Well Tim worked out a deal with Trump about tariffs for Apple Products, so... Maybe... There was a phone call... like: "Hey Tim, about those maps on iPhone... I need a favor though."
Unfortunately the last president became “more flexible” with Putin and Russia after he was re-elected.
Would have been nice if the press and congress would have bothered to follow up on that instead of tilting at windmills like they are now.
If you’re honestly trying to suggest Obama was more Putin-friendly than Trump, and failing to understand why current congress standing up to the current president’s allegiance to Putin and Russia is a thing, then you have greater problems than we can solve on this forum.
The problem in one photo:
I am, and he was.
LOL, two ignorant guys with t-shirts. Yep, that sure proved your case. That definitely beats Obama on a hot mic saying he’s going to be more flexible after the election. Gosh could you imagine what would have happened had that been Trump?
I still don’t understand why this is a talking point. He was talking about negotiating an amiable solution to ABM deployment in Europe that Russia was rightfully concerned about as a destabilizing deployment and possibly in violation of established treaties. That is responsible statesmanship. Flexibility just meant avoiding the partisan politics bullshit in a contentious election year in the hope of actually being able to negotiate a solution that was acceptable to Russia. Remember, our impetus for deploying ABM in Europe was ostensibly to counter Iran, and not Russia. In the end, that didn’t even happen. So why is this still something rightwingers bring up?
Meanwhile the current administration and GOP is quite literally pushing Russian intelligence propaganda and talking points, all to the benefit of Russia. This is happening on hot mics every day and should scare the shit out of everyone.
What happened to the 1980's called and they want their foreign policy back?
The libs and dems were all laughing about that not too long ago, now they've all flip flopped and they've been hyperventilating and having delusions and nonsense conspiracy theories about Russia for the past few years. What a bunch of sick freaks. Soon, even more of them will have to seek treatment.
Which “nonsense conspiracy theories” are you referring to?
Looking at the Maps app on my Mac, I don't see the word Russia coming up when I browse around Crimea. For example, type in "Simferopol" to jump into the city center. Tap some of the businesses, for example a "Like Hostel" and it comes up "Bulvar Lenina, 2A Simferopol 95015, Ukraine". Some of the business address stop at "Crimea" and don't indicate a country at all.
OMG! What's happens with your democratic americans? Why so much hate about Russia? I'm russian, born in Crimea btw), and Crimea was with Russia starting in 1782, is and will be Too hard to learn history? It's a pity to see all these foolish posts about damn Russia - better back to your US and remove all the weapon and soldiers from the globe).
Seems Tim likes to cuddle with Trump lately. Bend their company values to whatever brings in the most cash, including removing Hong Kong protest app, storing iCloud data in China, etcetera.
Company has lost its heart and soul with Tim as ice king in power.
OMG! What's happens with your democratic americans? Why so much hate about Russia? I'm russian, born in Crimea btw), and Crimea was with Russia starting in 1782, is and will be Too hard to learn history? It's a pity to see all these foolish posts about damn Russia - better back to your US and remove all the weapon and soldiers from the globe).
I mean, if history is enough to use the military to annex an area no matter modern, peacefully agreed upon, borders I'm guessing you also claim all these old Russian settlements?
I’m not a fan of Tim Cook (to say it mildly) and neither am I a fan of Putin. However, for all those self-righteous ignoramuses who decry the takeover of Crimea by Russia, please be advised that Crimea was part of Russia (not just USSR, but the Russian republic within the USSR) until Nikita Kruschev gave it to Ukraine without conducting any referendum to find out if the Crimeans were OK with it.
Nikita Kruschev was the same guy who almost started a nuclear war with the US. So, the Ukrainian possession over Crimea was illegitimate from the standpoint of the International law. Additionally, the Russian Black Sea Navy was stationed in Crimea evem before the Bolshevicks overthrew the monarchy in 1917. It continued to be stationed there throughout all these years even when Ukraine and Russia seceded from the USSR in 1991. So, the Russian Black Sea Navy was suddenly stationed in a foreign country. Add to all of this that the absolute majority of Crimeans hated being in Ukraine for many decades since Crimea was given to Ukraine, and you will have a better understanding what happened with Crimea in 2014.
I’m not a fan of Tim Cook (to say it mildly) and neither am I a fan of Putin. However, for all those self-righteous ignoramuses who decry the takeover of Crimea by Russia, please be advised that Crimea was part of Russia (not just USSR, but the Russian republic within the USSR) until Nikita Kruschev gave it to Ukraine without conducting any referendum to find out if the Crimeans were OK with it.
Nikita Kruschev was the same guy who almost started a nuclear war with the US. So, the Ukrainian possession over Crimea was illegitimate from the standpoint of the International law. Additionally, the Russian Black Sea Navy was stationed in Crimea evem before the Bolshevicks overthrew the monarchy in 1917. It continued to be stationed there throughout all these years even when Ukraine and Russia seceded from the USSR in 1991. So, the Russian Black Sea Navy was suddenly stationed in a foreign country. Add to all of this that the absolute majority of Crimeans hated being in Ukraine for many decades since Crimea was given to Ukraine, and you will have a better understanding what happened with Crimea in 2014.
Thing is, you can't just go "oh, we don't really count [these events] because we don't like the leader that we had back then"; and then use your military strength to do what the f*ck you want; which is exactly what Russia did when taking over Crimea, and what they are still doing by bullying their way into how people are (not) allowed to talk about the region.
The area already had a certain level of independence ("місто зі спеціальним статусом"), and was treated carefully due to the Russian navy stationed there; and Ukraine backtracked on a lot just to not become a serious risk to Russia, which Russia just used to then by force take over the area.
Give it another decade or two and the area probably would have become just more and more independent/neutral; but that just wasn't enough for Russia, because all they cared about is being in absolute control of the area. And that's less about anything historical and more about their expansionist plans as always being limited by how relatively landlocked Russia is; that's the real historical fact that is in play here.
I’m not a fan of Tim Cook (to say it mildly) and neither am I a fan of Putin. However, for all those self-righteous ignoramuses who decry the takeover of Crimea by Russia, please be advised that Crimea was part of Russia (not just USSR, but the Russian republic within the USSR) until Nikita Kruschev gave it to Ukraine without conducting any referendum to find out if the Crimeans were OK with it.
Nikita Kruschev was the same guy who almost started a nuclear war with the US. So, the Ukrainian possession over Crimea was illegitimate from the standpoint of the International law. Additionally, the Russian Black Sea Navy was stationed in Crimea evem before the Bolshevicks overthrew the monarchy in 1917. It continued to be stationed there throughout all these years even when Ukraine and Russia seceded from the USSR in 1991. So, the Russian Black Sea Navy was suddenly stationed in a foreign country. Add to all of this that the absolute majority of Crimeans hated being in Ukraine for many decades since Crimea was given to Ukraine, and you will have a better understanding what happened with Crimea in 2014.
Thing is, you can't just go "oh, we don't really count [these events] because we don't like the leader that we had back then"; and then use your military strength to do what the f*ck you want; which is exactly what Russia did when taking over Crimea, and what they are still doing by bullying their way into how people are (not) allowed to talk about the region.
