• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Crimea votes to join Russia[W:223]

DaveFagan said:
85% turnout of voters. Over 95% of those voting for unification with Russia.
Click to expand...

I read it was 83% turnout....regardless, under the circumstances, the voter turnout doesn't validate the vote.
 
DaveFagan said:
CIA and CIA front groups. It's like the story of the guy who has one glass of wine, but he's not referred to as a wino, but the same guy sucks one little dick and is forever known as a cokesuckaire. CIA taint is exactly the same. Check to see how many of these front groups are operating in Ukraine.

How the CIA Operates Through Non Governmental Agencies ‹ I Acknowledge Class Warfare Exists

"Here is just a small list of various NGOs that are either known or are broadly accepted as CIA front operations. These organizations funnel money directly from their budget into various unknown and foundations, humanitarian groups, and private companies to further CIA priorities:

National Democratic Institute for International Affairs
National Endowment for Democracy
Freedom House
Millennium Challenge Corporation
International Center for Journalists
Center for International Private Enterprise
USAID "

"With regard to Freedom House, a United States-based NGO enjoying consultative status, the Permanent Representative of Cuba went on to say that the Committee had been dealing with that “so-called NGO” for several sessions after having received complaints from many delegations. He had submitted proof of the politically motivated, interventionist activities the NGO carried out against his Government. The NGO’s links with terrorist groups in Cuba as well as the fact that it was an instrument of the special services of the United States were no secret."

"Today, Freedom House continues to serve as both a think tank and a “civil society” funder as part of the State Department’s modern “democracy promotion” complex. Frequently cited in the press and academic works, the reports and studies produced by Freedom House and its affiliates promote the neoconservative ideology of its trustees and government sponsors. Although some names and affiliations have changed, the group is still dominated by neocons. Brzezinski, Kirkpatrick, and Forbes are still on the trustees list, as well as Liasson, O’Rourke, and Noonan.

Trustee Ken Adelman is a contributor to the Project for a New American Century, along with former CIA director R. James Woolsey, who joined Freedom House in 2000. Adelman was an assistant to Rumsfeld from 1975-1977, U.N. ambassador and arms control director under Reagan, and is currently a member of the Defense Policy Board. He wrote an article for The Washington Postin 2002 titled, “Cakewalk in Iraq”28 in which he said: “I believe demolishing Hussein’s military power and liberating Iraq would be a cakewalk.” Another trustee, Harvard professor Samuel P. Huntington, is the U.S. author of the Trilateral Commission report, The Crisis of Democracy and The Clash of Civilizations and Remaking of World Order (1996)."

"Carl Bernstein writes in “the CIA and the Media“:

“Alsop is one of more than 400 American journalists who in the past twenty‑five years have secretly carried out assignments for the Central Intelligence Agency, according to documents on file at CIA headquarters. Some of these journalists’ relationships with the Agency were tacit; some were explicit. There was cooperation, accommodation and overlap. Journalists provided a full range of clandestine services—from simple intelligence gathering to serving as go‑betweens with spies in Communist countries. Reporters shared their notebooks with the CIA. Editors shared their staffs. Some of the journalists were Pulitzer Prize winners, distinguished reporters who considered themselves ambassadors without‑portfolio for their country. Most were less exalted: foreign correspondents who found that their association with the Agency helped their work; stringers and freelancers who were as interested in the derring‑do of the spy business as in filing articles; and, the smallest category, full‑time CIA employees masquerading as journalists abroad. In many instances, CIA documents show, journalists were engaged to perform tasks for the CIA with the consent of the managements of America’s leading news organizations…”
The Church Committee uncovered how the CIA funded journalists abroad …where those stories"

"Alternet explains what you can do:

Combined with current events factoids, Wikipedia and Sourcewatch, anyone with basic internet competence [ability to follow links and do key word searches such as ‘African Wildlife Foundation, MI6, CIA’ or ‘Fossey Foundation, arms trafficking’] and is able to make and organize notes while sifting out blatantly misinformed or amateur articles, can learn to overcome disinformation, do their own analysis, map the corporate activities, identify the rip-offs and peoples exploited by these schemes, all while identifying the actual players and motives behind the New York Times propaganda.

