Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Claim: 'Kyiv is the mother of all Russian Cities'

Options
24567…36

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    Pherekydes
    Registered Users Posts: 16,115 ✭✭✭✭Pherekydes


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    So if Cork voted to secede from Ireland, the rest of the country should have no say in the matter?

    Wouldn't the rest vote overwhelmingly in favour of secession? :pac:


  • Options
    #33
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,792 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    Pherekydes wrote: »
    Wouldn't the rest vote overwhelmingly in favour of secession? :pac:

    Quite likely, but we should at least be asked.


  • Options
    #34
    Genghiz Cohen
    Registered Users Posts: 7,182 ✭✭✭Genghiz Cohen


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    So if Cork voted to secede from Ireland, the rest of the country should have no say in the matter?

    If only... They'd have my vote!


  • Options
    #35
    endacl
    Registered Users Posts: 22,239 ✭✭✭✭endacl


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    So if Cork voted to secede from Ireland, the rest of the country should have no say in the matter?

    Are they still in?!? You'd never know it to talk to them...


  • Options
    #36
    Turtwig
    Registered Users Posts: 26,578 ✭✭✭✭Turtwig


    A better example would be if Irish troops invaded a Catholic dominated part of Northern Ireland. Held a referendum and that referendum declared that geographic location was now part of the Irish Republic.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    Brian Shanahan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,232 ✭✭✭Brian Shanahan


    recedite wrote: »
    I don't claim to know it all, but I have my principles, and those principles say that the land belongs to the people who live there.
    I apply the same principle to Crimea as I apply to Scotland, N.Ireland, Palestine or anywhere else. Let the people vote themselves. There is an assumption that the referendum will be rigged which is mere propaganda.

    Fine then, apply it. Write to the Russian ambassador expressing your shock and outrage at his country's illegal and highly Nazi occupation of a foreign country, and also at the rigged and blatantly falacious "referendum" his president is ordering to be carried out in order to put the slightest veneer of repsectability on the invasion.


  • Options
    #38
    Brian Shanahan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,232 ✭✭✭Brian Shanahan


    recedite wrote: »
    Look at this logically;
    Putin knows the referendum will go his way. There is no need to rig a result when you already have an overwhelming majority. He also knows that immediately afterwards, Nato countries will try to discredit the result.

    That's not looking at it logically. That's looking at it in justification of a preferred outcome, viz. that the only logical and moral outcome is that Putin get's his way.


  • Options
    #39
    Richard
    Registered Users Posts: 2,439 ✭✭✭Richard


    recedite wrote: »
    Of course it doesn't. You raise an interesting parallel though. What if De Valera had taken away the status of English as an official national language within weeks of declaring a Republic here?

    It wouldn't have happened, at the very least because there wouldn't have been enough decent Irish speakers to run the country alone.


  • Options
    #40
    Hotblack Desiato
    Registered Users Posts: 34,060 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    Irish was a requirement for entry into the civil service until the late 70s.

    Fingal County Council are certainly not competent to be making decisions about the most important piece of infrastructure on the island. They need to stick to badly designed cycle lanes and deciding on whether Mrs Murphy can have her kitchen extension.



  • Options
    #41
    Sulla Felix
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,442 ✭✭✭Sulla Felix


    I'm surprised they're even bothering with the paper thin covering of attempted legitimacy they're aiming for. They really don't need to. The west took a military response off the table. Putin isn't afraid of economic sanctions because 1) they're not fit for purpose and 2) they'll provide ample fuel for further nationalistic torch lighting.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    Turtwig
    Registered Users Posts: 26,578 ✭✭✭✭Turtwig


    Even if Russia were severely hurt by sanctions and the EU only marginally hurt it's the power of the citizens that decide the outcome. Put simply, Putin can squash any unrest with an iron fist, whereas in the EU any little grievances to our lives and its citizens would protest like mad. Crucially EU Politicians would likely cede to their demands. Russia has all the cards here. Putin's game is a little disconcerting but it can't be stopped without massive conflict either. What Putin want's Putin gets. Unless the West is willing to ensure some hardship to its way of life.