The area already had a certain level of independence ("місто зі спеціальним статусом"), and was treated carefully due to the Russian navy stationed there; and Ukraine backtracked on a lot just to not become a serious risk to Russia, which Russia just used to then by force take over the area.
Give it another decade or two and the area probably would have become just more and more independent/neutral; but that just wasn't enough for Russia, because all they cared about is being in absolute control of the area. And that's less about anything historical and more about their expansionist plans as always being limited by how relatively landlocked Russia is; that's the real historical fact that is in play here.
Do you live in the US? If so, do you realize that the Americans did the same exact thing first to the Indians, then to the Mexicans, then to the Spaniards?
There's not a single square inch of US that was not annexed from the Native Americans. Texas was annexed from Mexico along with the entire Southwestern US, California, and Oregon. In 1812, the US tried to annex Canadian territories but were repelled by the Canadians and the British. How about the annexation of Hawaii by the US? How about the takeover of Puerto Rico by the US from Spain?
So, why is it that you are denying Russia the right to annex the territory that was Russian for centuries, but you are completely fine by living on the land that is soaked in blood of Native Americans and taken from other sovereign nations like Mexico and Spain via aggressive wars?
I’m not a fan of Tim Cook (to say it mildly) and neither am I a fan of Putin. However, for all those self-righteous ignoramuses who decry the takeover of Crimea by Russia, please be advised that Crimea was part of Russia (not just USSR, but the Russian republic within the USSR) until Nikita Kruschev gave it to Ukraine without conducting any referendum to find out if the Crimeans were OK with it.
Nikita Kruschev was the same guy who almost started a nuclear war with the US. So, the Ukrainian possession over Crimea was illegitimate from the standpoint of the International law. Additionally, the Russian Black Sea Navy was stationed in Crimea evem before the Bolshevicks overthrew the monarchy in 1917. It continued to be stationed there throughout all these years even when Ukraine and Russia seceded from the USSR in 1991. So, the Russian Black Sea Navy was suddenly stationed in a foreign country. Add to all of this that the absolute majority of Crimeans hated being in Ukraine for many decades since Crimea was given to Ukraine, and you will have a better understanding what happened with Crimea in 2014.
Thing is, you can't just go "oh, we don't really count [these events] because we don't like the leader that we had back then"; and then use your military strength to do what the f*ck you want; which is exactly what Russia did when taking over Crimea, and what they are still doing by bullying their way into how people are (not) allowed to talk about the region.
The area already had a certain level of independence ("місто зі спеціальним статусом"), and was treated carefully due to the Russian navy stationed there; and Ukraine backtracked on a lot just to not become a serious risk to Russia, which Russia just used to then by force take over the area.
Give it another decade or two and the area probably would have become just more and more independent/neutral; but that just wasn't enough for Russia, because all they cared about is being in absolute control of the area. And that's less about anything historical and more about their expansionist plans as always being limited by how relatively landlocked Russia is; that's the real historical fact that is in play here.
Do you live in the US? If so, do you realize that the Americans did the same exact thing first to the Indians, then to the Mexicans, then to the Spaniards?
There's not a single square inch of US that was not annexed from the Native Americans. Texas was annexed from Mexico along with the entire Southwestern US, California, and Oregon. In 1812, the US tried to annex Canadian territories but were repelled by the Canadians and the British. How about the annexation of Hawaii by the US? How about the takeover of Puerto Rico by the US from Spain?
So, why is it that you are denying Russia the right to annex the territory that was Russian for centuries, but you are completely fine by living on the land that is soaked in blood of Native Americans and taken from other sovereign nations like Mexico and Spain via aggressive wars?
Do you usually get away with you just making things up about what other people feel about completely unrelated things, as some sort of strategy to deflect from the issue really discussed?
I’m not a fan of Tim Cook (to say it mildly) and neither am I a fan of Putin. However, for all those self-righteous ignoramuses who decry the takeover of Crimea by Russia, please be advised that Crimea was part of Russia (not just USSR, but the Russian republic within the USSR) until Nikita Kruschev gave it to Ukraine without conducting any referendum to find out if the Crimeans were OK with it.
Nikita Kruschev was the same guy who almost started a nuclear war with the US. So, the Ukrainian possession over Crimea was illegitimate from the standpoint of the International law. Additionally, the Russian Black Sea Navy was stationed in Crimea evem before the Bolshevicks overthrew the monarchy in 1917. It continued to be stationed there throughout all these years even when Ukraine and Russia seceded from the USSR in 1991. So, the Russian Black Sea Navy was suddenly stationed in a foreign country. Add to all of this that the absolute majority of Crimeans hated being in Ukraine for many decades since Crimea was given to Ukraine, and you will have a better understanding what happened with Crimea in 2014.
Thing is, you can't just go "oh, we don't really count [these events] because we don't like the leader that we had back then"; and then use your military strength to do what the f*ck you want; which is exactly what Russia did when taking over Crimea, and what they are still doing by bullying their way into how people are (not) allowed to talk about the region.
The area already had a certain level of independence ("місто зі спеціальним статусом"), and was treated carefully due to the Russian navy stationed there; and Ukraine backtracked on a lot just to not become a serious risk to Russia, which Russia just used to then by force take over the area.
Give it another decade or two and the area probably would have become just more and more independent/neutral; but that just wasn't enough for Russia, because all they cared about is being in absolute control of the area. And that's less about anything historical and more about their expansionist plans as always being limited by how relatively landlocked Russia is; that's the real historical fact that is in play here.
Do you live in the US? If so, do you realize that the Americans did the same exact thing first to the Indians, then to the Mexicans, then to the Spaniards?
There's not a single square inch of US that was not annexed from the Native Americans. Texas was annexed from Mexico along with the entire Southwestern US, California, and Oregon. In 1812, the US tried to annex Canadian territories but were repelled by the Canadians and the British. How about the annexation of Hawaii by the US? How about the takeover of Puerto Rico by the US from Spain?
So, why is it that you are denying Russia the right to annex the territory that was Russian for centuries, but you are completely fine by living on the land that is soaked in blood of Native Americans and taken from other sovereign nations like Mexico and Spain via aggressive wars?
Do you usually get away with you just making things up about what other people feel about completely unrelated things, as some sort of strategy to deflect from the issue really discussed?
How is this unrelated? Are you so brainwashed that you can’t even see a relation here?
Americans have no business telling Israelis that their settlements are illegal, as they are established on occupied territories, because the entire US comprises settlements established on occupied territories. Every American lives in an illegal settlement located on stolen land.
By the same token, Americans have no business criticizing Russia for the annexation of Crimea because of the American history of starting offensive wars to capture territory from other nations.
I can’t help you if you don’t see the irony of your self-righteous wrath over the Russian annexation of Crimea.
If you object to Crimea being shown as part of Russia, you should be objecting to California, Arizona, New Mexico, Nevada, Oregon, etc. being shown on the map as US states instead of being designated as “occupied Mexican territory”.
