• 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!

Should the U.S. recognize the Crimean vote on secession/annexation tomorrow?[W:78]

Should the U.S. recognize the Crimean vote?

  • Yes, the U.S. should

    Votes: 18 40.0%
  • No, the U.S. shouldn't

    Votes: 27 60.0%

  • Total voters
    45
Re: Should the U.S. recognize the Crimean vote on secession/annexation tomorrow?

I wasn't clear, because you're playing dumb and pretending to not understand what I'm saying I've got no interest in talking to you.

Thats fine, but my point still stands. Russia did indeed invite outside observers to Crimea to observe the referndum election and that negates your claim that they didn't want outsiders to observe the election.
 
Re: Should the U.S. recognize the Crimean vote on secession/annexation tomorrow?

Thats fine, but my point still stands. Russia did indeed invite outside observers to Crimea to observe the referndum election and that negates your claim that they didn't want outsiders to observe the election.
"Well, at least now you admit the Obama's White House are liars.

They have stated that the Russia provided pre-marked ballots for the election, an election held under Russia invasion and martial law, in a country that in the past deported and genocided everyone who opposed the Russian government - for which is was announced Russia won the election by 95% - though that had never been the outcome in prior votes on the same question.

There is no credibility in those posting 95% voted to join Russia, but at least you admit - as do nearly all Democrats on the forum, that the Obama White House are liars.
 
Re: Should the U.S. recognize the Crimean vote on secession/annexation tomorrow?

Moderator's Warning:
Both of you are starting to make it personal here. I'd suggest taking a step back before infractions and thread bans occur. I know that this is a sensitive subject to some but that is still not cause enough to not keep it civil.

Oh, so now it's my fault that your weasle tactics to avoid admitting a simple provable fact, failed you? lol

I wasn't clear, because you're playing dumb and pretending to not understand what I'm saying I've got no interest in talking to you.
 
Re: Should the U.S. recognize the Crimean vote on secession/annexation tomorrow?

Imo, Crimea's entire beef with Ukraine is it's unstable, corrupt government and the far right pro-nationalists threat of ethnic cleansing if they gained control. So to see the far right nationalist Svoboda's quick rise in parliament and now second in control of the government is probably a cause for great concern for Crimeans. After years of threats of ethnic cleansing and corrupt government officials...the threat is now barking at Crimea's door. If now is not a good time for Crimea to secceed, then when is?

If the referendum was a choice between two evils, Ukraine corruption or Russia corruption, Crimea picked the one they're most comfortable with....and I can't say I blame them because Ukraine's government is a mess and getting worse, not better. US throwing money at Ukraine isn't going to fix whats wrong with Ukraine and will likely only make it worse.....15 billion....how could it not?

Ukraine, who couldn't get a loan from US or IMF to save it's life before the coup.....after the coup, the US and IMF are tripping over themselves to loan them billions. So one might say that Putin actually helped Ukraine hit the jackpot and come out a winner. Now Ukraine can use the billions they get from IMF to pay their debt to Russia for the gas ....and in doing so...Putin comes out a winner, too. Most of the loan money is just going to get syphoned off by the corrupt Ukraine politicians, oligarchs and russia. The only ones who will really lose and end up paying is the US. Pretty clever of Putin, eh?

The USA made a deal with Russia. We get the massive natural resources of Afghanistan and Russia gets the massive natural resources of the Crimean region of Ukraine.

All the rest is just diversion and noise until the public loses interests as it always does.

Who loses are the people of Afghanistan and the people of Crimea.

Claiming 95% voted to join Russia is absurd on its face and self-proving it is a fraud.
 
Re: Should the U.S. recognize the Crimean vote on secession/annexation tomorrow?

The USA made a deal with Russia. We get the massive natural resources of Afghanistan and Russia gets the massive natural resources of the Crimean region of Ukraine.

All the rest is just diversion and noise until the public loses interests as it always does.

Who loses are the people of Afghanistan and the people of Crimea.

Claiming 95% voted to join Russia is absurd on its face and self-proving it is a fraud.
Imo it is not a surprise to have 95% vote there.
Most of them always felt themselves as Russians.
Also it's not a surprise to have a fair result of 90% in Russia, China, North Korea ect. because there are not 2 party which divide people in 2 sides like we used to see in West.
 
Re: Should the U.S. recognize the Crimean vote on secession/annexation tomorrow?

That's what Mexico has been doing for over forty years now.

Now the Mexican government is dictating to the American government that we should award these Mexican invaders with amnesty and citizenship while at the same time claiming under the "Law of Nations" that these Mexicans who now occupying America are still Mexican citizens who owe their allegiance to Mexico not America.