Apply the preceding method and the result is quite clear; the New York Times is but one arm of a mechanism to deceive on behalf of a corporate centered sociopath get-mega-rich[er]-quick scheme of the 1%, exploiting Americans belief in their institutions, any consequence to the USA and actual democracy be damned in process"
Click to expand...

Apparently you mixed up what thread you are posting on. This thread is about Crimea.
 
cpgrad08 said:
You cast a vote after the region was been invaded by Russian troops. That is voting at the point of a gun.
Click to expand...

There is a difference here. The vast majority of Crimeans ARE Russians. of course they support it. Crimea actually was part of Russia until 1954, when they became part of Ukraine, through some weird Soviet hocus pocus. Since then, there was an uneasy peace between Ukranians and Crimeans, who wanted to be part of Russia once more. This situation is not unlike Yugoslavia, in which ethnic factions were forced to be together as one nation, until the breakup of that nation, and the ethnic violence which followed. I doubt there would have been violence in Crimea, but the vast majority of the population there welcomed the Russian incursion.
 
Erod said:
Seems like a perfect climate to reduce military spending, right Obama?
Click to expand...

Yes it does, considering Russia has this under control with no loss of life.
 
The claim this was democracy is so absurd no one should take those claims serious.

There were 2 options on the ballot:

1. Declare independence from Ukraine or

2. Declare independence from Ukraine.

The election under the Russian gun and Russian occupation.
 
danarhea said:
There is a difference here. The vast majority of Crimeans ARE Russians. of course they support it. Crimea actually was part of Russia until 1954, when they became part of Ukraine, through some weird Soviet hocus pocus. Since then, there was an uneasy peace between Ukranians and Crimeans, who wanted to be part of Russia once more. This situation is not unlike Yugoslavia, in which ethnic factions were forced to be together as one nation, until the breakup of that nation, and the ethnic violence which followed. I doubt there would have been violence in Crimea, but the vast majority of the population there welcomed the Russian incursion.
Click to expand...

You left out the part about the genocide and deportation of the non-Russian population by Joseph Stalin. Why do I not think this was inadvertent on your part?

But, the population is still about 12% Muslim Tartar. So I guess you have your reasons to what Russia to take over to take care of them too.
 
Higgins86 said:
Yes as they are very similar.
Click to expand...

Actually Higgins, only if western powers had supported the violent overthrow of the elected governments in those countries, and replaced them with anti-German governments, and Germany had had two or three bases, and loyal German speaking and cultural people to secure and protect, would there be any similarity.
 
joko104 said:
Apparently you mixed up what thread you are posting on. This thread is about Crimea.
Click to expand...

And the post clarifies why Russia would consider it necessary to protect the Crimea from USA/State Depty/CIA meddling and interference in internal affairs.
 
Montecresto said:
Had the west intervened and supported violent overthrow of elected governments in those countries and then "recognised" anti-German governments in their place??
Click to expand...

Lol continue to spin in favor for Putin.
This was an armed annexation of part of the Ukraine, no more no less.
 
notquiteright said:
And just what would a bigger military have done? CON tripe doesn't fly. We challenged the USSR to a game of military spending chicken and they had to quit due to a very unstable economy... now we have the unstable economy and the Russians have a strong cash generator- NG to Europe. Putin would LOVE us to spend money we don't have with little if any way to pay-off the IOUs in another military spending spree. :doh

Our tanks didn't drive to the Ukraine/Russian border to 'free' the Ukraine and it damn sure isn't going to 'defend' it even with Reagan era spending.
Click to expand...

That wasn't the point.

The point is, the world is headed a very scary direction on multiple fronts, and the last thing we need is less troops and resources in our military. Obama, like most liberals, despises the military.
 
joko104 said:
You left out the part about the genocide and deportation of the non-Russian population by Joseph Stalin. Why do I not think this was inadvertent on your part?

But, the population is still about 12% Muslim Tartar. So I guess you have your reasons to what Russia to take over to take care of them too.
Click to expand...