I’m not a fan of Tim Cook (to say it mildly) and neither am I a fan of Putin. However, for all those self-righteous ignoramuses who decry the takeover of Crimea by Russia, please be advised that Crimea was part of Russia (not just USSR, but the Russian republic within the USSR) until Nikita Kruschev gave it to Ukraine without conducting any referendum to find out if the Crimeans were OK with it.
Nikita Kruschev was the same guy who almost started a nuclear war with the US. So, the Ukrainian possession over Crimea was illegitimate from the standpoint of the International law. Additionally, the Russian Black Sea Navy was stationed in Crimea evem before the Bolshevicks overthrew the monarchy in 1917. It continued to be stationed there throughout all these years even when Ukraine and Russia seceded from the USSR in 1991. So, the Russian Black Sea Navy was suddenly stationed in a foreign country. Add to all of this that the absolute majority of Crimeans hated being in Ukraine for many decades since Crimea was given to Ukraine, and you will have a better understanding what happened with Crimea in 2014.
Thing is, you can't just go "oh, we don't really count [these events] because we don't like the leader that we had back then"; and then use your military strength to do what the f*ck you want; which is exactly what Russia did when taking over Crimea, and what they are still doing by bullying their way into how people are (not) allowed to talk about the region.
The area already had a certain level of independence ("місто зі спеціальним статусом"), and was treated carefully due to the Russian navy stationed there; and Ukraine backtracked on a lot just to not become a serious risk to Russia, which Russia just used to then by force take over the area.
Give it another decade or two and the area probably would have become just more and more independent/neutral; but that just wasn't enough for Russia, because all they cared about is being in absolute control of the area. And that's less about anything historical and more about their expansionist plans as always being limited by how relatively landlocked Russia is; that's the real historical fact that is in play here.
Do you live in the US? If so, do you realize that the Americans did the same exact thing first to the Indians, then to the Mexicans, then to the Spaniards?
There's not a single square inch of US that was not annexed from the Native Americans. Texas was annexed from Mexico along with the entire Southwestern US, California, and Oregon. In 1812, the US tried to annex Canadian territories but were repelled by the Canadians and the British. How about the annexation of Hawaii by the US? How about the takeover of Puerto Rico by the US from Spain?
So, why is it that you are denying Russia the right to annex the territory that was Russian for centuries, but you are completely fine by living on the land that is soaked in blood of Native Americans and taken from other sovereign nations like Mexico and Spain via aggressive wars?
Do you usually get away with you just making things up about what other people feel about completely unrelated things, as some sort of strategy to deflect from the issue really discussed?
How is this unrelated? Are you so brainwashed that you can’t even see a relation here?
Americans have no business telling Israelis that their settlements are illegal, as they are established on occupied territories, because the entire US comprises settlements established on occupied territories. Every American lives in an illegal settlement located on stolen land.
By the same token, Americans have no business criticizing Russia for the annexation of Crimea because of the American history of starting offensive wars to capture territory from other nations.
I can’t help you if you don’t see the irony of your self-righteous wrath over the Russian annexation of Crimea.
If you object to Crimea being shown as part of Russia, you should be objecting to California, Arizona, New Mexico, Nevada, Oregon, etc. being shown on the map as US states instead of being designated as “occupied Mexican territory”.
I’m not a fan of Tim Cook (to say it mildly) and neither am I a fan of Putin. However, for all those self-righteous ignoramuses who decry the takeover of Crimea by Russia, please be advised that Crimea was part of Russia (not just USSR, but the Russian republic within the USSR) until Nikita Kruschev gave it to Ukraine without conducting any referendum to find out if the Crimeans were OK with it.
Nikita Kruschev was the same guy who almost started a nuclear war with the US. So, the Ukrainian possession over Crimea was illegitimate from the standpoint of the International law. Additionally, the Russian Black Sea Navy was stationed in Crimea evem before the Bolshevicks overthrew the monarchy in 1917. It continued to be stationed there throughout all these years even when Ukraine and Russia seceded from the USSR in 1991. So, the Russian Black Sea Navy was suddenly stationed in a foreign country. Add to all of this that the absolute majority of Crimeans hated being in Ukraine for many decades since Crimea was given to Ukraine, and you will have a better understanding what happened with Crimea in 2014.
Thing is, you can't just go "oh, we don't really count [these events] because we don't like the leader that we had back then"; and then use your military strength to do what the f*ck you want; which is exactly what Russia did when taking over Crimea, and what they are still doing by bullying their way into how people are (not) allowed to talk about the region.
The area already had a certain level of independence ("місто зі спеціальним статусом"), and was treated carefully due to the Russian navy stationed there; and Ukraine backtracked on a lot just to not become a serious risk to Russia, which Russia just used to then by force take over the area.
Give it another decade or two and the area probably would have become just more and more independent/neutral; but that just wasn't enough for Russia, because all they cared about is being in absolute control of the area. And that's less about anything historical and more about their expansionist plans as always being limited by how relatively landlocked Russia is; that's the real historical fact that is in play here.
Do you live in the US? If so, do you realize that the Americans did the same exact thing first to the Indians, then to the Mexicans, then to the Spaniards?
There's not a single square inch of US that was not annexed from the Native Americans. Texas was annexed from Mexico along with the entire Southwestern US, California, and Oregon. In 1812, the US tried to annex Canadian territories but were repelled by the Canadians and the British. How about the annexation of Hawaii by the US? How about the takeover of Puerto Rico by the US from Spain?
So, why is it that you are denying Russia the right to annex the territory that was Russian for centuries, but you are completely fine by living on the land that is soaked in blood of Native Americans and taken from other sovereign nations like Mexico and Spain via aggressive wars?
Do you usually get away with you just making things up about what other people feel about completely unrelated things, as some sort of strategy to deflect from the issue really discussed?
How is this unrelated? Are you so brainwashed that you can’t even see a relation here?
Americans have no business telling Israelis that their settlements are illegal, as they are established on occupied territories, because the entire US comprises settlements established on occupied territories. Every American lives in an illegal settlement located on stolen land.
By the same token, Americans have no business criticizing Russia for the annexation of Crimea because of the American history of starting offensive wars to capture territory from other nations.
I can’t help you if you don’t see the irony of your self-righteous wrath over the Russian annexation of Crimea.
If you object to Crimea being shown as part of Russia, you should be objecting to California, Arizona, New Mexico, Nevada, Oregon, etc. being shown on the map as US states instead of being designated as “occupied Mexican territory”.
It's a thread about an invasion that happened just a couple of years ago (after Russia in -97 agreed on the state of Crimea as part of Ukraine), and your whole line of arguing is that because of you making up what nationality I am I'm not allowed to say anything about that invasion because of other events that happened a century and a half ago…?
If that makes sense in your head you've had too much vodka for breakfast.
I’m not a fan of Tim Cook (to say it mildly) and neither am I a fan of Putin. However, for all those self-righteous ignoramuses who decry the takeover of Crimea by Russia, please be advised that Crimea was part of Russia (not just USSR, but the Russian republic within the USSR) until Nikita Kruschev gave it to Ukraine without conducting any referendum to find out if the Crimeans were OK with it.