Maybe the Mexican government should consider asking them to return, then, since it's my understanding that part of our plan includes expecting them to serve time in our military as a condition of amnesty. How can we do that if they are Mexican citizens who owe their allegiance to Mexico, not the US?

Greetings, APACHERAT. :2wave:
 
Re: Should the U.S. recognize the Crimean vote on secession/annexation tomorrow?

"Well, at least now you admit the Obama's White House are liars.

They have stated that the Russia provided pre-marked ballots for the election, an election held under Russia invasion and martial law, in a country that in the past deported and genocided everyone who opposed the Russian government - for which is was announced Russia won the election by 95% - though that had never been the outcome in prior votes on the same question.

There is no credibility in those posting 95% voted to join Russia, but at least you admit - as do nearly all Democrats on the forum, that the Obama White House are liars.

Sorry, but I didn't admit any such thing.
 
Re: Should the U.S. recognize the Crimean vote on secession/annexation tomorrow?

Maybe the Mexican government should consider asking them to return, then, since it's my understanding that part of our plan includes expecting them to serve time in our military as a condition of amnesty. How can we do that if they are Mexican citizens who owe their allegiance to Mexico, not the US?

Greetings, APACHERAT. :2wave:

Mexico may not observe the sovereignty of the United States but they follow every letter of the law under "The Law of Nations" regarding citizenship. >"Son follows the condition of his father."< That Mexico claims that the sons and daughters of Mexican nationals who are born on American soil and who's parents are in the United States illegally are Mexican citizens who owe their loyalty to Mexico. In America these same people because of the misinterpretation of the XIV Amendment are considered to be U.S. citizens aka "anchor babies."

Every six years you can see lines of thousands of "anchor babies" who are classified as being U.S. citizens waiting to vote in Mexico's Presidential election in Los Angeles, Santa Anna, San Bernardino, San Fransisco, and any other American city with a large Mexican anchor baby population.

Just think what would happen if America went to war against Mexico and anchor babies were serving in the U.S. Army and were captured on the battlefield by Mexican forces. These Mexican anchor babies serving in the U.S. military under international law could be tried and shot as traitors to Mexico.
 
Re: Should the U.S. recognize the Crimean vote on secession/annexation tomorrow?

I don't see how you could misunderstand the context that I meant since it was exactly the same as yours....I even used your words..."outside observers". So instead of conceding the point, you're equivocating and actually trying to move the goal posts? Really? oi.

Here's what you did:

1. You claimed that Russia invited international observers to monitor the legitimacy of the election. To support this claim, you cited the Russian invitation of the OSCE and the EU right-wing parties.
2. Wiseone pointed out that a) the Russians themselves did not actually invite anyone, because they had no authority to do so; b) the OSCE could not observe because it is outside of their mandate; and c) the right-wing groups are not qualified to determine the fairness of the referendum.
3. You then confused the OSCE and the right-wingers in your response, perhaps to deliberately obfuscate his legitimate arguments.

The dishonesty in what just happened is pretty self-evident.
 
Re: Should the U.S. recognize the Crimean vote on secession/annexation tomorrow?

Here's what you did:

1. You claimed that Russia invited international observers to monitor the legitimacy of the election. To support this claim, you cited the Russian invitation of the OSCE and the EU right-wing parties.
Yes, I was responding to Wiseone's claim that Russia wouldn't allow any "outside observers" whatsoever. Just to be clear, I said, "outside observers" not "international observers."

In your astute observations, MadLib...did you happen to notice if Wiseman provided any evidence to support his claim that Russia wouldn't allow any "outside observers" in Crimea?

2. Wiseone pointed out that a) the Russians themselves did not actually invite anyone,
And I pointed out that they did and I was right.

because they had no authority to do so;
No, as Wiseman's link pointed out, it was Crimea that didn't have the authority to invite them to observe. Geezus, you don't even know what the issue is and yet here you are pretending to be the grand jury. Perhaps you should've just let well enough alone, Madlib.

b) the OSCE could not observe because it is outside of their mandate; and c) the right-wing groups are not qualified to determine the fairness of the referendum.
Wiseone first said that Russia wouldn't allow ANY outside observers in Crimea and that is what I responded to. He didn't quantify that they had to be "professional' or "qualified" until well after he put his foot in his mouth. He also just assumed the EU far right nationalist parties weren't qualified to be election observers when in fact political parties often do have their own observers and the ones that Putin asked are recognized by the EU as a legitmate political party with all the qualifications neccessary to observe an election just as any other recognized political party would. But not that it matters because the point is and has been from the start of our discussion is that Russia did in fact invite outside observers, period.

