Subject: »NEWS AROUND THE WORLD

Are you denying the existence of Crimeans now?

Edit: Or are you just accepting the annexation of Crimea by Russia now? Probably, as you call them Russians.
(edited)

Are you denying the existence of Crimeans now?
Edit: Or are you just accepting the annexation of Crimea by Russia now? Probably, as you call them Russians.
Actually there was russian citizen (with russian pasports and nationalitu) that had property and lived in Crimea, just like english that have houses at est cost of France.

Actually, in contrary to Abkhazia and South Ossetia, few Crimeans had Russian passports before the annexation.

Actually, in contrary to Abkhazia and South Ossetia, few Crimeans had Russian passports before the annexation.
Not all. And Russians with only one passport also exist;)

few Crimeans had Russian passports before
And they are citizen of which country?

(edited)

Was the crazy belgium talking to me, eventhough he knows I have blocked him completely so I don't have to read any of his nonsense? Cuckoo

Well, they used to be Ukrainian citizens. So what? That doesn't mean they have to defend Ukraine. That doesn't mean they have no right on secession.

@ Fanakick: This is what I'm talking about :-) He's now even asking other people if I was talking to him :D

Charles Hill to guzh77
Was the crazy belgium talking to me, eventhough he knows I have blocked him completely so I don't have to read any of his nonsense? Cuckoo
(edited)

But Crimeans exists regardless of independence, just like people from Sao Paulo are Paulistas, or people from Kiev are.. Kievians? OK, I give up, I don't know the word for that, but you get the idea :P

Let's assume they have such right.

Do you think that this was a normal, legitimate referendum? :-)

No, of course not. I never said that.

(To me, they have that moral right.)

Edit: In the current conditions, a normal referendum was impossible. Maybe only if there would have been an international coalition who kept military control of Crimea until the execution of the referendum's result.
(edited)

You can divide people by country, or even smaller by region or even city, but that doesn't change the fact that regions and cities are part of countries. And borders of countries are clear, the deals made in the past over these borders also.

EDIT: an agreement signed on Dec. 5, 1994, by the United States, Britain, Russia (!!!) and Ukraine, promising to recognize Ukraine’s borders in exchange for Ukraine giving up its nuclear weapons at the time.
(edited)

That doesn't mean they have no right on secession.
http://inagist.com/all/445646387443539969/ only this in english

And because borders are unchangeable for eternity (see the history), we should send an EU army (not NATO) to Ukraine.

Wiki: In the evening of 16 March 2014, Mikhail Malyshev, the Crimean election Spokesman, reported that as of 20:00, 1,250,427 people or 81.36% voted in the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and 274,136 or 89.50% voted in Sevastopol for a total of 1,524,563 or 82.71% of the electorate.[83] ITAR-TASS initially reported this as 1,724,563 voters in total,[84] but corrected it later.[85] The discrepancy led to some reports of a 123% turnout in Sevastopol.[86][87][88][89]

Let me be straight: I agree that the referendum was unfair. I totally agree. But I do think that Crimea has/had the right on secession, and let's face it: all foreign information agencies expected a clear victory for the pro-Russian side. There would not have been a fair referendum if it were to be organized by the Ukrainian government either.

It's not a good argument Levi.

So if Russia would take Ukraine by force, everything would be ok?

After all wars are nothing new, and in history the Ukrainian territory changed it's allegiance A LOT of times...

So if Russia would take Ukraine by force, everything would be ok?

Of course not. I'm not going to defend something I did not say.

I hope you can see the difference in ethnic composition (and so probably, political composition) between Crimea and the rest of Ukraine.