  • Options
    #43
    recedite
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,993 ✭✭✭✭recedite


    Jernal wrote: »
    A better example would be if Irish troops invaded a Catholic dominated part of Northern Ireland. Held a referendum and that referendum declared that geographic location was now part of the Irish Republic.
    That was actually on the agenda at one time. Exercise Armageddon.
    Would you have objected to that as a matter of principle?
    Or just because it was unworkable, the Irish army being a rubbish army at the time. I think it was predicted that they would have lasted 5 or 6 hours before the backlash.


  • Options
    #44
    robindch
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,399 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    recedite wrote: »
    robindch wrote: »
    The vote is almost certain to be rigged; voters are almost certain to be intimidated or otherwise disenfranchised.
    Ok this is the mantra being put about by Nato among others.
    The BBC has reported a few interesting tit-bits on its live feed:
    • Kiev hasn't provided Crimea with the voters' register, so Crimea is cobbling together its own one from sources unknown.
    • Ethnic Tatars appear to be boycotting the vote entirely.
    • The OCSE is not observing the election, as is virtually nobody else. Even the Russian parliament has managed to send eight observers.
    • Unlike constitutional plebiscites in most countries, this vote appears to be open to anybody, even holders of Russian passports.
    • The Russian military has seized a Ukrainian village north of Crimea in order to "to protect a gas distribution station from "terrorist attacks"".
    • There seems to have been an online voting website, but it's offline at the moment.
    • As an aside, although Russia is encouraging the secession of Crimea from Ukraine, within Russia itself, encouraging secession is a serious criminal offence.
    • The Russian Navy are throwing grenades into the water near Ukrainian navy ships and the grounds around a Ukrainian marine base has been mined


  • Options
    #45
    robindch
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,399 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    recedite wrote: »
    robindch wrote: »
    The vote is almost certain to be rigged; voters are almost certain to be intimidated or otherwise disenfranchised.
    Ok this is the mantra being put about by Nato among others.
    The Crimean authorities announce that 474,137 (1,724,563 - 1,250,426, message at 0:00) votes were cast in Sevastopol, a city which at the end of 2013, was reported by Crimean authorities to have 385,462 people of voting age. NTV reported a different total vote count of 1,524,563.

    If the earlier figure is the right one, then that indicates that Sevastopol produced around 25% more votes that it had voters.


  • Options
    #46
    recedite
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,993 ✭✭✭✭recedite


    robindch wrote: »
    If the earlier figure is the right one, then that indicates that Sevastopol produced around 25% more votes that it had voters.
    Well there are various possibilities, people may have moved back to Crimea from other parts for reasons of personal security and political affiliation. For example a large proportion of the Berkut police went there.
    As an analogy, it is historical fact that the protestant population in what is now Republic of Ireland suffered a drastic reduction in numbers in 1922 with many relocating to N. Ireland or Britain. You may say these political migrants have no right to vote, but that is a subjective opinion. IMO long term residency should not be a prerequisite to voting rights in such a situation.

    Apart from that, is anyone seriously suggesting that the vote could have gone any other way? Even without counting the votes of refugees, you would be looking at maybe 80% majority instead of 96.6%? Either way it is an overwhelming democratic majority. You are clutching at straws in pursuing this line of argument.

    If you believe the Crimeans do not have the right to self determination, and that the referendum is illegal because it was held without the permission of the nationalist govt. in Kiev, then by all means argue that point.


