4 ms·
1. So: force natives out, settle the land with military officers and other not-collonists-only-in-name, fix some polls and call it Crimean agency. Tell me: in
by dantyti 4y ago
1. So: force natives out, settle the land with military officers and other not-collonists-only-in-name, fix some polls and call it Crimean agency.
Tell me: in 1941, did the Baltic States enter the Soviet Union willingly (via democratic votes of coincidentally brand new Soviet-aligned governments) or did it happen due to Soviet military coercion, threats and ultimatums? Was it a settled issue in 1945-1953[1]? In 1989[2]? How about now? Same question about Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Poland, and Romania.
2. Finding it really hard not to see this as victim blaming. Do you believe cutting off the water supply to Crimea was what prompted a military invasion that targeted Kiyv, among other targets? Should Ukraine have absorbed the infrastructure costs, maintenance, etc. to keep the water supply operational for a, your words 'settled issue'? Since it would then be an international matter, the water supply question would be governed by treaties, yes? Again, at the very least, there are costs involved in keeping the water flowing. Unless you feel this is a situation where Russia can take what ever it wants and get paid for it. A sort of Bullying as a Service, if you will.
3. First of all: what if Russia's the pawn? Secondly: did the US organize the 2003 Tuzla Island incident, where Russia tried to annex Ukraine's island in the Kerch strait? Might this be a pattern that's not solely the interest of the US military-industrial complex?
4. Whataboutism. Or, as the Soviets used to say: "Oh yeah? And you're lynching negroes in the US!".[3]
5. Since you are equivocating the Soviet Union and Russia, the US is objectively more benign. To paraphrase your point: you are making the same mistake that most US "anti-imperialists" make by seeing it as the most active and subversive force in human history. In terms of repressiveness and meddling in foreign countries (coups, revolutions), Russian and Soviet history is hard to beat. Bucha in 2022 is what my great grandparents and grandparents had to live through when the Soviets occupied our country. The equivocation is justified.
6. It takes two to tango, but it's hard to listen to the crowd shouting about how you should start dancing when the other side has just left the floor and stabbed your mother in plain sight of everyone.
Fascinating how you agreed that the Russian narrative is completely ridiculous and then ended with another whataboutism about the US.
1- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Soviet_partisans#During_Second_World_War_and_its_aftermath https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Soviet_partisans#During_S...
2- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baltic_Way https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baltic_Way
3- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/And_you_are_lynching_Negroes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/And_you_are_lynching_Negroes
- ivan_gammel 4y agoI wonder if you really understand what „natives“ mean in the context of Crimea. E.g. Eastern Slavs were present there long before conquest by Ottoman Turks, so technically Crimean Tatars can be called colonizers, which wiped or assimilated the original population of the peninsula. Even if we start calling them natives, the sequence that you described is a nonsense. Crimea became part of Ukraine only after Tatars were resettled by Stalin, so this could not be part of some plan of Russia to take it from Ukraine. It was already Russian, with Russian population bigger than Ukrainian.
- psorcerer 4y agoGive Texas and California to Mexico then. Why not? Really, same reasoning can be applied.