Why make this personal, and accuse me of wanting Russia to be there? I merely gave historical information and facts. It is your decision whether to debate them or to engage in name calling. FACT - In 1954, the Soviet Union made Crimea part of Ukraine. FACT - Before that it was part of Russia. FACT - The vast majority of Crimeans in 1954, and since then are Russians (Stalin was out of power when the transfer to Ukraine was made, so your point there is a non-sequituer). As for your flame bait, I am not going to bite. Sorry to disappoint you.
 
DaveFagan said:
And the post clarifies why Russia would consider it necessary to protect the Crimea from USA/State Depty/CIA meddling and interference in internal affairs.
Click to expand...

You tell 'em, comrade.
 
DaveFagan said:
And the post clarifies why Russia would consider it necessary to protect the Crimea from USA/State Depty/CIA meddling and interference in internal affairs.
Click to expand...

So THAT is the justification for Stalin's genocide of non-Russian Crimeans? I was wondering what it was.

Any other places that you want genocide and invasion? You know, like the Nazi's had to exterminate Jews to protect Europe from USA/State Department/CIA meddling and interference.
 
DaveFagan said:
And the post clarifies why Russia would consider it necessary to protect the Crimea from USA/State Depty/CIA meddling and interference in internal affairs.
Click to expand...

You need to show why the CIA has anything at all to do with this. So far, you have not. Why? Because it's just not there. This is an issue with Russians and Ukranians.
 
joko104 said:
2 million.

The hypocrisy of your message is amazing. You claim that the Crimea is Russia's because it became Russia's in the 1700s by a military treaty - but then declare the current treaty concerning Crimea is totally irrelevant. That is as absurd a reasons as it gets.
Click to expand...

What current treaty are you referring to? There is NO current treaty, a memorandum that is for everyone to RESPECT the Ukrainian borders but no Treaty.

The Crimea was also occupied centuries ago, but not taken from the Ukrainians- it never was Ukrainian- and is a majority Russian enclave that is a, why can't you get this part????, is a SEMI AUTONOMOUS region attached to the Ukraine. It has it's own Parliament.

You claim a treaty exists and it does not.

You claim Crimea is part of the Ukraine but it is a semi autonomous region

You claim it was an invasion and it was not.
 
danarhea said:
Why make this personal, and accuse me of wanting Russia to be there? I merely gave historical information and facts. It is your decision whether to debate them or to engage in name calling. FACT - In 1954, the Soviet Union made Crimea part of Ukraine. FACT - Before that it was part of Russia. FACT - The vast majority of Crimeans in 1954, and since then are Russians (Stalin was out of power when the transfer to Ukraine was made, so your point there is a non-sequituer). As for your flame bait, I am not going to bite. Sorry to disappoint you.
Click to expand...

You pick a moment in history and declare that was all there ever was - a military peace treaty in the 1700s. Nothing before, nothing after, ever happened. FACT, Stalin engaged in what was mass eviction and genocide of non-Russians in Crimea. FACT, since 1954 Crimea was part of the Ukraine. FACT, when Ukraine became an independent country this included Crimea.
FACT, the USA, Russia, UK and numerous other countries vowed to respect and protect the borders of Ukraine, which included Crimea.

All FACTS you leave out for obvious reason.

FACT, claiming a majority of Russians in one part of Ukraine due to genocide results then in Russia rightly seizing the territory by a military invasion and then a ballot that did not allow even allow voting to stay in Ukraine is cheering the fruits of genocide.
 
danarhea said:
You need to show why the CIA has anything at all to do with this. So far, you have not. Why? Because it's just not there. This is an issue with Russians and Ukranians.
Click to expand...

It is an issue with the whole world in relation to future nuclear weapons proliferation and an issue in relation to the treaty with Ukraine to give up the third largest nuclear arsenal in the world.

No county would ever give a nuclear weapons in the future and there would be no point to engaging in any negotiations otherwise as anything said or promises has exactly no value whatsoever.
 
Erod said:
That wasn't the point. The point is, the world is headed a very scary direction on multiple fronts, and the last thing we need is less troops and resources in our military. Obama, like most liberals, despises the military.
Click to expand...