Nikita Kruschev was the same guy who almost started a nuclear war with the US. So, the Ukrainian possession over Crimea was illegitimate from the standpoint of the International law. Additionally, the Russian Black Sea Navy was stationed in Crimea evem before the Bolshevicks overthrew the monarchy in 1917. It continued to be stationed there throughout all these years even when Ukraine and Russia seceded from the USSR in 1991. So, the Russian Black Sea Navy was suddenly stationed in a foreign country. Add to all of this that the absolute majority of Crimeans hated being in Ukraine for many decades since Crimea was given to Ukraine, and you will have a better understanding what happened with Crimea in 2014.
Thing is, you can't just go "oh, we don't really count [these events] because we don't like the leader that we had back then"; and then use your military strength to do what the f*ck you want; which is exactly what Russia did when taking over Crimea, and what they are still doing by bullying their way into how people are (not) allowed to talk about the region.
The area already had a certain level of independence ("місто зі спеціальним статусом"), and was treated carefully due to the Russian navy stationed there; and Ukraine backtracked on a lot just to not become a serious risk to Russia, which Russia just used to then by force take over the area.
Give it another decade or two and the area probably would have become just more and more independent/neutral; but that just wasn't enough for Russia, because all they cared about is being in absolute control of the area. And that's less about anything historical and more about their expansionist plans as always being limited by how relatively landlocked Russia is; that's the real historical fact that is in play here.
Do you live in the US? If so, do you realize that the Americans did the same exact thing first to the Indians, then to the Mexicans, then to the Spaniards?
There's not a single square inch of US that was not annexed from the Native Americans. Texas was annexed from Mexico along with the entire Southwestern US, California, and Oregon. In 1812, the US tried to annex Canadian territories but were repelled by the Canadians and the British. How about the annexation of Hawaii by the US? How about the takeover of Puerto Rico by the US from Spain?
So, why is it that you are denying Russia the right to annex the territory that was Russian for centuries, but you are completely fine by living on the land that is soaked in blood of Native Americans and taken from other sovereign nations like Mexico and Spain via aggressive wars?
Do you usually get away with you just making things up about what other people feel about completely unrelated things, as some sort of strategy to deflect from the issue really discussed?
How is this unrelated? Are you so brainwashed that you can’t even see a relation here?
Americans have no business telling Israelis that their settlements are illegal, as they are established on occupied territories, because the entire US comprises settlements established on occupied territories. Every American lives in an illegal settlement located on stolen land.
By the same token, Americans have no business criticizing Russia for the annexation of Crimea because of the American history of starting offensive wars to capture territory from other nations.
I can’t help you if you don’t see the irony of your self-righteous wrath over the Russian annexation of Crimea.
If you object to Crimea being shown as part of Russia, you should be objecting to California, Arizona, New Mexico, Nevada, Oregon, etc. being shown on the map as US states instead of being designated as “occupied Mexican territory”.
It's a thread about an invasion that happened just a couple of years ago (after Russia in -97 agreed on the state of Crimea as part of Ukraine), and your whole line of arguing is that because of you making up what nationality I am I'm not allowed to say anything about that invasion because of other events that happened a century and a half ago…?
If that makes sense in your head you've had too much vodka for breakfast.
Are you telling me that 200 years makes a difference in the history of humanity?
Would you justify an occupation of Country A by country B in the year 1300 but denounce the occupation of country B by country A in the year 1500 because 200 years passed and it was no longer appropriate to behave like that in 1500, while in 1300 it was common for countries to occupy their neighbors?
It’s complete nonsense. Americans have no right to criticize Russia for returning its own land that was illegally transferred to Ukraine by a dictator who used to be the leader of Ukraine before he became the leader of the USSR.
I had relatives who lived in Crimea back in the 1950 to 1990s. They hated Crimea being transferred to Ukraine when it happened and they hated being part of Ukraine until they died. So did their neighbors and friends who lived in Crimea. So did the absolute majority of the Crimeans. Obviously, not everyone hated it, but the absolute majority did.
I’m not a fan of Tim Cook (to say it mildly) and neither am I a fan of Putin. However, for all those self-righteous ignoramuses who decry the takeover of Crimea by Russia, please be advised that Crimea was part of Russia (not just USSR, but the Russian republic within the USSR) until Nikita Kruschev gave it to Ukraine without conducting any referendum to find out if the Crimeans were OK with it.
Nikita Kruschev was the same guy who almost started a nuclear war with the US. So, the Ukrainian possession over Crimea was illegitimate from the standpoint of the International law. Additionally, the Russian Black Sea Navy was stationed in Crimea evem before the Bolshevicks overthrew the monarchy in 1917. It continued to be stationed there throughout all these years even when Ukraine and Russia seceded from the USSR in 1991. So, the Russian Black Sea Navy was suddenly stationed in a foreign country. Add to all of this that the absolute majority of Crimeans hated being in Ukraine for many decades since Crimea was given to Ukraine, and you will have a better understanding what happened with Crimea in 2014.
Thing is, you can't just go "oh, we don't really count [these events] because we don't like the leader that we had back then"; and then use your military strength to do what the f*ck you want; which is exactly what Russia did when taking over Crimea, and what they are still doing by bullying their way into how people are (not) allowed to talk about the region.
The area already had a certain level of independence ("місто зі спеціальним статусом"), and was treated carefully due to the Russian navy stationed there; and Ukraine backtracked on a lot just to not become a serious risk to Russia, which Russia just used to then by force take over the area.
Give it another decade or two and the area probably would have become just more and more independent/neutral; but that just wasn't enough for Russia, because all they cared about is being in absolute control of the area. And that's less about anything historical and more about their expansionist plans as always being limited by how relatively landlocked Russia is; that's the real historical fact that is in play here.
Do you live in the US? If so, do you realize that the Americans did the same exact thing first to the Indians, then to the Mexicans, then to the Spaniards?
There's not a single square inch of US that was not annexed from the Native Americans. Texas was annexed from Mexico along with the entire Southwestern US, California, and Oregon. In 1812, the US tried to annex Canadian territories but were repelled by the Canadians and the British. How about the annexation of Hawaii by the US? How about the takeover of Puerto Rico by the US from Spain?
So, why is it that you are denying Russia the right to annex the territory that was Russian for centuries, but you are completely fine by living on the land that is soaked in blood of Native Americans and taken from other sovereign nations like Mexico and Spain via aggressive wars?
Do you usually get away with you just making things up about what other people feel about completely unrelated things, as some sort of strategy to deflect from the issue really discussed?
How is this unrelated? Are you so brainwashed that you can’t even see a relation here?
Americans have no business telling Israelis that their settlements are illegal, as they are established on occupied territories, because the entire US comprises settlements established on occupied territories. Every American lives in an illegal settlement located on stolen land.
By the same token, Americans have no business criticizing Russia for the annexation of Crimea because of the American history of starting offensive wars to capture territory from other nations.