3. You then confused the OSCE and the right-wingers in your response, perhaps to deliberately obfuscate his legitimate arguments.
Wiseman deliberatly moving the goal posts from Russia wouldn't allow any "outside observer' then to only "qualifed and professinal international observer" and then to saying Russia did invite outside observers but but but....was obfuscating. But in your zeal to find fault with me, apparently you over looked his glaring fallacy.

The dishonesty in what just happened is pretty self-evident.
There's plenty of self evident dishonesty to go around, MadLib and you and Wiseman are no exception.
 
Last edited:
Re: Should the U.S. recognize the Crimean vote on secession/annexation tomorrow?

Of course she (America) should.

If Obama recognizes an illegal coup to topple a democratically elected government in Kiev...then he should recognize a legally-held (the Crimean government overwhelmingly approved it) referendum.
 
Re: Should the U.S. recognize the Crimean vote on secession/annexation tomorrow?

Sorry, but I didn't admit any such thing.


Then why don't you just post that Crimea was never part of the Ukraine and make up anything else for your anti-Ukraine messages? Claim Ukraine was mass slaughtering Crimeans?

The White House claims Russia provided pre-marked ballots for the counting and that the election was a fraud. You claim the results of the election are accurate, despite they numbers also contradict past elections on the issue.

If you claim the 95% vote result is accurate then you are also claiming the Obama White House is lying.
 
Re: Should the U.S. recognize the Crimean vote on secession/annexation tomorrow?

Of course she (America) should.

If Obama recognizes an illegal coup to topple a democratically elected government in Kiev...then he should recognize a legally-held (the Crimean government overwhelmingly approved it) referendum.

So wrong. Like, completely.

IF they were an undemocratic govt, why would the first thing they'd do is set a date for elections? That's not what undemocratic people do. You're a putin sympathiser.

Calling the referendum legal... is a joke. It was illegal to begin with, but lets say that it wasn't. Even so, you had voter intimidation. You had massive disenfranchizement because numerous tartars didn't get their voting cards so they could go and vote. You had the crimean parliament, who was occupied by Spetnats forces, declare that crimea is independent before the referendum... and to top all of that, the referendum, the ballot itself, had just 2 options:

a) join russia now
b) return crimea to 1992 constitution and status -> i.e. a 2 step process to join Russia.

Pathetic. No option to decide to stay with Ukraine. That's not legal or democratic or anything. Nothing about it is. And you support this?
 
Re: Should the U.S. recognize the Crimean vote on secession/annexation tomorrow?

Then why don't you just post that Crimea was never part of the Ukraine and make up anything else for your anti-Ukraine messages? Claim Ukraine was mass slaughtering Crimeans?

The White House claims Russia provided pre-marked ballots for the counting and that the election was a fraud. You claim the results of the election are accurate, despite they numbers also contradict past elections on the issue.

If you claim the 95% vote result is accurate then you are also claiming the Obama White House is lying.

Sorry, I didn't claim or say any such thing.
 
Re: Should the U.S. recognize the Crimean vote on secession/annexation tomorrow?

`
`
Unless it can be proved, to an international tribunal, that there was undue and flagrant abuses which affected the vote, we as a nation, should support the vox populi and recognize the Crimean vote as it stands.
 
Last edited:
Re: Should the U.S. recognize the Crimean vote on secession/annexation tomorrow?[W:78

The U.S. has already said it will not, but do you think it should?

The only concern is people might feel intimidated, but I honestly doubt that is the case.

If the U.S. supports democracy, it should recognize this vote. Granted, the U.S. government doesn't exactly have a positive view of secession I would imagine...

I support recognizing the vote. If they vote to join Russia, let them. If not, then we have to figure out what is next.
I think that would lend us the moral authority to force Russia to back off.




What the USA recognizes or doesn't recognize will have zero effect on the situation in Crimea.




I don't believe that Russia is going to back off.

Who is going to make Russia back off?

The majority of the people (58.32%) in Crimea are ethnic Russians.
 
Re: Should the U.S. recognize the Crimean vote on secession/annexation tomorrow?[W:78

What the USA recognizes or doesn't recognize will have zero effect on the situation in Crimea.




I don't believe that Russia is going to back off.

Who is going to make Russia back off?

The majority of the people (58.32%) in Crimea are ethnic Russians.

Stalin's purge of non-Russians from Crimea was incomplete and non-Russians tend to have more children. This was a corrective action to stomp down Muslims and non-Russians before they regained the majority they had before Stalin.