  • Options
    #47
    Brian Shanahan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,232 ✭✭✭Brian Shanahan


    recedite wrote: »
    Well there are various possibilities, people may have moved back to Crimea from other parts for reasons of personal security and political affiliation. For example a large proportion of the Berkut police went there.
    As an analogy, it is historical fact that the protestant population in what is now Republic of Ireland suffered a drastic reduction in numbers in 1922 with many relocating to N. Ireland or Britain. You may say these political migrants have no right to vote, but that is a subjective opinion. IMO long term residency should not be a prerequisite to voting rights in such a situation.

    Apart from that, is anyone seriously suggesting that the vote could have gone any other way? Even without counting the votes of refugees, you would be looking at maybe 80% majority instead of 96.6%? Either way it is an overwhelming democratic majority. You are clutching at straws in pursuing this line of argument.

    If you believe the Crimeans do not have the right to self determination, and that the referendum is illegal because it was held without the permission of the nationalist govt. in Kiev, then by all means argue that point.

    Or we take the 99.999999999% probability at face value, somebody was stuffing ballots, and the boxes from which the votes were counted were filld before the "referendum" happened.

    Seriously, who with any knowledge of demographics would believe that a city in an area wracked with tensions and the possibility of violence on a mass scale would put an extra 1/4 on its population in three months? Its not credible.


  • Options
    #48
    robindch
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,399 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    recedite wrote: »
    Well there are various possibilities, people may have moved back to Crimea from other parts for reasons of personal security and political affiliation. For example a large proportion of the Berkut police went there.
    It is possible that some Berkut escaped there after the massacre in Maidan for which they were largely responsible. I don't think, however, that there were 90,000 of them.
    recedite wrote: »
    Apart from that, is anyone seriously suggesting that the vote could have gone any other way? Even without counting the votes of refugees, you would be looking at maybe 80% majority instead of 96.6%?
    And if you remove from your 80% figure, the 25-30% or so of ethnic Ukrainians some or all of who may have boycotted the election, plus the 10-15% of Tatars who almost certainly did boycott it, you're potentially down to as little as 35% approval.
    recedite wrote: »
    Either way it is an overwhelming democratic majority.
    Nope, it's not - see above. And that's not allowing for corruption in the collation and counting process which was generally unmonitored. I've quoted evidence above from the Crimeans themselves which shows that there may be as many as 200,000 votes "missing".
    recedite wrote: »
    If you believe the Crimeans do not have the right to self determination, and that the referendum is illegal because it was held without the permission of the nationalist govt. in Kiev, then by all means argue that point.
    I am in general favour of self-determination and there's a process by which this can be done via the Ukrainian constitution - the entire country gets to vote on the proposal which seems fair enough to me.

    What the Russians can't do, however, is -- on the process side -- manufacture a manifestly false pretext against a weak, potentially unstable country, then invade it, then deny they've invaded it, spread around on their own propaganda channels the most dreadful load of offensive nonsense imaginable, then at gunpoint, appoint their own man in charge of the regional legislature, have him push through a snap, illegal and unfair (status quo was not an option) referendum which was almost certainly rigged and which almost nobody recognises, then spend a day or two as an independent country. And then -- on the result side -- discard any future ability to self-determine by becoming a federal republic within a country which will never allow another referendum.


  • Options
    #49
    recedite
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,993 ✭✭✭✭recedite


    robindch wrote: »
    ..discard any future ability to self-determine by becoming a federal republic within a country which will never allow another referendum.
    I agree with this last point, but the Maidan crowd had their chance to unify Ukraine and they blew it with their uber-nationalistic rhetoric. They pushed Crimea (and possibly the eastern regions) into Putin's embrace, from which the Crimeans may eventually find they cannot escape. Withdrawing the status of Russian as an official language was particularly stupid.

    In fairness we did the same 100 years ago, we had our chance and we blew it. John Redmond may well have had the ability to create a united Ireland in the long term, but after 1916 the attitude of the people polarized, North and South.