More of a dodge than an answer... just what would a bigger military do besides spend money we don't have?

Answer- not much when the clash point is up against a major power. Out in the desert we kick ass, up against Russia in the Georgian affair and the Crimea- not a damn thing.

Defending our nation takes 1/4th of what we have currently. Maintaining our hegemony takes twice what we have as other nations rise in power.

Typical CON babble- most liberals don't despise the military, they just see the massive spending levels as unsustainable.

Nice try though.
 
joko104 said:
You pick a moment in history and declare that was all there ever was - a military peace treaty in the 1700s. Nothing before, nothing after, ever happened. FACT, Stalin engaged in what was mass eviction and genocide of non-Russians in Crimea. FACT, since 1954 Crimea was part of the Ukraine. FACT, when Ukraine became an independent country this included Crimea.
FACT, the USA, Russia, UK and numerous other countries vowed to respect and protect the borders of Ukraine, which included Crimea.

All FACTS you leave out for obvious reason.

FACT, claiming a majority of Russians in one part of Ukraine due to genocide results then in Russia rightly seizing the territory by a military invasion and then a ballot that did not allow even allow voting to stay in Ukraine is cheering the fruits of genocide.
Click to expand...

Look, I already told you I am not going to take your flame bait. Maybe you don't know how to read, or maybe you have an issue with ADHT. Whatever your problem is, I have no intention of playing your games. Onto my ignore list you go.
 
OldWorldOrder said:
Or it just says she's displeased and is sympathetic to the protesters. It says nothing about indicating a secret CIA plot.
Click to expand...

I didn't say the CIA did it. I said Victoria Nuland did it. Don't put words in my mouth.


OldWorldOrder said:
LOL at the bolded. Read that out loud and ask yourself if that sounds bat **** crazy.
Click to expand...

You forgot about this part. Let me help you out. Here's the WHOLE THING AGAIN.

The fact that you can't produce any other pictures of an Assistant Secretary of State passing out cookies to protesters is a sign the strength of US involvement in the installation of Yatsenyuk.If that was the usual thing that the Assistant Secretary of State did, then you could say it's no big deal. That's just what they do. But in this case it shows just how pissed off she was that Yanukovych made that decision.
Click to expand...

OldWorldOrder said:
...lol no. It doesn't. This is INSANITY.
Click to expand...

What's insane is that you want people to believe that it's not possible that the US played a substantial role in the installation of Yatsenyuk as prime minister.


OldWorldOrder said:
Yeah...do you not know what diplomats do? What do you think they do? Seriously, what do you think they do?
Click to expand...

That's right. That's what US diplomats do. And that's how they get rid of people they don't want and put in people they do want. They do it all the time.

OldWorldOrder said:
lol what if I pass out cookies? Will that be proof I work for the DIA and I'm trying to overthrow the moderators here?
Click to expand...

If the Assistant Secretary of State of the United States is out passing out cookies to protesters against the prime minister of a government when the State Department is threatening to impose sanctions against the prime minister of the government it is a BIG sign that the Assistant Secretary of State is VERY displeased with the prime minister of that government. Do I have to draw pictures to make you understand?

OldWorldOrder said:
The US has disagreements with the leaders of virtually every government. Does the US try to overthrow virtually every government? Your knowledge of international relations is truly shocking.
Click to expand...

Ahh!! Now we can see where you are coming from. That was a deliberate distortion of what I said. And you know it. You are getting desperate.

OldWorldOrder said:
To you, normal embassy operations are a sign of a secret CIA plot. That's weird, dude. You should...ya know...learn a little bit about it?
Click to expand...

Yep, that's another distortion. Actually a BIG LIE. Show me where I said it was a CIA plot. You are a liar.


OldWorldOrder said:
Then we're both idiots!
Click to expand...

What you are is a liar. You told a big lie, right here in this post to try to make a point. You sir are a liar.
 
joko104 said:
I should clarify. You hate all not Russian Crimeans. Why do you celebrate the genocide of Muslim Tartars? Did you have some great grandfather who died in the Crimean wars in the past or something? You hate Muslims believing they are all a terrorists?
Click to expand...
That is the most off the wall accusation leveled at me on this forum pulled out of thin air I have ever encountered. You sir, are out of line. There's a minority of Tartars living in Crimea, they are also living throughout the Ukraine where there is no evidence that they are treated any differently than any of the other minorities that make up the different ethnic groups in that country. If the Tartars should be harassed for their anti-Russian vote in Crimea, they would be welcomed in what is left of the Ukraine.
 