I can’t help you if you don’t see the irony of your self-righteous wrath over the Russian annexation of Crimea.
If you object to Crimea being shown as part of Russia, you should be objecting to California, Arizona, New Mexico, Nevada, Oregon, etc. being shown on the map as US states instead of being designated as “occupied Mexican territory”.
It's a thread about an invasion that happened just a couple of years ago (after Russia in -97 agreed on the state of Crimea as part of Ukraine), and your whole line of arguing is that because of you making up what nationality I am I'm not allowed to say anything about that invasion because of other events that happened a century and a half ago…?
If that makes sense in your head you've had too much vodka for breakfast.
Are you telling me that 200 years makes a difference in the history of humanity?
Would you justify an occupation of Country A by country B in the year 1300 but denounce the occupation of country B by country A in the year 1500 because 200 years passed and it was no longer appropriate to behave like that in 1500, while in 1300 it was common for countries to occupy their neighbors?
It’s complete nonsense. Americans have no right to criticize Russia for returning its own land that was illegally transferred to Ukraine by a dictator who used to be the leader of Ukraine before he became the leader of the USSR.
I had relatives who lived in Crimea back in the 1950 to 1990s. They hated Crimea being transferred to Ukraine when it happened and they hated being part of Ukraine until they died. So did their neighbors and friends who lived in Crimea. So did the absolute majority of the Crimeans. Obviously, not everyone hated it, but the absolute majority did.
Oh, if you prefer such timescales I guess you are all in favour of returning the Crimean Khanate to its previous state before the events of the Russo-Turkish War.
So let us condemn these Russian invaders, and return Crimea to its former Turkish glory!!
Looking at the timescale their 342 year history clearly trumps the Russian newcomers.
I’m not a fan of Tim Cook (to say it mildly) and neither am I a fan of Putin. However, for all those self-righteous ignoramuses who decry the takeover of Crimea by Russia, please be advised that Crimea was part of Russia (not just USSR, but the Russian republic within the USSR) until Nikita Kruschev gave it to Ukraine without conducting any referendum to find out if the Crimeans were OK with it.
Nikita Kruschev was the same guy who almost started a nuclear war with the US. So, the Ukrainian possession over Crimea was illegitimate from the standpoint of the International law. Additionally, the Russian Black Sea Navy was stationed in Crimea evem before the Bolshevicks overthrew the monarchy in 1917. It continued to be stationed there throughout all these years even when Ukraine and Russia seceded from the USSR in 1991. So, the Russian Black Sea Navy was suddenly stationed in a foreign country. Add to all of this that the absolute majority of Crimeans hated being in Ukraine for many decades since Crimea was given to Ukraine, and you will have a better understanding what happened with Crimea in 2014.
Thing is, you can't just go "oh, we don't really count [these events] because we don't like the leader that we had back then"; and then use your military strength to do what the f*ck you want; which is exactly what Russia did when taking over Crimea, and what they are still doing by bullying their way into how people are (not) allowed to talk about the region.
The area already had a certain level of independence ("місто зі спеціальним статусом"), and was treated carefully due to the Russian navy stationed there; and Ukraine backtracked on a lot just to not become a serious risk to Russia, which Russia just used to then by force take over the area.
Give it another decade or two and the area probably would have become just more and more independent/neutral; but that just wasn't enough for Russia, because all they cared about is being in absolute control of the area. And that's less about anything historical and more about their expansionist plans as always being limited by how relatively landlocked Russia is; that's the real historical fact that is in play here.
Do you live in the US? If so, do you realize that the Americans did the same exact thing first to the Indians, then to the Mexicans, then to the Spaniards?
There's not a single square inch of US that was not annexed from the Native Americans. Texas was annexed from Mexico along with the entire Southwestern US, California, and Oregon. In 1812, the US tried to annex Canadian territories but were repelled by the Canadians and the British. How about the annexation of Hawaii by the US? How about the takeover of Puerto Rico by the US from Spain?
So, why is it that you are denying Russia the right to annex the territory that was Russian for centuries, but you are completely fine by living on the land that is soaked in blood of Native Americans and taken from other sovereign nations like Mexico and Spain via aggressive wars?
Do you usually get away with you just making things up about what other people feel about completely unrelated things, as some sort of strategy to deflect from the issue really discussed?
How is this unrelated? Are you so brainwashed that you can’t even see a relation here?
Americans have no business telling Israelis that their settlements are illegal, as they are established on occupied territories, because the entire US comprises settlements established on occupied territories. Every American lives in an illegal settlement located on stolen land.
By the same token, Americans have no business criticizing Russia for the annexation of Crimea because of the American history of starting offensive wars to capture territory from other nations.
I can’t help you if you don’t see the irony of your self-righteous wrath over the Russian annexation of Crimea.
If you object to Crimea being shown as part of Russia, you should be objecting to California, Arizona, New Mexico, Nevada, Oregon, etc. being shown on the map as US states instead of being designated as “occupied Mexican territory”.
It's a thread about an invasion that happened just a couple of years ago (after Russia in -97 agreed on the state of Crimea as part of Ukraine), and your whole line of arguing is that because of you making up what nationality I am I'm not allowed to say anything about that invasion because of other events that happened a century and a half ago…?
If that makes sense in your head you've had too much vodka for breakfast.
Are you telling me that 200 years makes a difference in the history of humanity?
Would you justify an occupation of Country A by country B in the year 1300 but denounce the occupation of country B by country A in the year 1500 because 200 years passed and it was no longer appropriate to behave like that in 1500, while in 1300 it was common for countries to occupy their neighbors?
It’s complete nonsense. Americans have no right to criticize Russia for returning its own land that was illegally transferred to Ukraine by a dictator who used to be the leader of Ukraine before he became the leader of the USSR.
I had relatives who lived in Crimea back in the 1950 to 1990s. They hated Crimea being transferred to Ukraine when it happened and they hated being part of Ukraine until they died. So did their neighbors and friends who lived in Crimea. So did the absolute majority of the Crimeans. Obviously, not everyone hated it, but the absolute majority did.
Oh, if you prefer such timescales I guess you are all in favour of returning the Crimean Khanate to its previous state before the events of the Russo-Turkish War.
So let us condemn these Russian invaders, and return Crimea to its former Turkish glory!!
Looking at the timescale their 342 year history clearly trumps the Russian newcomers.
Actually, I wouldn’t mind if Turkey made such a claim. They would simply have to declare a war on Russia and try to take Crimea. I haven’t heard them making such a claim similarly to the way that Mexico is not demanding their former territory to be returned by the US. Probably the reason for the lack of such demands is that those who make them would be laughed off the international stage. But, if they want to take the territory back by force, they are welcome to try.
The bottom line of my argument is that The situation with the Crimea was never settled - neither under the Soviet Union not after it collapsed. The very fact that Russia inherited the Soviet Black Sea Navy almost in its entirety from the USSR, but the base was in a foreign country once the USSR broke apart was an awkward situation. Yeltsin decided not to push for an immediate resolution and instead decided to lease Sevastopol from Ukraine, but the final status of Crimea was never completely settled. When an uprising in Kiev overthrew the legitimately elected President of Ukraine (Viktor Yanukovich) who was friendly to Russia, Putin decided to act. The absolute majority of Russians and the absolute majority of Crimeans supported the annexation.
