• 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!

If Crimea says 'Da!,' what's next?

Blue_State

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 30, 2011
Messages
5,411
Reaction score
2,228
Location
In a Blue State
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Such a referendum has no precedent, analysts say, and no one appears certain how opponents, Russia and the world will react, or what difference the vote may make.

/snip

"You have Russian troops on the ground – it cannot be considered legal – any referendum that happens at gunpoint is illegal," said Liik. "Plus, the referendum was announced by the new prime minister who was appointed at a session of parliament that was also at gunpoint. He got 4% of the vote at the latest local election, so he is clearly not representative, either. That is all staged by Russia."

If Crimea says 'Da!,' what's next?

I had no idea that the "leader" only received 4% of the vote.

The article makes a interesting point that this entire situation is in Putin's hands.

Given the lack of serious action by the West, many analysts say the outcome of the crisis is squarely in the hands of Putin.

"What happens will be decided by Putin," said Kadri Liik, senior policy fellow at the European Council on Foreign Relations. "He hasn't said the final word on whether he will join Crimea with Russia or not. But all groundwork is prepared. Basically he has freedom of action."

The bear is out of the cage. Are we prepared to in a Cold War Era again?
 
If Crimea says 'Da!,' what's next?

I had no idea that the "leader" only received 4% of the vote.

The article makes a interesting point that this entire situation is in Putin's hands.



The bear is out of the cage. Are we prepared to in a Cold War Era again?

I think we should turn the whole Ukraine over to Putin. He's the only player to have backed up his rhetoric with money. His actions helped the Ukraine. Keep in mind Russia was selling Ukraine gas at about half of World Market prices to help the Ukraine, obviously. Russia also agreed to a loan to Ukraine backed by bonds, not as a scheme to privatize Ukrainian Energy assets and with no strings, like lowering pensions, raising taxes, or squeezing the common taxpayer. All Western interests are about Corporate Hegemony with Energy Corporations and Big Banks.
 
Ukraine crisis: Russia reserves right to "take people under its protection" in Donetsk as John Kerry meets Lavrov - CBS News

As U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry and his Russian counterpart met in London Friday in a last-ditch effort to find some common ground over the Russian invasion of Crimea, the Russian Foreign Ministry issued a warning suggesting Moscow was willing to expand its military actions in Ukraine into another region.

The Foreign Ministry released a statement, according to the Reuters news agency, saying Moscow “reserves the right to take people under its protection” in light of clashes between pro-Moscow and pro-Western demonstrators in the city of Donetsk on Thursday.

One person was killed Thursday evening as the clashes — which have occurred almost daily in the majority-ethnic Russian region — became violent for the first time.

“Russia is aware of its responsibility for the lives of compatriots and fellow citizens in Ukraine,” said the statement obtained by Reuters.

Given the reports of Russian troops massing on the eastern front, sounds like they will move into Luhansk and Donetsk next.
 
I think we should turn the whole Ukraine over to Putin. He's the only player to have backed up his rhetoric with money. His actions helped the Ukraine. Keep in mind Russia was selling Ukraine gas at about half of World Market prices to help the Ukraine, obviously. Russia also agreed to a loan to Ukraine backed by bonds, not as a scheme to privatize Ukrainian Energy assets and with no strings, like lowering pensions, raising taxes, or squeezing the common taxpayer. All Western interests are about Corporate Hegemony with Energy Corporations and Big Banks.

I would rather leave it up to the people of the country what they want to do. And not at gun point. Just because a country invests in another doesn't give them the right to invade. If so, we should welcome china to Hawaii and California.
 
I would rather leave it up to the people of the country what they want to do. And not at gun point. Just because a country invests in another doesn't give them the right to invade. If so, we should welcome china to Hawaii and California.

Then explain how it was all right for the USA to spend $5 billion to create NGOs, train protestors and militants, establish supply and transportation networks, and support the overthrow af a DEMOCRATICALLY elected scumbag in Ukraine and install the leader chosen by our State Department/CIA as acknowledged by the Victoria Nuland phone conversation? And now to have OLIGARCHS in control of some areas? CORPORATE hegemony, eh?
 
It will have to be ensured that Russia does not send troops into eastern Ukraine.
 
Then explain how it was all right for the USA to spend $5 billion to create NGOs, train protestors and militants, establish supply and transportation networks, and support the overthrow af a DEMOCRATICALLY elected scumbag in Ukraine and install the leader chosen by our State Department/CIA as acknowledged by the Victoria Nuland phone conversation? And now to have OLIGARCHS in control of some areas? CORPORATE hegemony, eh?

Dave, where did I say that? Get real.
 
Continuing economic and political isolation for Russia. No one (government or private individual) will trust Putin for the forseeable even if he withdraws.
 
It will have to be ensured that Russia does not send troops into eastern Ukraine.



But it's OK to have mercenaries in there. Hypocrisy! I think it needs Russian troops to ensure its' stability and protect the citizens from Western Banks and Energy Conglomerates.
 
-Redacted-
 
Last edited:
Then explain how it was all right for the USA to spend $5 billion to create NGOs, train protestors and militants, establish supply and transportation networks, and support the overthrow af a DEMOCRATICALLY elected scumbag in Ukraine and install the leader chosen by our State Department/CIA as acknowledged by the Victoria Nuland phone conversation? And now to have OLIGARCHS in control of some areas? CORPORATE hegemony, eh?

Allegations with no proof.
 
It's not an "if" question. Crime WILL vote yes to independence from Russia. Whether they become part of the Russian federation or become an "independent" state is another issue.