MildSteel said:
I didn't say the CIA did it. I said Victoria Nuland did it. Don't put words in my mouth.




You forgot about this part. Let me help you out. Here's the WHOLE THING AGAIN.





What's insane is that you want people to believe that it's not possible that the US played a substantial role in the installation of Yatsenyuk as prime minister.




That's right. That's what US diplomats do. And that's how they get rid of people they don't want and put in people they do want. They do it all the time.



If the Assistant Secretary of State of the United States is out passing out cookies to protesters against the prime minister of a government when the State Department is threatening to impose sanctions against the prime minister of the government it is a BIG sign that the Assistant Secretary of State is VERY displeased with the prime minister of that government. Do I have to draw pictures to make you understand?



Ahh!! Now we can see where you are coming from. That was a deliberate distortion of what I said. And you know it. You are getting desperate.



Yep, that's another distortion. Actually a BIG LIE. Show me where I said it was a CIA plot. You are a liar.




What you are is a liar. You told a big lie, right here in this post to try to make a point. You sir are a liar.
Click to expand...

It's like you don't understand I was replying to DaveFagan, who said it was a CIA plot. If you thought it wasn't, why did you respond to me at all?
 
Moderator's Warning:
Cut out the sniping, baiting, and attacks.
 
notquiteright said:
More of a dodge than an answer... just what would a bigger military do besides spend money we don't have?

Answer- not much when the clash point is up against a major power. Out in the desert we kick ass, up against Russia in the Georgian affair and the Crimea- not a damn thing.

Defending our nation takes 1/4th of what we have currently. Maintaining our hegemony takes twice what we have as other nations rise in power.

Typical CON babble- most liberals don't despise the military, they just see the massive spending levels as unsustainable.

Nice try though.
Click to expand...

How would you know how big the military needs to be to defend our country? Defend it against what? They don't send out a flier beforehand, buddy. You have to be prepared for anything from any direction under any circumstances. You don't guess.
 
danarhea said:
You need to show why the CIA has anything at all to do with this. So far, you have not. Why? Because it's just not there. This is an issue with Russians and Ukranians.
Click to expand...


Heya Dan :2wave: .....this might lead to some more of those questions and answers. ;)

The US AID has been active in Ukraine for some years, trying to undermine Russian influence. This led to the demonstrations in Kiev, during the Olympics, an embarrassment for Putin. The US fomented the conditions for Anti-Russian sentiment, and did little to quell the demonstrations against the elected president, who had Russian support.

Obama deserves criticism for how he is handling the Russians now, but also how he handled the CIA and USAIS in Ukraine, during his administration. This has been going on for several administrations. Kerry, US Secretary of State, was theoretically in charge of Ukraine CIA operations.

The Ukraine society is short on community leaders, because Stalin's purges in 1936 killed millions of the community leaders. The society of Ukraine is not well organized, and savvy. The demonstrations in Kiev had the effect of forcing a Russian invasion of Crimea. Not real bright.


"Since 1991, Ukraine’s development trajectory has taken the country from a command to a market-based economy. The United States Government maintains a strategic interest in helping Ukraine’s transition toward greater democracy and a sustainable free market economy. Over the last 20 years USAID has provided $1.8 billion in critical development assistance in support of the Ukrainian people. Much of this development assistance has helped Ukrainians experience increased political freedoms, stronger transparency guarantees, and more economic and social opportunities.

Today, USAID/Ukraine implements a focused development assistance program to support: more participatory, transparent, and accountable governance; broad-based resilient economic development; and improved health status for Ukrainians.

USAID also supports U.S. Presidential Initiatives in Global Health and Global Climate Change. '

Ukraine | U.S. Agency for International Development.....snip~

Ukraine | U.S. Agency for International Development
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom