or support?

I don't accept the analysis fully, because in the January 1991 referendum Crimeans voted to remain in the Soviet Union, of which the Ukraine was a constituent part.

I don't accept the result of a referendum held at gunpoint at all. (2014).

[David1819]

"The Russian president described the weekend's rebellion as "a colossal threat" and vowed that those involved would be brought to justice."


https://news.sky.com/story/any-blackmail-is-doomed-to-failure-defiant-putin-warns-after-attempted-rebellion-12910112