Ehm, there is nothing to do. We must all understand that the right of self-determination trumps geopolitical considerations. And the majority of people in Crimea don't want to be part of Ukraine and if they express that view this saturday/sunday in the referendum, then that's that. We have to respect that. To be clear, I'm not saying that the referendum will fair and handled properly... I'm saying that regardless whether there will be corruption at the votes or not, the outcome will still be the same. But instead of having a, say 60% "YES" you'll have a 80% or more.

Hopefully it ends there. Pray that it ends there. I do mean it. Ukraine will have to accept that is the desire of the majority in Crime and maybe, you know, if ukrainians in Crimea will want to get out, there should be some sort of govt program to facilitate repatriation. Other than that, there is nothing we can or should do. You must understand that despite your objections, or mine for that matter, Crimea is ethnically Russian and the ethnicity of a region makes that region.
There is no "cold war".

Let me put it this way. If this were a "cold war" scenario, it should have started with Georgia, not now. This is just a superpower flexing it's muscles. The difference between this Ukraine situation and georgia is that mainly, for Ukraine, the EU (and more recently the USA)is willing to put itself on the line to keep Russia out of it where as no superpower was willing to put it's ass on the line for Georgia. That's why Putin could easily chop 1/4th of Georgia off. But now since he's meeting massive resistance and very real dangers from the EU (the russian stock market has been dropping like a brick for a week now, even today, it's crashed by 5% or smth like that), the real kind of danger -> econimic danger. That is the kind that will cripple Russia. the EU has an abundance of trading partners and trading possibilities. You tell me one country or region on this planet that wouldn't want to sign up trade agreements worth almost 200bil euros -> that's about as much money Russia makes from trade with the EU. Losing even a fraction of that will cripple Russia' economy.
 
But it's OK to have mercenaries in there. Hypocrisy! I think it needs Russian troops to ensure its' stability and protect the citizens from Western Banks and Energy Conglomerates.

What mercenaries?
 
Dave, where did I say that? Get real.

You state that the "bear is out of the cage" indicting Russia as the destabilizing influence. I have identified the actual destabilizing influence and it is not Russia. It is the USA that is getting the Cold War going again. Good for the Military/Industrial/Corporate complex and armaments profits. Any war is good marketing when you're in the arms business. War is good business and the USA is about business.
 
Our Grand and Glorious Republic has a cherished history of invading at gunpoint to enforce trade/treaty/corporate deals. (Commodore Perry in Japan and the Marines in the 'Banana Wars' comes to mind. Can't recall anyone in government renouncing those actions) Let's not forget the CIA attempts to overthrow democratically elected presidents, assassination attempts and the World Bank dictating severe economic upheavals as part of any aid given. We seem to be the pot looking hard at a kettle. :3oops:

But given that the Crimea has not been a historic part of the Ukraine I'd say these people get to decide who they want to snuggle with.

Our nation doesn't give aid with no strings attached in places we care about. The HUGE bribes we give Egypt and Israel to play nice is a good example. The Ukraine has been helped to a far greater extent by the Russians than by the Europeans or USofA. This doesn't mean the Russians get to invade (like we did throughout the Caribbean when Reagan was our President- to include illegal support for right wing terror squads in the Iran-Contra scandal) because they want the Ukraine to toe the Russian line. But it does show how important the Ukraine is to the Russians and how much it didn't, until now, matter to the Europeans and 'Mericans.

There was some talk of an aid package for the Ukraine in Congress- how is that going?
 
Continuing economic and political isolation for Russia. No one (government or private individual) will trust Putin for the forseeable even if he withdraws.

He wont' withdraw from Crimea (not that he admits to ever being there to begin with) because it's basically political career suicide back home. If you're going to be a despot, better be seen as a strong, unyielding despot than a weak one.

It will have to be ensured that Russia does not send troops into eastern Ukraine.
That is a very real danger. Look into the Europe subforum on a thread I made about violent protests in Donetsk region. It's one of the 4 Oblasts that have majority russian speaking populations. Donetsk, Kharkiv and Luhanska Oblasts have all seen massive pro-russian demonstrations and you do see the russian flag flying over Ukrainian buildings in those 3 regions.
 
Continuing economic and political isolation for Russia. No one (government or private individual) will trust Putin for the forseeable even if he withdraws.

No one??
 
He wont' withdraw from Crimea (not that he admits to ever being there to begin with) because it's basically political career suicide back home. If you're going to be a despot, better be seen as a strong, unyielding despot than a weak one.

That's the problem. He's put himself in a lose-lose situation in terms of long term outcome no matter the status of Crimea he may feel compelled to double down and cause more damage.

That's happened a lot to me when I lose a few hands of poker.
 
Allegations with no proof.

It's been established and proved multiple times in multiple threads. Must a person add links to every post. If we mention that the CIA toppled the democratic Iranian government in 1953, or that we landed on the moon in 1969, must we provide a link, each time?
 
You state that the "bear is out of the cage" indicting Russia as the destabilizing influence. I have identified the actual destabilizing influence and it is not Russia. It is the USA that is getting the Cold War going again. Good for the Military/Industrial/Corporate complex and armaments profits. Any war is good marketing when you're in the arms business. War is good business and the USA is about business.

Dave, Russia invaded. Last I checked, that is highly destabilizing. The Ukraine was a sovereign nation recognized by the world.
 
It's been established and proved multiple times in multiple threads. Must a person add links to every post. If we mention that the CIA toppled the democratic Iranian government in 1953, or that we landed on the moon in 1969, must we provide a link, each time?

Check the conspiracy theory threads...you may be surprised to find out that we did not in fact land on the moon.

JK
 
Also, if you use to speak Russian or still do speak Russian, can you expect to be invaded in the next few months if this works out for Russia?
 
Check the conspiracy theory threads...you may be surprised to find out that we did not in fact land on the moon.

JK

That's what you think. Anyway, that didn't speak to the point.
 
Back
Top Bottom