I understand your messages are that of a Stalinist, so am surprised you didn't claim that ethnic Russians (since you also adamantly believe is division of people on ethnicity) were 95% of the population of Crimea, like you claim that was the actual vote total.
 
Re: Should the U.S. recognize the Crimean vote on secession/annexation tomorrow?

`
`
Unless it can be proved, to an international tribunal, that there was undue and flagrant abuses which affected the vote, we as a nation, should support the vox populi and recognize the Crimean vote as it stands.

Three cheers for genocide and the white race! White people of the world need to keep sticking together like you say.
 
Re: Should the U.S. recognize the Crimean vote on secession/annexation tomorrow?

Three cheers for genocide and the white race! White people of the world need to keep sticking together like you say.

I think I made myself quite clear. Given the circumstances, unless a legal entity files a world court suit, and can prove there were crimes associated with the voting, the US, a constitutional republic, should recognize the will of the Crimean voter.
 
Re: Should the U.S. recognize the Crimean vote on secession/annexation tomorrow?

Then why don't you just post that Crimea was never part of the Ukraine and make up anything else for your anti-Ukraine messages? Claim Ukraine was mass slaughtering Crimeans?

The White House claims Russia provided pre-marked ballots for the counting and that the election was a fraud. You claim the results of the election are accurate, despite they numbers also contradict past elections on the issue.

If you claim the 95% vote result is accurate then you are also claiming the Obama White House is lying.
Personally, I think they're all lying.
 
Re: Should the U.S. recognize the Crimean vote on secession/annexation tomorrow?

Simpleχity;1063040025 said:
It seems to me that this referendum violates numerous Articles of the Constitution of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea

Article 1
1. The Autonomous Republic of Crimea shall be an integral part of Ukraine and it shall solve, within the powers conferred upon it by the Constitution of Ukraine, any and all matters coming within its terms of reference.

Article 2
2. In the event where the provisions of the statutory acts of the Supreme Rada of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the acts of the Council of Ministers of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea should contradict the Constitution of Ukraine and/or Ukrainian laws, the provisions of the Constitution of Ukraine and Ukrainian laws shall prevail.

Article 28
The statutory acts of the Supreme Rada of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the Council of Ministers of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea upon any and all matters regarding the powers of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea shall conform to the Constitution of Ukraine and Ukrainian laws.


There is also the matter of the Crimean port city Sevastopol. According to the Ukrainian Constitution, the city of Sevastopol is classified as an "independent city" on sovereign Ukrainian (not Crimean) land.

With the Crimean Republic being a constituent part of the Ukraine and the Ukraine no longer have a Constitution since the overthrow of the constitutionally elected President, it seems to me that any argument which uses appeals to Constitution becomes invalid.
 
Re: Should the U.S. recognize the Crimean vote on secession/annexation tomorrow?

Yes, I was responding to Wiseone's claim that Russia wouldn't allow any "outside observers" whatsoever. Just to be clear, I said, "outside observers" not "international observers."
More obfuscation. You know that's what he meant; the terms are used interchangeably.
In your astute observations, MadLib...did you happen to notice if Wiseman provided any evidence to support his claim that Russia wouldn't allow any "outside observers" in Crimea?
Because, other than Russian state propaganda, there is no evidence to suggest that Russia allowed qualified observers.
And I pointed out that they did and I was right.
'Themselves" is the qualifying word in that statement. You'll get no argument from me that the Crimean regional government is Putin's puppet, but that's still Crimea inviting them, not Russia.
No, as Wiseman's link pointed out, it was Crimea that didn't have the authority to invite them to observe. Geezus, you don't even know what the issue is and yet here you are pretending to be the grand jury. Perhaps you should've just let well enough alone, Madlib.
Same difference. Either way, that does not count as a legitimate invitation. :2wave:
Wiseone first said that Russia wouldn't allow ANY outside observers in Crimea and that is what I responded to. He didn't quantify that they had to be "professional' or "qualified" until well after he put his foot in his mouth.
It's obvious that he didn't mean any random idiot who could be invited to join and it would count as an "outside observer."
He also just assumed the EU far right nationalist parties weren't qualified to be election observers when in fact political parties often do have their own observers and the ones that Putin asked are recognized by the EU as a legitmate political party with all the qualifications neccessary to observe an election just as any other recognized political party would. [/B]
Since when did EU political parties have the qualifications to observe an election, especially one that takes place outside of the Eurozone?
 
Re: Should the U.S. recognize the Crimean vote on secession/annexation tomorrow?