I know you disagree with it, but if you are an honest guy, you should be just as incensed by how your own country behaved for centuries as you are incensed by the behavior of Russia vis-à-vis Crimea and eastern Ukraine.
I’m not a fan of Tim Cook (to say it mildly) and neither am I a fan of Putin. However, for all those self-righteous ignoramuses who decry the takeover of Crimea by Russia, please be advised that Crimea was part of Russia (not just USSR, but the Russian republic within the USSR) until Nikita Kruschev gave it to Ukraine without conducting any referendum to find out if the Crimeans were OK with it.
Nikita Kruschev was the same guy who almost started a nuclear war with the US. So, the Ukrainian possession over Crimea was illegitimate from the standpoint of the International law. Additionally, the Russian Black Sea Navy was stationed in Crimea evem before the Bolshevicks overthrew the monarchy in 1917. It continued to be stationed there throughout all these years even when Ukraine and Russia seceded from the USSR in 1991. So, the Russian Black Sea Navy was suddenly stationed in a foreign country. Add to all of this that the absolute majority of Crimeans hated being in Ukraine for many decades since Crimea was given to Ukraine, and you will have a better understanding what happened with Crimea in 2014.
Thing is, you can't just go "oh, we don't really count [these events] because we don't like the leader that we had back then"; and then use your military strength to do what the f*ck you want; which is exactly what Russia did when taking over Crimea, and what they are still doing by bullying their way into how people are (not) allowed to talk about the region.
The area already had a certain level of independence ("місто зі спеціальним статусом"), and was treated carefully due to the Russian navy stationed there; and Ukraine backtracked on a lot just to not become a serious risk to Russia, which Russia just used to then by force take over the area.
Give it another decade or two and the area probably would have become just more and more independent/neutral; but that just wasn't enough for Russia, because all they cared about is being in absolute control of the area. And that's less about anything historical and more about their expansionist plans as always being limited by how relatively landlocked Russia is; that's the real historical fact that is in play here.
Do you live in the US? If so, do you realize that the Americans did the same exact thing first to the Indians, then to the Mexicans, then to the Spaniards?
There's not a single square inch of US that was not annexed from the Native Americans. Texas was annexed from Mexico along with the entire Southwestern US, California, and Oregon. In 1812, the US tried to annex Canadian territories but were repelled by the Canadians and the British. How about the annexation of Hawaii by the US? How about the takeover of Puerto Rico by the US from Spain?
So, why is it that you are denying Russia the right to annex the territory that was Russian for centuries, but you are completely fine by living on the land that is soaked in blood of Native Americans and taken from other sovereign nations like Mexico and Spain via aggressive wars?
Do you usually get away with you just making things up about what other people feel about completely unrelated things, as some sort of strategy to deflect from the issue really discussed?
How is this unrelated? Are you so brainwashed that you can’t even see a relation here?
Americans have no business telling Israelis that their settlements are illegal, as they are established on occupied territories, because the entire US comprises settlements established on occupied territories. Every American lives in an illegal settlement located on stolen land.
By the same token, Americans have no business criticizing Russia for the annexation of Crimea because of the American history of starting offensive wars to capture territory from other nations.
I can’t help you if you don’t see the irony of your self-righteous wrath over the Russian annexation of Crimea.
If you object to Crimea being shown as part of Russia, you should be objecting to California, Arizona, New Mexico, Nevada, Oregon, etc. being shown on the map as US states instead of being designated as “occupied Mexican territory”.
It's a thread about an invasion that happened just a couple of years ago (after Russia in -97 agreed on the state of Crimea as part of Ukraine), and your whole line of arguing is that because of you making up what nationality I am I'm not allowed to say anything about that invasion because of other events that happened a century and a half ago…?
If that makes sense in your head you've had too much vodka for breakfast.
Are you telling me that 200 years makes a difference in the history of humanity?
Would you justify an occupation of Country A by country B in the year 1300 but denounce the occupation of country B by country A in the year 1500 because 200 years passed and it was no longer appropriate to behave like that in 1500, while in 1300 it was common for countries to occupy their neighbors?
It’s complete nonsense. Americans have no right to criticize Russia for returning its own land that was illegally transferred to Ukraine by a dictator who used to be the leader of Ukraine before he became the leader of the USSR.
I had relatives who lived in Crimea back in the 1950 to 1990s. They hated Crimea being transferred to Ukraine when it happened and they hated being part of Ukraine until they died. So did their neighbors and friends who lived in Crimea. So did the absolute majority of the Crimeans. Obviously, not everyone hated it, but the absolute majority did.
Oh, if you prefer such timescales I guess you are all in favour of returning the Crimean Khanate to its previous state before the events of the Russo-Turkish War.
So let us condemn these Russian invaders, and return Crimea to its former Turkish glory!!
Looking at the timescale their 342 year history clearly trumps the Russian newcomers.
Actually, I wouldn’t mind if Turkey made such a claim. They would simply have to declare a war on Russia and try to take Crimea. I haven’t heard them making such a claim similarly to the way that Mexico is not demanding their former territory to be returned by the US. Probably the reason for the lack of such demands is that those who make them would be laughed off the international stage. But, if they want to take the territory back by force, they are welcome to try.
The bottom line of my argument is that The situation with the Crimea was never settled - neither under the Soviet Union not after it collapsed. The very fact that Russia inherited the Soviet Black Sea Navy almost in its entirety from the USSR, but the base was in a foreign country once the USSR broke apart was an awkward situation. Yeltsin decided not to push for an immediate resolution and instead decided to lease Sevastopol from Ukraine, but the final status of Crimea was never completely settled. When an uprising in Kiev overthrew the legitimately elected President of Ukraine (Viktor Yanukovich) who was friendly to Russia, Putin decided to act. The absolute majority of Russians and the absolute majority of Crimeans supported the annexation.
I know you disagree with it, but if you are an honest guy, you should be just as incensed by how your own country behaved for centuries as you are incensed by the behavior of Russia vis-à-vis Crimea and eastern Ukraine.
It was settled with the "Agreement Between the Russian Federation and Ukraine on the Status and Conditions of the Russian Federation Black Sea Fleet’s Stay on Ukrainian Territory" in 1997.
I’m not a fan of Tim Cook (to say it mildly) and neither am I a fan of Putin. However, for all those self-righteous ignoramuses who decry the takeover of Crimea by Russia, please be advised that Crimea was part of Russia (not just USSR, but the Russian republic within the USSR) until Nikita Kruschev gave it to Ukraine without conducting any referendum to find out if the Crimeans were OK with it.
Nikita Kruschev was the same guy who almost started a nuclear war with the US. So, the Ukrainian possession over Crimea was illegitimate from the standpoint of the International law. Additionally, the Russian Black Sea Navy was stationed in Crimea evem before the Bolshevicks overthrew the monarchy in 1917. It continued to be stationed there throughout all these years even when Ukraine and Russia seceded from the USSR in 1991. So, the Russian Black Sea Navy was suddenly stationed in a foreign country. Add to all of this that the absolute majority of Crimeans hated being in Ukraine for many decades since Crimea was given to Ukraine, and you will have a better understanding what happened with Crimea in 2014.
Thing is, you can't just go "oh, we don't really count [these events] because we don't like the leader that we had back then"; and then use your military strength to do what the f*ck you want; which is exactly what Russia did when taking over Crimea, and what they are still doing by bullying their way into how people are (not) allowed to talk about the region.
The area already had a certain level of independence ("місто зі спеціальним статусом"), and was treated carefully due to the Russian navy stationed there; and Ukraine backtracked on a lot just to not become a serious risk to Russia, which Russia just used to then by force take over the area.
Give it another decade or two and the area probably would have become just more and more independent/neutral; but that just wasn't enough for Russia, because all they cared about is being in absolute control of the area. And that's less about anything historical and more about their expansionist plans as always being limited by how relatively landlocked Russia is; that's the real historical fact that is in play here.
Do you live in the US? If so, do you realize that the Americans did the same exact thing first to the Indians, then to the Mexicans, then to the Spaniards?
There's not a single square inch of US that was not annexed from the Native Americans. Texas was annexed from Mexico along with the entire Southwestern US, California, and Oregon. In 1812, the US tried to annex Canadian territories but were repelled by the Canadians and the British. How about the annexation of Hawaii by the US? How about the takeover of Puerto Rico by the US from Spain?
So, why is it that you are denying Russia the right to annex the territory that was Russian for centuries, but you are completely fine by living on the land that is soaked in blood of Native Americans and taken from other sovereign nations like Mexico and Spain via aggressive wars?
Do you usually get away with you just making things up about what other people feel about completely unrelated things, as some sort of strategy to deflect from the issue really discussed?
How is this unrelated? Are you so brainwashed that you can’t even see a relation here?
Americans have no business telling Israelis that their settlements are illegal, as they are established on occupied territories, because the entire US comprises settlements established on occupied territories. Every American lives in an illegal settlement located on stolen land.
By the same token, Americans have no business criticizing Russia for the annexation of Crimea because of the American history of starting offensive wars to capture territory from other nations.
I can’t help you if you don’t see the irony of your self-righteous wrath over the Russian annexation of Crimea.
If you object to Crimea being shown as part of Russia, you should be objecting to California, Arizona, New Mexico, Nevada, Oregon, etc. being shown on the map as US states instead of being designated as “occupied Mexican territory”.
It's a thread about an invasion that happened just a couple of years ago (after Russia in -97 agreed on the state of Crimea as part of Ukraine), and your whole line of arguing is that because of you making up what nationality I am I'm not allowed to say anything about that invasion because of other events that happened a century and a half ago…?
If that makes sense in your head you've had too much vodka for breakfast.
Are you telling me that 200 years makes a difference in the history of humanity?
Would you justify an occupation of Country A by country B in the year 1300 but denounce the occupation of country B by country A in the year 1500 because 200 years passed and it was no longer appropriate to behave like that in 1500, while in 1300 it was common for countries to occupy their neighbors?
It’s complete nonsense. Americans have no right to criticize Russia for returning its own land that was illegally transferred to Ukraine by a dictator who used to be the leader of Ukraine before he became the leader of the USSR.
I had relatives who lived in Crimea back in the 1950 to 1990s. They hated Crimea being transferred to Ukraine when it happened and they hated being part of Ukraine until they died. So did their neighbors and friends who lived in Crimea. So did the absolute majority of the Crimeans. Obviously, not everyone hated it, but the absolute majority did.
Oh, if you prefer such timescales I guess you are all in favour of returning the Crimean Khanate to its previous state before the events of the Russo-Turkish War.
So let us condemn these Russian invaders, and return Crimea to its former Turkish glory!!
Looking at the timescale their 342 year history clearly trumps the Russian newcomers.
Actually, I wouldn’t mind if Turkey made such a claim. They would simply have to declare a war on Russia and try to take Crimea. I haven’t heard them making such a claim similarly to the way that Mexico is not demanding their former territory to be returned by the US. Probably the reason for the lack of such demands is that those who make them would be laughed off the international stage. But, if they want to take the territory back by force, they are welcome to try.
The bottom line of my argument is that The situation with the Crimea was never settled - neither under the Soviet Union not after it collapsed. The very fact that Russia inherited the Soviet Black Sea Navy almost in its entirety from the USSR, but the base was in a foreign country once the USSR broke apart was an awkward situation. Yeltsin decided not to push for an immediate resolution and instead decided to lease Sevastopol from Ukraine, but the final status of Crimea was never completely settled. When an uprising in Kiev overthrew the legitimately elected President of Ukraine (Viktor Yanukovich) who was friendly to Russia, Putin decided to act. The absolute majority of Russians and the absolute majority of Crimeans supported the annexation.
I know you disagree with it, but if you are an honest guy, you should be just as incensed by how your own country behaved for centuries as you are incensed by the behavior of Russia vis-à-vis Crimea and eastern Ukraine.
It was settled with the "Agreement Between the Russian Federation and Ukraine on the Status and Conditions of the Russian Federation Black Sea Fleet’s Stay on Ukrainian Territory" in 1997.
I’m not a fan of Tim Cook (to say it mildly) and neither am I a fan of Putin. However, for all those self-righteous ignoramuses who decry the takeover of Crimea by Russia, please be advised that Crimea was part of Russia (not just USSR, but the Russian republic within the USSR) until Nikita Kruschev gave it to Ukraine without conducting any referendum to find out if the Crimeans were OK with it.
Nikita Kruschev was the same guy who almost started a nuclear war with the US. So, the Ukrainian possession over Crimea was illegitimate from the standpoint of the International law. Additionally, the Russian Black Sea Navy was stationed in Crimea evem before the Bolshevicks overthrew the monarchy in 1917. It continued to be stationed there throughout all these years even when Ukraine and Russia seceded from the USSR in 1991. So, the Russian Black Sea Navy was suddenly stationed in a foreign country. Add to all of this that the absolute majority of Crimeans hated being in Ukraine for many decades since Crimea was given to Ukraine, and you will have a better understanding what happened with Crimea in 2014.
Thing is, you can't just go "oh, we don't really count [these events] because we don't like the leader that we had back then"; and then use your military strength to do what the f*ck you want; which is exactly what Russia did when taking over Crimea, and what they are still doing by bullying their way into how people are (not) allowed to talk about the region.
The area already had a certain level of independence ("місто зі спеціальним статусом"), and was treated carefully due to the Russian navy stationed there; and Ukraine backtracked on a lot just to not become a serious risk to Russia, which Russia just used to then by force take over the area.
Give it another decade or two and the area probably would have become just more and more independent/neutral; but that just wasn't enough for Russia, because all they cared about is being in absolute control of the area. And that's less about anything historical and more about their expansionist plans as always being limited by how relatively landlocked Russia is; that's the real historical fact that is in play here.
