View Poll Results: Whom do you support and to what extent?

Voters
124. You may not vote on this poll
  • I support Ukraine fully.

    85 68.55%
  • I support Russia fully.

    13 10.48%
  • I only support Russia's claim over Crimea.

    4 3.23%
  • I only support Russia's claim over Crimea and Donbass (Luhansk and Donetsk regions).

    7 5.65%
  • Not sure.

    7 5.65%
  • I don't care.

    8 6.45%

Thread: Russia, US, Ukraine, and the Future

  1. #6641
    antaeus's Avatar Cool and normal
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Cool and normal
    Posts
    5,397

    Default Re: Russia, US, Ukraine, and the Future

    Quote Originally Posted by Kyriakos View Post
    Why find it reasonable for Russia to give up even Crimea? They sort of clearly won the 2014 war.
    A compromise would be to give up the rest, but get de jure recognition for Crimea.
    Personally I doubt it will happen (doesn't have a limit, from neither side the function isn't even definable at status of Crimea)
    This isn't the 18th century. Russia's land grab in Crimea is a violation of UN articles that Russia is a signatory to. It is considered fundamental to modern international law, that countries can't through force take territory off their neighbours. To approve of this action is to acknowledge that countries can get away with doing it. It sets a new precedent.

    So while at the end of this conflict, Russia might still occupy Crimea, it is unlikely that Ukraine would relinquish it's claim, nor that ownership would be recognised by the international community.
    IN PATROCINIVM SVB MARENOSTRUM

  2. #6642

    Default Re: Russia, US, Ukraine, and the Future

    Quote Originally Posted by antaeus View Post
    This isn't the 18th century. Russia's land grab in Crimea is a violation of UN articles that Russia is a signatory to. It is considered fundamental to modern international law, that countries can't through force take territory off their neighbours. To approve of this action is to acknowledge that countries can get away with doing it. It sets a new precedent. So while at the end of this conflict, Russia might still occupy Crimea, it is unlikely that Ukraine would relinquish it's claim, nor that ownership would be recognised by the international community.
    There is one rather awkward problem though. While the circumstances of Russia's annexation of the peninsula were not considered legitimate, there's also at least some degree of evidence (even from non-Russian sources) that it was supported by a majority of the population (contra the situation on the mainland). This creates an issue regarding how the principles of self-determination and territorial integrity relate to one another, a matter that's caused issues in the past (e.g. Kosovo).

    In this regard, the Ukrainian parliament's recent declaration of Chechnya as 'occupied' is shooting themselves in the foot a bit; arguing that ethnically-motivated separatism is acceptable implicitly undermines their own position with respect to Crimea (Russia has the same problem, especially when you consider Abkhazia and South Ossetia).

  3. #6643
    Praeses
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    8,015

    Default Re: Russia, US, Ukraine, and the Future

    Quote Originally Posted by conon394 View Post
    "Bush II's Grand Theft Autofuel" Nice one...
    I'm doing my part [salutes].

    Quote Originally Posted by conon394 View Post
    Biden kinda had to stick to the deal..
    Cannot disagree, even though the US has successfully pulled "the other guy" a few times (as well as that other classic "akchewally, first Congress has to approve...") some deals have to stick and this was one of them.

    Quote Originally Posted by conon394 View Post
    Yes but its kind of too bad they were carried along. had two of the 4 not joined or had really strong reservations it might really have set back the Bush Admin's efforts to get congress on board. I new doubters at the time who were not convinced by say Cheney (didn't trust him) or Bush semi articulate Texan thing - but where Blair is convincing it's got to be true.
    Bush (well Cheney) laid it on pretty thick, it wasn't "once again we are asking" it was "be here at this time" and our government was literally "sir yes sir": we get a square deal from our US alliance so when Washinton says "jump" we say "on whom?". I dunno what Blair's play was, there's a theory he'd been mentored by Clinton as a centre "left" globalist and he was hoping to steer Bush who he saw as maybe headstrong but manageable? Certainly, the US has friends who they have treated well and can expect loyalty from. I think more likely the UK, like Australia, was not in a position to refuse.