    There is an interesting psychological flaw in peoples minds which causes moderates to back extremists when the chips are down. The fear of extremists in the opposite camp gaining control drives people much more than the desire to see moderates in their own camp gain power. You can see it in N. Ireland politics all the time; the average citizen is a moderate, yet SF and the DUP get most of the votes.
    Moderates think that if they vote for extremists on their own side, that will counter-balance the extremists on the other side. But it always leads to grief... the hazards of the belief.


  • Options
    #50
    Sulla Felix
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,442 ✭✭✭Sulla Felix


    robindch wrote: »
    What the Russians can't do, however, is -- on the process side -- manufacture a manifestly false pretext against a weak, potentially unstable country, then invade it, then deny they've invaded it, spread around on their own propaganda channels the most dreadful load of offensive nonsense imaginable, then at gunpoint, appoint their own man in charge of the regional legislature, have him push through a snap, illegal and unfair (status quo was not an option) referendum which was almost certainly rigged and which almost nobody recognises, then spend a day or two as an independent country. And then -- on the result side -- discard any future ability to self-determine by becoming a federal republic within a country which will never allow another referendum.
    But they can. They are. There's nothing stopping them. The west has taken the military option off the table. The EU can't impose any meaningful sanctions, not unless someone magics up a 100bn m3 of natural gas a year in the medium to long term. The US probably will especially with the '08 china/russia bond talks still bugging the shít out of the hawks but they'll be less effective without the EU backing them up.


  • Options
    #51
    robindch
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,399 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    Sulla Felix wrote: »
    robindch wrote: »
    What the Russians can't do, however, is -- on the process side -- manufacture a manifestly false pretext against a weak, potentially unstable country, then invade it, then deny they've invaded it, spread around on their own propaganda channels the most dreadful load of offensive nonsense imaginable, then at gunpoint, appoint their own man in charge of the regional legislature, have him push through a snap, illegal and unfair (status quo was not an option) referendum which was almost certainly rigged and which almost nobody recognises, then spend a day or two as an independent country. And then -- on the result side -- discard any future ability to self-determine by becoming a federal republic within a country which will never allow another referendum.
    But they can. They are. There's nothing stopping them.
    Should have been clearer -- they can't do the things I've listed and still expect to be believed again any time soon.

    Perhaps the most beautiful part of Ukraine has been stolen at gunpoint by a rich, aggressive country, from a poor, peaceful one. My feelings for the conduct of the Russian state (never all that good) have sunk a long way beneath contempt.

    Sadly, the theft has divided the ex-pat Russian community too and those of us with links to it. The majority are against it -- having access to media not controlled by Putin -- but a significant minority have joined with his crude, hooting jingoism, much to the disgust of everybody else. One friend of mine has had some very silent breakfast with his missus, while another has said as well that Russian speakers now distinguish themselves by nation and affiliation, when they never did that before.

    The Wars of the Yugoslav Secession were nasty affairs and Putin's open encouragement of Russian ethnic nationalism, backed by military force, is the very last thing that this unstable, divided continent needs.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    Hotblack Desiato
    Registered Users Posts: 34,060 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    So, when is Vladimir the champion of democracy and self-determination going to run a referendum in Chechnya? Anyone?

    Fingal County Council are certainly not competent to be making decisions about the most important piece of infrastructure on the island. They need to stick to badly designed cycle lanes and deciding on whether Mrs Murphy can have her kitchen extension.



  • Options
    #53
    Cabaal
    Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators, Regional South East Moderators Posts: 28,468 Mod ✭✭✭✭Cabaal


    ninja900 wrote: »
    So, when is Vladimir the champion of democracy and self-determination going to run a referendum in Chechnya? Anyone?

    2000 and never


  • Options
    #54
    recedite
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,993 ✭✭✭✭recedite


    robindch wrote: »
    The Wars of the Yugoslav Secession were nasty affairs
    They were, because nobody stepped in to contain them. Towards the end, Nato bombed Serbia to ensure the complete secession of the southern Kosovo region.
    Thankfully civil war has now been averted in Crimea/Ukraine.