Do you live in the US? If so, do you realize that the Americans did the same exact thing first to the Indians, then to the Mexicans, then to the Spaniards?
There's not a single square inch of US that was not annexed from the Native Americans. Texas was annexed from Mexico along with the entire Southwestern US, California, and Oregon. In 1812, the US tried to annex Canadian territories but were repelled by the Canadians and the British. How about the annexation of Hawaii by the US? How about the takeover of Puerto Rico by the US from Spain?
So, why is it that you are denying Russia the right to annex the territory that was Russian for centuries, but you are completely fine by living on the land that is soaked in blood of Native Americans and taken from other sovereign nations like Mexico and Spain via aggressive wars?
Do you usually get away with you just making things up about what other people feel about completely unrelated things, as some sort of strategy to deflect from the issue really discussed?
How is this unrelated? Are you so brainwashed that you can’t even see a relation here?
Americans have no business telling Israelis that their settlements are illegal, as they are established on occupied territories, because the entire US comprises settlements established on occupied territories. Every American lives in an illegal settlement located on stolen land.
By the same token, Americans have no business criticizing Russia for the annexation of Crimea because of the American history of starting offensive wars to capture territory from other nations.
I can’t help you if you don’t see the irony of your self-righteous wrath over the Russian annexation of Crimea.
If you object to Crimea being shown as part of Russia, you should be objecting to California, Arizona, New Mexico, Nevada, Oregon, etc. being shown on the map as US states instead of being designated as “occupied Mexican territory”.
It's a thread about an invasion that happened just a couple of years ago (after Russia in -97 agreed on the state of Crimea as part of Ukraine), and your whole line of arguing is that because of you making up what nationality I am I'm not allowed to say anything about that invasion because of other events that happened a century and a half ago…?
If that makes sense in your head you've had too much vodka for breakfast.
Are you telling me that 200 years makes a difference in the history of humanity?
Would you justify an occupation of Country A by country B in the year 1300 but denounce the occupation of country B by country A in the year 1500 because 200 years passed and it was no longer appropriate to behave like that in 1500, while in 1300 it was common for countries to occupy their neighbors?
It’s complete nonsense. Americans have no right to criticize Russia for returning its own land that was illegally transferred to Ukraine by a dictator who used to be the leader of Ukraine before he became the leader of the USSR.
I had relatives who lived in Crimea back in the 1950 to 1990s. They hated Crimea being transferred to Ukraine when it happened and they hated being part of Ukraine until they died. So did their neighbors and friends who lived in Crimea. So did the absolute majority of the Crimeans. Obviously, not everyone hated it, but the absolute majority did.
Oh, if you prefer such timescales I guess you are all in favour of returning the Crimean Khanate to its previous state before the events of the Russo-Turkish War.
So let us condemn these Russian invaders, and return Crimea to its former Turkish glory!!
Looking at the timescale their 342 year history clearly trumps the Russian newcomers.
Actually, I wouldn’t mind if Turkey made such a claim. They would simply have to declare a war on Russia and try to take Crimea. I haven’t heard them making such a claim similarly to the way that Mexico is not demanding their former territory to be returned by the US. Probably the reason for the lack of such demands is that those who make them would be laughed off the international stage. But, if they want to take the territory back by force, they are welcome to try.
The bottom line of my argument is that The situation with the Crimea was never settled - neither under the Soviet Union not after it collapsed. The very fact that Russia inherited the Soviet Black Sea Navy almost in its entirety from the USSR, but the base was in a foreign country once the USSR broke apart was an awkward situation. Yeltsin decided not to push for an immediate resolution and instead decided to lease Sevastopol from Ukraine, but the final status of Crimea was never completely settled. When an uprising in Kiev overthrew the legitimately elected President of Ukraine (Viktor Yanukovich) who was friendly to Russia, Putin decided to act. The absolute majority of Russians and the absolute majority of Crimeans supported the annexation.
I know you disagree with it, but if you are an honest guy, you should be just as incensed by how your own country behaved for centuries as you are incensed by the behavior of Russia vis-à-vis Crimea and eastern Ukraine.
It was settled with the "Agreement Between the Russian Federation and Ukraine on the Status and Conditions of the Russian Federation Black Sea Fleet’s Stay on Ukrainian Territory" in 1997.
Comments
"Hey Tim, about those maps on iPhone... I need a favor though."
Meanwhile the current administration and GOP is quite literally pushing Russian intelligence propaganda and talking points, all to the benefit of Russia. This is happening on hot mics every day and should scare the shit out of everyone.
I'm russian, born in Crimea btw), and Crimea was with Russia starting in 1782, is and will be Too hard to learn history?
It's a pity to see all these foolish posts about damn Russia - better back to your US and remove all the weapon and soldiers from the globe).
Company has lost its heart and soul with Tim as ice king in power.
I mean, if history is enough to use the military to annex an area no matter modern, peacefully agreed upon, borders I'm guessing you also claim all these old Russian settlements?
The area already had a certain level of independence ("місто зі спеціальним статусом"), and was treated carefully due to the Russian navy stationed there; and Ukraine backtracked on a lot just to not become a serious risk to Russia, which Russia just used to then by force take over the area.
Give it another decade or two and the area probably would have become just more and more independent/neutral; but that just wasn't enough for Russia, because all they cared about is being in absolute control of the area. And that's less about anything historical and more about their expansionist plans as always being limited by how relatively landlocked Russia is; that's the real historical fact that is in play here.
There's not a single square inch of US that was not annexed from the Native Americans. Texas was annexed from Mexico along with the entire Southwestern US, California, and Oregon. In 1812, the US tried to annex Canadian territories but were repelled by the Canadians and the British. How about the annexation of Hawaii by the US? How about the takeover of Puerto Rico by the US from Spain?
So, why is it that you are denying Russia the right to annex the territory that was Russian for centuries, but you are completely fine by living on the land that is soaked in blood of Native Americans and taken from other sovereign nations like Mexico and Spain via aggressive wars?
Americans have no business telling Israelis that their settlements are illegal, as they are established on occupied territories, because the entire US comprises settlements established on occupied territories. Every American lives in an illegal settlement located on stolen land.
If that makes sense in your head you've had too much vodka for breakfast.
Would you justify an occupation of Country A by country B in the year 1300 but denounce the occupation of country B by country A in the year 1500 because 200 years passed and it was no longer appropriate to behave like that in 1500, while in 1300 it was common for countries to occupy their neighbors?
I had relatives who lived in Crimea back in the 1950 to 1990s. They hated Crimea being transferred to Ukraine when it happened and they hated being part of Ukraine until they died. So did their neighbors and friends who lived in Crimea. So did the absolute majority of the Crimeans. Obviously, not everyone hated it, but the absolute majority did.
So let us condemn these Russian invaders, and return Crimea to its former Turkish glory!!
Looking at the timescale their 342 year history clearly trumps the Russian newcomers.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mexican-American_War