Connection ErrorBad RequestSession ExpiredSign in requiredForbiddenNot FoundToo Many RequestsServer ErrorBad GatewayService UnavailableGateway TimeoutHTTP Version Not Supported
Session Expired
Your session has expired. Please log in to continue.
Sign in required
You need an account to do that. Sign in or create one — it only takes a minute.
Request Failed
We encountered an issue while processing your request.
Please check your internet connection and try again.
Error Details:
Share Link
Posts from Discussions, post-mortems, analysis, inflated egos, and all that jazz.
I can't say anything about the provocateur, but if y2noob is indeed one of the "green men," that wouldn't be surprising. His communication style reveals traits typical of someone in law enforcement.
Crimea made its choice a long time ago, and so did I as a resident of Crimea. It's amusing to read posts from sick people; tell them to call their sister.
I may be sick, but not because of Crimea. And your choice is your right, but you are not Crimea. When a person speaks for the entire island, region, or country, they are either officially authorized to say something, or they are seriously delusional. And the big question is, who is more seriously and hopelessly ill:D
I may be ill, but not because of Crimea. And your choice is your right, but you are not Crimea. When a person speaks on behalf of an entire island, region, province, country, or people, etc., they are either officially authorized to say something, or they are clearly delusional. And it's a big question who is more seriously and hopelessly ill:D
The results of the referendum speak for themselves.
Watching the movie Haven of the Damned made me think of something interesting. Why build a bunch of psychiatric clinics and subject those who have gone beyond the norm to violence? You can simply create an illusion of freedom for them, convince them of their superiority, give them hope for a bright future, and instill faith that everything is as it should be. Why fences with barbed wire? Why close the borders? Everything is fine. The patients are already under complete control. And they are ready not only to defend their faith in the created reality but also to kill for it. Moreover, many people want to join this reality.
u2noob
7 years ago
Auto-translated
It’s amusing when neighbors offer advice on how to arrange furniture in your home.
Petya, let's assume for a moment that it makes sense to communicate with you. Answer a couple of questions with simple answer options – either yes or no.
1. If the overwhelming majority of the population of a given territory directly states that it wants to secede from a particular state, is the opinion of the overwhelming majority of the population legitimate and should it be implemented?
2. Do you acknowledge that the overwhelming majority of the population of Crimea voted in a referendum to secede from Ukraine and join Russia?
In other words, do you recognize the democratic principles of self-determination of any society?
Petya, let’s hypothetically assume that it makes sense to communicate with you. Answer a couple of questions.
1. If the majority of the population of a territory directly states that it wants to secede from a state, is the opinion of the majority legitimate and should it be implemented? 2. Do you acknowledge that the majority of the population of Crimea voted in a referendum to secede from Ukraine and join Russia?
In other words, do you acknowledge the democratic principles of self-determination of a society?
I read one text, clicked "quote," and started writing, and now I'm looking at a different text. In other words, you're just talking nonsense. Now, when I reply, it will be the third one.)
In the case of Crimea, the situation you describe did not exist; many things were decided by the "little green men," cellulite-ridden women, and other fanatical Soviets. But the critical factor was the surrender of the local elites; without this, they would have quickly forced all the "Sharikovs" into a kennel. It is also necessary to take into account the factor of the local population being stirred up by propaganda and myths about a better life, some kind of spirit, and "traditional values," as well as the deliberate resettlement of Crimea by Russians for many decades, which continues to this day. That is, it was well done from both above and below.
In general, one should look at the legislation of the country to which this territory belongs. And only from this point of view should one reason about legitimacy. Let's say, hypothetically, I think that Kaliningrad would not vote for the Russian Federation, Karelia may dream of Finland, the Kuril Islands dream of Japan, Lviv dreams of Poland, etc., but who will let them. I call all this wishful thinking, which is either implemented legally or not.
Democracy is a term that is used when it is convenient, and not where it actually exists.
P.S. - regarding the majority, there is no reliable or relevant information on this subject, and we will probably never know the truth about Crimea. If you need short answers, then 1. Yes, I suppose. 2. No, I do not acknowledge it. The procedures for secession take years of preparation and deliberation, not 2 weeks of chaos.
I asked specific questions with clear and straightforward answer options. Either yes or no. Instead, you write anything and everything, except for direct answers to direct questions.
One more time.
First question: If a territory belongs to a specific state, does the population of that territory, along with the territory itself, have the right to secede from that specific state within your internal system?
Second question: Do you acknowledge that the majority of the population of Crimea voted in a referendum to secede from Ukraine and join Russia?
Aha. I saw the edits to your message. So, you also edit...)))
That is, in your opinion, the results of the Crimean referendum were completely falsified?
Piterius
7 years ago
Auto-translated
Well, listen, conduct testing on students. What a load of nonsense! Will you answer yes or no to my questions? Yes or no?
Added 10 minutes ago MerlinTheMagician
I asked specific questions with clear and concise answer options. Either yes or no. In response, you write anything but direct answers to direct questions. Once again. First question. If any territory is part of a specific state, does the population of that territory, along with the territory itself, have the right to secede from that specific state within your internal system of coordinates? Second question. Do you acknowledge that the majority of the population of Crimea voted in the referendum to secede from Ukraine and join Russia?
Yes. I saw the edits to your message. So, you're also editing...))) That is, in your opinion, the results of the Crimean referendum were completely falsified?