More obfuscation. You know that's what he meant; the terms are used interchangeably.

Because, other than Russian state propaganda, there is no evidence to suggest that Russia allowed qualified observers.

'Themselves" is the qualifying word in that statement. You'll get no argument from me that the Crimean regional government is Putin's puppet, but that's still Crimea inviting them, not Russia.

Same difference. Either way, that does not count as a legitimate invitation. :2wave:

It's obvious that he didn't mean any random idiot who could be invited to join and it would count as an "outside observer."

Since when did EU political parties have the qualifications to observe an election, especially one that takes place outside of the Eurozone?

Well a few points.

1) The Russians would never allow outside observers into the Crimea to watch over the election, it simply cannot be negotiated for....


The Russians invited outside observers to monitor the Crimea election.....



NBC: "....There are 135 independent observers from 23 countries in Crimea to monitor the referendum vote scheduled for Sunday, in which citizens will decide whether to join Russia or remain an autonomous region in Ukraine.....
Referendum Monitor Criticizes U.S. Involvement in Crimea - NBC News


Reuters: Mar. 15 - International monitors invited by Russia arrive in Crimea to observe Sunday's referendum to join Russia. Sarah Toms reports...
International observers arrive for Crimea referendum | Video | Reuters.com


EuroNews: "...Russia and Crimea’s pro-Russian parliament have both backed election monitors but the OSCE does not plan to send any, judging Sunday’s referendum illegal...."
http://www.euronews.com/2014/03/15/thwarted-crimea-mission-of-osce-observers/


Just thought you should know. :2wave:
 
Last edited:
Re: Should the U.S. recognize the Crimean vote on secession/annexation tomorrow?

The Russians invited outside observers to monitor the Crimea election.....



NBC: "....There are 135 independent observers from 23 countries in Crimea to monitor the referendum vote scheduled for Sunday, in which citizens will decide whether to join Russia or remain an autonomous region in Ukraine.....
Referendum Monitor Criticizes U.S. Involvement in Crimea - NBC News


Reuters: Mar. 15 - International monitors invited by Russia arrive in Crimea to observe Sunday's referendum to join Russia. Sarah Toms reports...
International observers arrive for Crimea referendum | Video | Reuters.com


EuroNews: "...Russia and Crimea’s pro-Russian parliament have both backed election monitors but the OSCE does not plan to send any, judging Sunday’s referendum illegal...."
http://www.euronews.com/2014/03/15/thwarted-crimea-mission-of-osce-observers/


Just thought you should know. :2wave:

When I said observers, I meant people who were actually professionals at this kind of work and who come in without bias toward the outcome. I did not mean folks like the guy in your first link where he quite clearly supports Russia move here and thinks that Crimea should be part of Russia. I did not mean guys like the person in your second link where he literally says the majority of Crimeans will support Russia and that they need to send Kiev a message. And I didn't mean your third link where there's been a lot of conflicting information about whether the OSCE was invited or not and if they were invited why were they stopped at the border?

OSCE observers barred from entering Crimea:polish minister | Reuters
 
Re: Should the U.S. recognize the Crimean vote on secession/annexation tomorrow?

The Russians invited outside observers to monitor the Crimea election.....



NBC: "....There are 135 independent observers from 23 countries in Crimea to monitor the referendum vote scheduled for Sunday, in which citizens will decide whether to join Russia or remain an autonomous region in Ukraine.....
Referendum Monitor Criticizes U.S. Involvement in Crimea - NBC News


Reuters: Mar. 15 - International monitors invited by Russia arrive in Crimea to observe Sunday's referendum to join Russia. Sarah Toms reports...
International observers arrive for Crimea referendum | Video | Reuters.com


EuroNews: "...Russia and Crimea’s pro-Russian parliament have both backed election monitors but the OSCE does not plan to send any, judging Sunday’s referendum illegal...."
http://www.euronews.com/2014/03/15/thwarted-crimea-mission-of-osce-observers/


Just thought you should know. :2wave:

When I said observers, I meant people who were actually professionals at this kind of work and who come in without bias toward the outcome. I did not mean folks like the guy in your first link where he quite clearly supports Russia move here and thinks that Crimea should be part of Russia. I did not mean guys like the person in your second link where he literally says the majority of Crimeans will support Russia and that they need to send Kiev a message. And I didn't mean your third link where there's been a lot of conflicting information about whether the OSCE was invited or not and if they were invited why were they stopped at the border?

OSCE observers barred from entering Crimea:polish minister | Reuters
 
Back
Top Bottom