    The longer I study history the clearer it emerges that all empires are bastards, but there are degrees. The present US Empire is not the worst (neither the Gilded Empire 1830's-1939, nor the UN Empire 1945-present [coining these on the fly, tell me what you think]). The First British Empire was not as bad as the Second one (post 1780-"no more benign neglect") and that was definitely worse than the present US one is, maybe Communist Dynasty China will get below them (they already have the body count I suspect). The Klepto Interregnum of the Russian Empire is shaping up as a pretty low period for them. Imperial rump conducting brigand raids for loot and slices of territory.
    Jatte lambastes Calico Rat

  4. #6644
    antaeus's Avatar Cool and normal
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Cool and normal
    Posts
    5,397

    Default Re: Russia, US, Ukraine, and the Future

    Quote Originally Posted by Laser101 View Post
    There is one rather awkward problem though. While the circumstances of Russia's annexation of the peninsula were not considered legitimate, there's also at least some degree of evidence (even from non-Russian sources) that it was supported by a majority of the population (contra the situation on the mainland). This creates an issue regarding how the principles of self-determination and territorial integrity relate to one another, a matter that's caused issues in the past (e.g. Kosovo).
    Although we're in that place where we have to ask "would the population have wanted Russia to invade or were the population just OK with the change of ownership after the fact"?? Previously they had the opportunity to choose, they chose Ukraine.
    IN PATROCINIVM SVB MARENOSTRUM

  5. #6645

    Default Re: Russia, US, Ukraine, and the Future

    Quote Originally Posted by Kyriakos View Post
    Why find it reasonable for Russia to give up even Crimea? They sort of clearly won the 2014 war.
    A compromise would be to give up the rest, but get de jure recognition for Crimea.
    Personally I doubt it will happen (doesn't have a limit, from neither side the function isn't even definable at status of Crimea)
    What war was that? It was a case of treason, not war. Ukraine couldn't take much action because it did not have the ability to. It was what pushed Ukraine towards NATO.


    Quote Originally Posted by Laser101 View Post
    There is one rather awkward problem though. While the circumstances of Russia's annexation of the peninsula were not considered legitimate, there's also at least some degree of evidence (even from non-Russian sources) that it was supported by a majority of the population (contra the situation on the mainland). This creates an issue regarding how the principles of self-determination and territorial integrity relate to one another, a matter that's caused issues in the past (e.g. Kosovo).
    What non-Russian sources would that be? If Crimea was so pro-Russian why would the first thing Russians did was to dissolve the Crimean parliament?
    Last edited by PointOfViewGun; December 09, 2022 at 01:42 AM.
    The Armenian Issue
    http://www.twcenter.net/forums/group.php?groupid=1930

    "We're nice mainly because we're rich and comfortable."

  6. #6646

    Default Re: Russia, US, Ukraine, and the Future

    Quote Originally Posted by antaeus View Post
    Although we're in that place where we have to ask "would the population have wanted Russia to invade or were the population just OK with the change of ownership after the fact"?? Previously they had the opportunity to choose, they chose Ukraine.
    That's not really true. While it is often pointed out that a (narrow) majority of the Crimean population voted in favour of Ukrainian independence in the December 1991 referendum, it should probably be considered that at that point Ukraine had been de facto independent for about 3 months and the Soviet Union was basically dead; the referendum was basically making the existing situation official. There are a few other events worth considering as well:
    • In January 1991 a referendum to re-establish the Crimean ASSR passed with a 94% yes vote. Considering the text though, it could be argued that the intended meaning was for Crimea to become a separate Soviet Republic from Ukraine or Russia (although that was of course not what was implemented).
    • In 1992 the Supreme Council of Crimea moved to plan a referendum on independence, which the Ukrainian parliament blocked. It also adopted a constitution.
    • A 1994 referendum on greater autonomy passed by a wide margin. Yuri Meshkov was elected Crimean President the same year by 72% of voters on an autonomist/separatist, pro-Russian platform.
    • In 1995, after a struggle with the Crimean legislature, Meshkov was forcibly removed and deported by Ukrainian military forces. The Crimean Presidency was abolished and the Crimean constitution changed to downgrade Crimea's status from a Republic to Autonomous Republic.