    People in Crimea knew when they voted to join the Russian Federation that it was a one way ticket. They are not stupid. They also knew their wages and standard of living would rise within a short period of time.
    They picked up their ballot papers and they made their choice.


  • Options
    #55
    Brian Shanahan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,232 ✭✭✭Brian Shanahan


    recedite wrote: »
    Thankfully civil war has now been averted in Crimea/Ukraine.

    Yes, by a very Chamberlainian capitulation on the part of the West, I wonder will we see Call me Dave or Gideon getting off a plane from Moscow in the near future waving a scrap of paper and declaring "peace in our time".


  • Options
    #56
    marienbad
    Registered Users Posts: 9,463 ✭✭✭marienbad


    recedite wrote: »
    They were, because nobody stepped in to contain them. Towards the end, Nato bombed Serbia to ensure the complete secession of the southern Kosovo region.
    Thankfully civil war has now been averted in Crimea/Ukraine.

    People in Crimea knew when they voted to join the Russian Federation that it was a one way ticket. They are not stupid. They also knew their wages and standard of living would rise within a short period of time.
    They picked up their ballot papers and they made their choice.

    And next on to Nagorno-Karabakh on the Putin world tour


  • Options
    #57
    Sulla Felix
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,442 ✭✭✭Sulla Felix


    Brian Shanahan wrote: »
    Yes, by a very Chamberlainian capitulation on the part of the West, I wonder will we see Call me Dave or Gideon getting off a plane from Moscow in the near future waving a scrap of paper and declaring "peace in our time".
    I think that's a little unfair to Chamberlain. He did what he did out of a principled position. The west did what it did this time because of money.


  • Options
    #58
    recedite
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,993 ✭✭✭✭recedite


    If the west did nothing at all, then how does that help to avert civil war?

    Credit is due to the special forces "troops without insignia" who kept the the Ukrainian troops separated from the local "self defence forces" and whatever other paramilitaries had taken it upon themselves to "protect" the Crimean parliament buildings.
    Also to the individual Ukrainian troops themselves who declined to use their guns, despite receiving orders from Kiev authorising the use of deadly force.


  • Options
    #59
    Hotblack Desiato
    Registered Users Posts: 34,060 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    Civil war, my ass. The only agression and threat was from the Russians with no insignia.

    Not only does Putin care nothing for international law and treaties signed by his country, he cares nothing for the Geneva Convention either.

    Fingal County Council are certainly not competent to be making decisions about the most important piece of infrastructure on the island. They need to stick to badly designed cycle lanes and deciding on whether Mrs Murphy can have her kitchen extension.



  • Options
    #60
    Sulla Felix
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,442 ✭✭✭Sulla Felix


    recedite wrote: »
    If the west did nothing at all, then how does that help to avert civil war?

    Credit is due to the special forces "troops without insignia" who kept the the Ukrainian troops separated from the local "self defence forces" and whatever other paramilitaries had taken it upon themselves to "protect" the Crimean parliament buildings.
    Also to the individual Ukrainian troops themselves who declined to use their guns, despite receiving orders from Kiev authorising the use of deadly force.
    In fairness, they could have encouraged them to fight like we did the Kurds in '91 and then stood by and watched the aggressor crush them. Doing absolutely nothing is probably the lesser evil than doing the wrong something.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    Sulla Felix
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,442 ✭✭✭Sulla Felix


    ninja900 wrote: »
    Not only does Putin care nothing for international law and treaties signed by his country, he cares nothing for the Geneva Convention either.
    I don't know why this comes as a surprise to people.
    The west only pays lip service to international law and treaties, and the Geneva convention. And by the west I mean the military and political complex, not each and every citizen. It's window dressing to keep the them placated.
    Putin doesn't even have to do that much because there's a population back home who lap up the strong man image, he could change his title to Tzar in the morning and they'd love it.


Advertisement