Not edits, but additions! At the bottom, not in the text! The entire election process in the Russian Federation or under the control of the Russian Federation, including ours, has long been a fact of the past – essentially a sham. Whether completely or not, I have no reliable data to draw conclusions on this topic. For a revolution, the votes of a critical mass are enough, and that's 10-15%. The rest sat in their holes and watched what would happen next.
There are two rules of classic manipulation: create a threat and offer a solution, and the brain automatically accepts it. I always remember with amusement how Джавдет wrote to me about trains of Bandera supporters heading to Crimea to kill Crimeans:D He wrote to me, saying that if I interfered, he would take action. An adult, we had a good relationship, we met several times in person, I bought a painting from him, and then suddenly – the person was replaced! How to solve the threat? By joining. I assume that some of the undecided people went to vote. But was it a large or small number overall? Who knows? And most importantly, it's just a classic bait, which Soviets fall for.
Another question. Are you familiar with the results of the all-Union referendum of 1991 on the preservation of the USSR, in particular, with the results of the expression of will of the citizens of the Ukrainian SSR? Was everything falsified there too?
And a couple more points, if we talk about the formal side of the issue (that is, about the laws of various countries). The results of World War II were accepted by all countries. The territorial boundaries as a result of World War II are inviolable (which, for example, Japan is now trying to disavow).
There is no point in even talking about the statehood of Ukraine - historically, there has never been such a separate state as Ukraine. The Ukrainian SSR, therefore, is part of the state of the USSR.
Regarding the territory of Crimea (the emphasis is precisely on it), according to the final terms of the Kuchuk-Kainarji peace treaty, the territory of Crimea was annexed to the Russian Empire in 1783 by agreement between the Russian and Ottoman Empires (as a result of military operations - as previously, as a result of military operations, the Crimean Khanate became a vassal of the Ottoman Empire, and then it lost its independence and became part of the Russian Empire). There is not a single word about Ukraine there.
In fact, all this has absolutely no significance in the scale of the Universe. And personally, I don't care at all what flag is flying over what territory at any given time. In fact, I believe that humanity in its current form should be eliminated...
But since you are so passionate about this "pseudo-statehood topic," I decided to add a little fuel to the fire, just in case it dies out - what will we use to keep warm then?
Another question. Are you familiar with the results of the all-Union referendum of 1991 on the preservation of the USSR, in particular with the results of the expression of will of the citizens of the Ukrainian SSR? Was that also falsified? And a couple more points, if we talk about the formal side of the issue (that is, about the laws of various countries). The results of World War II were accepted by all countries. The territorial boundaries following World War II are inviolable (which, for example, Japan is now trying to disavow). There is no point in even talking about the statehood of Ukraine - historically, there has never been such a separate state as Ukraine. The Ukrainian SSR, therefore, is part of the state of the USSR. As for the territory of Crimea (and the emphasis here is precisely on it), according to the final terms of the Kuchuk-Kainarji peace treaty, the territory of Crimea was annexed to the Russian Empire in 1783 by agreement between the Russian and Ottoman Empires (as a result of military actions - as previously, as a result of military actions, the Crimean Khanate became a vassal of the Ottoman Empire, and then it lost its independence and became part of the Russian Empire). There is not a single word about Ukraine there.
This is all forcing a square peg into a round hole. Everything that was, is gone. The egg always grows up and starts teaching the chicken what was, what wasn't, how deep to dig, a bunch of facts and non-facts, propaganda, and all sorts of nonsense. It's all such a rotten bore. There are rules and regulations that are agreed upon to be observed at the present time, and this is the main sign of development. If you are involved in jurisprudence, you also know that any new norm cancels out the old one, while the old one exists informationally, read it from beginning to end, enjoy it, admire it, reminisce - but it no longer WORKS. After World War II, a certain world order emerged in a part of the planet. At the same time, regional orders also emerged, which no one has canceled. The collapse of the USSR did not happen bloodily or forcibly, but naturally, in the process of which borders were fixed and new regional orders were formalized, in particular, the Budapest Memorandum on the disarmament of Ukraine from nuclear weapons. They lived normally in this order, influencing each other in a civilized way. And what suddenly happened? Someone suddenly remembered - but everything was divided incorrectly! Where is my club! That's it, it's over. Civilization ended at this point. I do not deny the right to use force, but this is already a new order, or rather, a long-forgotten old one - a new redistribution through lawlessness. Let's see what all this will end with.
There's no point in even talking about the statehood of Ukraine – historically, there has never been a separate state called Ukraine. The Ukrainian SSR was, therefore, part of the USSR.
Listen, enough with this imperial nonsense. That's what you read in Soviet sources, and you don't know anything else and don't want to know anything else. Just accept the fact that the state you live in is as old as Ukraine. Before that, there was the USSR, and before that, the Russian Empire, and even before that, the Muscovite state. Russia began with the Muscovite state, not with Russia or Russians, and it was the size of a swamp. Ukraine began with Kievan Rus' and with the tribes of Polyans, Drevlians, and Severians, not with Ukrainians and Ukraine. Even in Soviet textbooks, the first mentions of Ukraine date back to the 12th century; I participated in a history Olympiad in 1990, and I had such a question. Peter I invented Russia and Russians in 1721. At different times, Ukrainians called their state by different names; there were many uprisings and liberation movements; it was of different sizes in different periods, but Ukrainians have lived here for 900 years. And let them decide for themselves what to call the territory they currently possess.
And you know very well what the Muscovite state was doing – conquering and enslaving. And it's still doing that. Who is to blame the Chekists for squandering the USSR? Who but themselves? Why are you sticking up for them, you pathetic imperialist? You won't get anything out of it, except for "a feeling of importance and belonging":D
