5 ms·

I mean, you could have travelled there even before the 2014 hostilities began. So it's not like you gained anything in that regard, right? Now if Russia loses i

by krab 2y ago

I mean, you could have travelled there even before the 2014 hostilities began. So it's not like you gained anything in that regard, right? Now if Russia loses it, the travel there might be more difficult for some time.

thriftwy 2y ago
Yes, one may be thinking of it as "not losing something". But it's much easier to not lose something when it's in your possession than when you depend on goodwill of some third party. Actual Russian Federation experience with all post-Soviet states ranges from bad to mediocre. It's as far cry as possible to e.g. the EU affair where one might say "I'm completely OK with %region% being a part of other country since I am always free to move there if I want, the local population is protected by laws and conventions as good as they are in my country, and even discussing political borders creates unnecessary strife". Perhaps it was the original idea behind CIS but it became very bad very fast.
- krab 2y ago
  Well, from my point of view, the war just makes all of this only worse. I imagine going to the Crimea for a family vacation isn't a great prospect with the risk of bombardment or even a takeover. But that's probably something where we differ. I view this Russian attitude as "we can't live as well as we'd like to so we'll at least make other suffer too". This is completely self-inflicted.
  - thriftwy 2y ago
    There was no war in Crimea from 2014 to 2022 and even today it's mostly spared. Some other parts of Ukraine has went through a meat grinder, which reinforces the opinion that overrunning and firewalling it was a good idea. The Russian attitude is that if a third party makes some offer to any post-Soviet country, they should match it with an offer to Russia itself that is same or better, and are eventually ready to go to war over that.

5 ms·

I mean, you could have travelled there even before the 2014 hostilities began. So it's not like you gained anything in that regard, right? Now if Russia loses i

by krab 2y ago

thriftwy 2y ago
Yes, one may be thinking of it as "not losing something". But it's much easier to not lose something when it's in your possession than when you depend on goodwill of some third party. Actual Russian Federation experience with all post-Soviet states ranges from bad to mediocre. It's as far cry as possible to e.g. the EU affair where one might say "I'm completely OK with %region% being a part of other country since I am always free to move there if I want, the local population is protected by laws and conventions as good as they are in my country, and even discussing political borders creates unnecessary strife". Perhaps it was the original idea behind CIS but it became very bad very fast.
- krab 2y ago
  Well, from my point of view, the war just makes all of this only worse. I imagine going to the Crimea for a family vacation isn't a great prospect with the risk of bombardment or even a takeover. But that's probably something where we differ. I view this Russian attitude as "we can't live as well as we'd like to so we'll at least make other suffer too". This is completely self-inflicted.
  - thriftwy 2y ago
    There was no war in Crimea from 2014 to 2022 and even today it's mostly spared. Some other parts of Ukraine has went through a meat grinder, which reinforces the opinion that overrunning and firewalling it was a good idea. The Russian attitude is that if a third party makes some offer to any post-Soviet country, they should match it with an offer to Russia itself that is same or better, and are eventually ready to go to war over that.