    Considering the above, it doesn't seem like the Crimean population were particularly attached to Ukraine, at least in the 90s. Whether or not attitudes may have changed in the intervening years is a different question.

    Pew Research polls shortly after the takeover suggest at least acceptance by much of the population. Compare this to areas of Ukraine occupied this year where widespread opposition and resistance was clear from the outset. It seems that the Russian takeover of Crimea had at least some base of local support which is absent on the mainland.

  7. #6647
    antaeus's Avatar Cool and normal
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Cool and normal
    Posts
    5,397

    Default Re: Russia, US, Ukraine, and the Future

    Quote Originally Posted by Laser101 View Post
    That's not really true. While it is often pointed out that a (narrow) majority of the Crimean population voted in favour of Ukrainian independence in the December 1991 referendum, it should probably be considered that at that point Ukraine had been de facto independent for about 3 months and the Soviet Union was basically dead; the referendum was basically making the existing situation official. There are a few other events worth considering as well:
    • In January 1991 a referendum to re-establish the Crimean ASSR passed with a 94% yes vote. Considering the text though, it could be argued that the intended meaning was for Crimea to become a separate Soviet Republic from Ukraine or Russia (although that was of course not what was implemented).
    • In 1992 the Supreme Council of Crimea moved to plan a referendum on independence, which the Ukrainian parliament blocked. It also adopted a constitution.
    • A 1994 referendum on greater autonomy passed by a wide margin. Yuri Meshkov was elected Crimean President the same year by 72% of voters on an autonomist/separatist, pro-Russian platform.
    • In 1995, after a struggle with the Crimean legislature, Meshkov was forcibly removed and deported by Ukrainian military forces. The Crimean Presidency was abolished and the Crimean constitution changed to downgrade Crimea's status from a Republic to Autonomous Republic.


    Considering the above, it doesn't seem like the Crimean population were particularly attached to Ukraine, at least in the 90s. Whether or not attitudes may have changed in the intervening years is a different question.

    Pew Research polls shortly after the takeover suggest at least acceptance by much of the population. Compare this to areas of Ukraine occupied this year where widespread opposition and resistance was clear from the outset. It seems that the Russian takeover of Crimea had at least some base of local support which is absent on the mainland.
    To reiterate the point I was making... Sure the population might have been OK with the fait-accompli - with hindsight, post-justification and all. But that doesn't mean they wanted it in the first instance, or would have been prepared to do anything to make it occur. None of what you've evidenced here suggests that the population wanted to leave Ukraine and join Russia. Apathy or acceptance of a fait accompli does not suggest any overwhelming sense of agency, and certainly doesn't call into question the legitimacy of internationally accepted borders.
    IN PATROCINIVM SVB MARENOSTRUM

  8. #6648
    nhytgbvfeco2's Avatar Praepositus
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Israel
    Posts
    5,802

    Default Re: Russia, US, Ukraine, and the Future

    Quote Originally Posted by mishkin View Post
    I am preparing a movement in Spain to launch a lightning attack and take over Portugal because it is a country full of fascists. Then we will negotiate because Portugal cannot win the war and the Spanish we will keep everything north of Lisbon.
    I support this. I think I once saw a picture of a fascist in Portugal, so clearly Portugal is due for a de-nazification and disarmament, to give Spain a buffer state between them and.

  9. #6649
    mishkin's Avatar Comes Limitis
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    14,797
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: Russia, US, Ukraine, and the Future

    Quote Originally Posted by nhytgbvfeco2 View Post
    I think I once saw a picture of a fascist in Portugal.
    something you will never see in spain, just saying.

  10. #6650
    Morticia Iunia Bruti's Avatar Praeses
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Deep within the dark german forest
    Posts
    7,960

    Default Re: Russia, US, Ukraine, and the Future

    And don't forget the US has an agency in Portugal. Remember Cuba, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan...

    Some news are saying Russia is building trenches and fortifications at the russian - ukranian border in the region of Belgorod. And some experts are saying the Ukraine will use the frozen ground for a special operation with their armoured forces.
    Last edited by Morticia Iunia Bruti; December 09, 2022 at 07:30 AM. Reason: corrected spelling
    Did you ever think for a second
    I'm only human too.
    You have no perception of all the struggles that I have been through.
    Listening to the nothingness I'm hearing while I watch your lips move.
    If you really knew me, you'd think twice about creating my truth.

    Kobra and the Lotus - You don't know

  11. #6651
    conon394's Avatar hoi polloi
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Colfax WA, neat I have a barn and 49 acres - I have 2 horses, 15 chickens - but no more pigs
    Posts
    15,701

    Default Re: Russia, US, Ukraine, and the Future

    experts are saying the Ukraine wil use the frozen ground for a special operation with their armoured forces
    Some kind raid or such across the boarder if done well might be useful. To the extent Russia than has take seriously defending it boarders. It like Russia can make it missile attacks much worse in response.
    IN PATROCINIVM SVB Dromikaites

    'One day when I fly with my hands - up down the sky, like a bird'

    But if the cause be not good, the king himself hath a heavy reckoning to make, when all those legs and arms and heads, chopped off in battle, shall join together at the latter day and cry all 'We died at such a place; some swearing, some crying for surgeon, some upon their wives left poor behind them, some upon the debts they owe, some upon their children rawly left.

    Hyperides of Athens: We know, replied he, that Antipater is good, but we (the Demos of Athens) have no need of a master at present, even a good one.

  12. #6652
    Kyriakos's Avatar Praeses
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Thessalonike, The Byzantine Empire
    Posts
    8,829

    Default Re: Russia, US, Ukraine, and the Future

    Hm, I suppose Russia won't use that other weapon even if Ukraine hits Moscow.
    Or maybe that's not the view, which is why US declared it's not in favor of Ukraine attacking in areas not formerly in the Ukraine
    Λέων μεν ὄνυξι κρατεῖ, κέρασι δε βούς, ἄνθρωπος δε νῷι
    "While the lion prevails with its claws, and the ox through its horns, man does by his thinking"
    Anaxagoras of Klazomenae, 5th century BC










  13. #6653
    conon394's Avatar hoi polloi
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Colfax WA, neat I have a barn and 49 acres - I have 2 horses, 15 chickens - but no more pigs
    Posts
    15,701

    Default Re: Russia, US, Ukraine, and the Future

    "use that other weapon"

    Which one?

    Or maybe that's not the view, which is why US declared it's not in favor of Ukraine attacking in areas not formerly in the Ukraine
    That's not quite what the US said it rather said it was not encouraging it but it never said it holding a leash either.
    Last edited by conon394; December 09, 2022 at 10:36 AM.
    IN PATROCINIVM SVB Dromikaites

    'One day when I fly with my hands - up down the sky, like a bird'

    But if the cause be not good, the king himself hath a heavy reckoning to make, when all those legs and arms and heads, chopped off in battle, shall join together at the latter day and cry all 'We died at such a place; some swearing, some crying for surgeon, some upon their wives left poor behind them, some upon the debts they owe, some upon their children rawly left.

    Hyperides of Athens: We know, replied he, that Antipater is good, but we (the Demos of Athens) have no need of a master at present, even a good one.

  14. #6654
    reavertm's Avatar Decanus
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Wrocław, Poland
    Posts
    583

    Default Re: Russia, US, Ukraine, and the Future

    Russia is attacking civilian targets in Ukraine, so it is only fair for Ukraine to attack military targets in Russia.

  15. #6655

    Default Re: Russia, US, Ukraine, and the Future

    In order to prevent a frozen conflict, Russia might need an incentive for actual peace treaty. Stopping such attacks might be that incentive.

  16. #6656

    Default Re: Russia, US, Ukraine, and the Future

    Quote Originally Posted by reavertm View Post
    Russia is attacking civilian targets in Ukraine, so it is only fair for Ukraine to attack military targets in Russia.
    In a perfect world, I would like to see Ukrainian missiles/drones pay a visit to the nexus of pipelines and factories in Samara:

    https://www.britannica.com/place/Samara-Russia
    Of these facts there cannot be any shadow of doubt: for instance, that civil society was renovated in every part by Christian institutions; that in the strength of that renewal the human race was lifted up to better things-nay, that it was brought back from death to life, and to so excellent a life that nothing more perfect had been known before, or will come to be known in the ages that have yet to be. - Pope Leo XIII

  17. #6657
    Praeses
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    8,015

    Default Re: Russia, US, Ukraine, and the Future

    Quote Originally Posted by Kyriakos View Post
    Hm, I suppose Russia won't use that other weapon even if Ukraine hits Moscow.
    Or maybe that's not the view, which is why US declared it's not in favor of Ukraine attacking in areas not formerly in the Ukraine
    Say rather "his last weapon". Not there yet, this bloody minded scum has a dozen divisions to lose before we discuss that.

    Ukraine doesn't have the forces to invade Russia, but they can hit targets there as they have demonstrated, more valuable assets (and who knows what proportion of those are irreplaceable?) each time if they like.
    Last edited by Cyclops; December 09, 2022 at 12:00 PM.
    Jatte lambastes Calico Rat

  18. #6658
    Kyriakos's Avatar Praeses
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Thessalonike, The Byzantine Empire
    Posts
    8,829

    Default Re: Russia, US, Ukraine, and the Future

    For the record, I'd like to see peace with Ukraine taking back all other areas apart from Crimea (since Crimea is by large majority pro-Russian).
    That said, if nukes start hitting Ukraine, you should realize it has already lost due to there not being a return from your main cities being nuked.
    And if one wanted to make use of nukes palatable, they'd urge Ukraine to hit inside Russia - as they now do. So not a good idea at all, imo.
    Λέων μεν ὄνυξι κρατεῖ, κέρασι δε βούς, ἄνθρωπος δε νῷι
    "While the lion prevails with its claws, and the ox through its horns, man does by his thinking"
    Anaxagoras of Klazomenae, 5th century BC










  19. #6659
    Vanoi's Avatar Dux Limitis
    Civitate

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, USA
    Posts
    16,970

    Default Re: Russia, US, Ukraine, and the Future

    Quote Originally Posted by Laser101 View Post
    That's not really true. While it is often pointed out that a (narrow) majority of the Crimean population voted in favour of Ukrainian independence in the December 1991 referendum, it should probably be considered that at that point Ukraine had been de facto independent for about 3 months and the Soviet Union was basically dead; the referendum was basically making the existing situation official. There are a few other events worth considering as well:
    • In January 1991 a referendum to re-establish the Crimean ASSR passed with a 94% yes vote. Considering the text though, it could be argued that the intended meaning was for Crimea to become a separate Soviet Republic from Ukraine or Russia (although that was of course not what was implemented).
    • In 1992 the Supreme Council of Crimea moved to plan a referendum on independence, which the Ukrainian parliament blocked. It also adopted a constitution.
    • A 1994 referendum on greater autonomy passed by a wide margin. Yuri Meshkov was elected Crimean President the same year by 72% of voters on an autonomist/separatist, pro-Russian platform.
    • In 1995, after a struggle with the Crimean legislature, Meshkov was forcibly removed and deported by Ukrainian military forces. The Crimean Presidency was abolished and the Crimean constitution changed to downgrade Crimea's status from a Republic to Autonomous Republic.


    Considering the above, it doesn't seem like the Crimean population were particularly attached to Ukraine, at least in the 90s. Whether or not attitudes may have changed in the intervening years is a different question.

    Pew Research polls shortly after the takeover suggest at least acceptance by much of the population. Compare this to areas of Ukraine occupied this year where widespread opposition and resistance was clear from the outset. It seems that the Russian takeover of Crimea had at least some base of local support which is absent on the mainland.
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Crimea

    The number of Crimean residents who consider Ukraine their motherland increased sharply from 32% to 71.3% from 2008 through 2011; according to a poll by Razumkov Center in March 2011,[23] although this is the lowest number in all Ukraine (93% on average across the country).[23] Surveys of regional identities in Ukraine have shown that around 30% of Crimean residents claim to have retained a self-identified "Soviet identity".[24]
    Seems like Crimeans very much considered themselves Ukrainians at least as of 2011.

  20. #6660
    Mithradates's Avatar Domesticus
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Hungary
    Posts
    2,047

    Default Re: Russia, US, Ukraine, and the Future

    Exchanging Brittney Griner to Viktor "Merchant of Death" Bout? wtf...
    Clear win for Russia


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •