Russia sinks own ship to block Ukrainian vessels, official says

AntiPrivateWestBankers

SLAYER69
Russia robbing their neighbor solves this...

You can't rob your own house.

60-70 % of Crimeans are Russians and want to be part of Russia. Referendum is in days.

Those of you that are on the "They wanna be Russia" and "They're majority Russian" should really look into the facts found on the situation.

It's not 70% to begin with. This number seems to be growing leaps and bounds when it's not even true. If they were 60%, that's still leaves 40% (almost half) of the population in only one part of the Ukrain. 40% of this population is still a massive number! What about those guys? Don't care?

Well, here is a link for you to help educate you on the facts...

Please Read before making up your own facts

However, it is worth noting that only only 1 percent of Crimeans mentioned Russia as a homeland and only 10 percent mentioned the Soviet Union. This suggests that even though Crimeans have much stronger pro-Russian geo-political preferences than other Ukrainians (see Figure 2) these preferences did not translate into a strong emotional identification with Russia. Moreover, in a more recent Razumkov Center survey (from December 21-25 2013), while substantial minorities endorsed either Crimean independence (35 percent) or joining “another state” (29 percent), a majority (56 percent was opposed to either of the political options involving Crimea’s separation from Ukraine. Of course, it is anyone’s guess how these proportions have been affected by the events of the past two months in the context of a highly partisan political and informational environment.

You should read what this site has to offer. It's VERY informative!

reply to post by Xcathdra


Chechnya has been a full blown, knock down drag out and full military engagement level warfare in more than one distinct and separate 'war' over the past 15-20 years.

Chechnya Timeline

I get your point, I just disagree with it completely. Its comparing apples to grapefruit and saying they're in the same food group so naturally fit for comparison. Well...I don't believe Chechnya and Crimea have anything whatever in common outside the fact there are Russian forces involved. There is always room for disagreement but to me, drawing one to the other (and Chechnya wasn't unjustified EITHER..in my own opinion) is trying to bring mud from the multiple bloody wars into a situation that isn't anywhere near that yet..and may never be.

So far, the videos from the streets in Crimea and Ukraine aren't showing this oppression and terrible Russian behavior. It seems to be showing a population, at least in the Russian areas right now, that are indifferent at worst and bordering on downright thankful at best. After all, these are the places where those who thought the Soviet Union was a GOOD idea...and millions DID support it....settled down to live after 1989.

We're looking at some of the hard hard core of the Communist and Russian world view in populations..and trying to say they aren't what they are? It seems silly when it's plain to see outside the prepared and carefully edited media footage right now.

russia sinks own shgip ...bad
isarel sinks uss liberty... good

my god whats wrong with that picture?

remember the Maine..and the gulf of tonkin, and pearl harbour, ( techn ically the us allowed it to happen and so are as guilty as XC says russia is times half a fleet

but hey, who am i to say you can't have it both ways...thats just reality

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


the banker supplied Bolsheviks killed 10 million Ukrainians...that's right, the stooges of the oligarchs Putin kicked out of Russia and the funders off the idf soldiers who are admittedly doing violence against the legitimate government of Ukraine now

Putin bad
lol
thats some funny **** right there

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


I understand what you are saying, but I don't think you are getting my point (no offense / respectfully)

I think the comparison is valid because of how closely similar the 2 incidents are.

I get Chechnya has a lot of internal issues and I certainly don't want to see another country / state / whatever become a haven for extremists. I get it that open violence occurs in Chechnya and not Ukraine (to that extent anyways).

I just want to know why, at face value, his position towards Crimea is not the same for Chechnya.

Russians being threatened in Ukraine - Russia is concerned.
Russia threatening Chechnya - no issue.

Russia demands Crimea be allowed to determine their fate - Russia concerned.
Russia refuses to allow Chechnya to determine their own fate - No issue

At the fundamental base core level the Russian reasons given for Crimea are the very same issues present in Chechnya (not the warfare but the population / independence / self determination etc).

Why support independence for Crimea and refuse it for Chechnya?

Danbones
russia sinks own shgip ...bad
isarel sinks uss liberty... good

my god whats wrong with that picture?

Your facts.

The USS Liberty wasn't sunk

Also, Some believe the then President of the US Johnson ordered the attack so as to get the US involved in the region...

Interesting Revelation?

However, according to Peter Hounam, the author of the expose’, “Operation Cyanide,” the murderous Israeli attack was a set up to blame the Egyptians and bring the U.S. into the 1967 war on their side. The Liberty was a “sitting duck” for the Israeli jet planes’ missiles and rockets and their torpedo boats. The attack lasted at least 75 minutes, killing 34 brave Americans and wounding 172 others. Liberty survivor, Petty Officer Ernie Gallo, said, “I mean for a group of people, who are suppose to be the children of God, (the Israelis), they didn’t show any mercy for us.”

Interesting story..

Worth reading


Vladi­mir Putin rebuffs Obama on Ukraine, says Russia ‘cannot ignore calls for help’

A day after President Obama ordered sanctions over Russia’s military takeover in Crimea, Russian President Vladi­mir Putin emphatically rejected the U.S. position, saying his country could not “ignore calls for help” from ethnic Russians in Ukraine after what he has termed an illegitimate power grab there by pro-Western agitators.

Obama authorized the Treasury Department on Thursday to impose sanctions on “individuals and entities” responsible for the Russian intervention in Crimea or for “stealing the assets of the Ukrainian people.”

Calls for help?

From what?

If it as many here brag. "Crimea taken without a shot being fired' and Russian Troops Crimean militia have everything under control then why the call for help?

And against what?

A mass Vodka shortage?

Crimea is gone , the question is now, what next ?

reply to post by AntiPrivateWestBankers


So you think its a good thing that a country can't choose its own path?
Can you make the fonts bigger it still not getting your point across.

Xcathdra
reply to post by MysterX

 

Ukraine says Russian troops in Crimea have doubled to 30,000

Russia, whose forces occupied the isolated peninsula last week, says the only troops it has there are those based in Sevastopol. The Russian troops that have occupied positions across Crimea wear no insignia on their uniforms but drive vehicles with Russian military plates.

Ukraine says thousands of extra troops have arrived and have fanned out across the occupied peninsula in violation of the treaty governing the base. Earlier this week Ukraine said there were a total of 16,000 Russian troops in Crimea.

The treaty allows for 25k troops.
The treaty does not allow Russian troops to fan out across Crimea.
It also does not allow Russia to blockade the harbor / prevent Ukrainian naval vessels from deploying.
It does not allow Russia to surround Ukrainian bases.
It does not allow Russian military personnel to equip the "militias"
It does not allow Russian forces to be present without insignias.

As for non insignia troops -
Soldier with no Insignia identifies himself as Russian military

edit on 7-3-2014 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)

Crimea is to Russia as the Virgin Islands are to the USA. It aint our business at all! The Nuclear subs patrolling the gulf, the advanced missile shield penetrating ICBM that was launched should speak loads to this end. Crimea was just annexed my friend and there is jack squat you can do about it. War with Russia means war on US streets! Welcome back to the reality of Mutually Assured Destruction. The USA is not the only super power in the world!

reply to post by Donkey_Dean


Linky

In 1916 and 1917, Denmark and the U.S., respectively, ratified a treaty in which Denmark sold the Danish West Indies to the United States of America for $25 million in gold.

Who sold Crimea to Russia?

reply to post by SLAYER69


Its been theirs since WWII. Only recently was it given to Ukraine. Russia states a mob overthrew a democratically elected government and was immediacy recognized as legitimate by the West. I call BS on this as well.

Crimea is Russia's because Russia said it is! That's the end of it! Obama would kiss Putin's bare ass before we entered a war with Russia and the Ruskies know it! We all know it too. Hell man we were raised to fear the sleeping bear!

reply to post by Donkey_Dean


No, it was the Soviet Union but that went belly up.

If this is the strong point for their right because of outdated claims why not give it back to the Goths? They took it in (AD 250)

reply to post by StallionDuck

As far as I remember, I never heard of the US sinking a ship to block a country from leaving and telling them that they should join our fleet and change their loyalty. I've heard of countries just giving up to us, but never ever the way that is done here. That would be as though we surrounded Japan and said... Hey! Join our fleets so your countries fleet is no more! If not.. we'll go away, but the sunken ship blocking you will remain... Because we have an interest in your country that once belonged to us.. that we gave back.. But we still own because we say so.

A 'country' isn't being blocked from leaving, if anything...i'd guess the idea was to prevent something from entering that area, not leaving it.

The old ship is blocking an entrance to a medium sized lake in an old industrial place called Novoozerne, in Crimea.

There are no Ukranian naval warships or military assets stationed there as far as i can tell. A few rusty clapped out boats, and a decommisioned tanker looks to be all that's there.

Your analogy about Japan doesn't work.

If an autonomous region in Japan had a population of 60% Americans where 1,200,000 Americans who lived there were fearful a newly installed fascist government in Japan was about to place jack boots on their necks, and asked for help from US troops stationed in nearby bases and the USA...then it might be somewhat similar.

A large number of those ethnic Russians have officially requested assistance from the Russians stationed in Crimea and have appealed to the Russian Federation for preventative protection due to fear of anti-Russian extremism on the tail of the fascists banning Russian language immediately following their rise after seizing power in Kiev following the coup.

If you or the OP want to think blocking a crumbling ex-Soviet port on a backwater lake is the same as blockading the entire Ukrainian Navy, you're of course free to think what you like, just don't expect everyone to fall in line with the co-opted MSM spew and sheepishly believe it with you.

The Russians don't have to ask the forces in that part of Ukraine to join forces with Crimean militias, let alone force them to as they are doing pretty well enough on their own volunteering by the 1000's, including those at the very top echelons of the military to either pledge alligeance to defending Crimea against the fascists, or directly joining with the russians living and stationed there to fight them off should they get similar ideas about Crimea as they have shown in Kiev.

Prevention is always better than cure when talking about whether people might be murdered by NAZIs of not..i'm sure over 60 million people who died the last time fascism was in vogue wouldn't argue too strongly against that principle...do you?

Donkey_Dean
reply to post by SLAYER69

 

Its been theirs since WWII. Only recently was it given to Ukraine. Russia states a mob overthrew a democratically elected government and was immediacy recognized as legitimate by the West. I call BS on this as well.

Crimea is Russia's because Russia said it is! That's the end of it!

edit on 7-3-2014 by Donkey_Dean because: (no reason given)

Khrushchev handed Crimea over to Ukraine in the 1950's. When the Soviet Union collapsed Russia initially rejected Crimea being a part of Ukraine. They, Ukraine and Russia, signed an agreement in 1997 where Russia gave up all claims to the Crimea in exchange for Crimea to be autonomous (but still subordinate to the Ukrainian federal government). That agreement also moved Sevastopol to Ukraine as well (no joint status).

It is in Ukraine's Constitution.

The "referendum" that is illegally planned in Crimea only gives people 2 choices, and independence is not one of them. They can either vote to go with Russia or they can vote to remain part of Ukraine.

reply to post by SLAYER69


Way different, 50% of Crimean's speak Russian and the whole place is ethically Russian. The only country that has any business their is Russia! We have none!

Donkey_Dean
reply to post by SLAYER69

 

Way different, 50% of Crimean's speak Russian and the whole place is ethically Russian. The only country that has any business their is Russia! We have none!

edit on 7-3-2014 by Donkey_Dean because: (no reason given)

How does Russia have business in Ukraine when Ukraine is a sovereign nation?

The logic is faulty.

reply to post by Xcathdra


It does not matter! Crimea is Russian territory and it has been my whole life! Being part of the Ukraine is and has always been dependent upon a Russian presence! There is no autonomy to be had in Crimea. At least now you may have the Russian influence out of the rest of Ukraine affairs!

Crimea is a lost cause unless you want to pay the price, and I bet that price would be millions of lives and trillions of dollars with no guarantee of victory. What do you think Crimean's will choose? Peace or War? Will we make the choice for them?

I don't imagine we will ever see a Crimea free of the Russia, and this my friend is just how it is! Lest you forget the Russians and Ukrainians are friends. The two armies met and did not exchange fire they played foot ball!

Your logic is faulty and Peace is much better than civil war! A Ukraine in flames benefits none but the West!

Donkey_Dean
Crimea is Russia's because Russia said it is! That's the end of it!

People call Americans arrogant.

I wont be friending Putin on facebook with that attitude.

Xcathdra
reply to post by Wrabbit2000

 

I understand what you are saying, but I don't think you are getting my point (no offense / respectfully)

I think the comparison is valid because of how closely similar the 2 incidents are.

I get Chechnya has a lot of internal issues and I certainly don't want to see another country / state / whatever become a haven for extremists. I get it that open violence occurs in Chechnya and not Ukraine (to that extent anyways).

I just want to know why, at face value, his position towards Crimea is not the same for Chechnya.

Russians being threatened in Ukraine - Russia is concerned.
Russia threatening Chechnya - no issue.

Russia demands Crimea be allowed to determine their fate - Russia concerned.
Russia refuses to allow Chechnya to determine their own fate - No issue

At the fundamental base core level the Russian reasons given for Crimea are the very same issues present in Chechnya (not the warfare but the population / independence / self determination etc).

Why support independence for Crimea and refuse it for Chechnya?

edit on 7-3-2014 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)

You work so hard on your posts Xcathdra, i almost feel bad for pointing out to you that Crimeans have not been planting bombs and blowing innocent people to bits on the streets of Moscow for decades, which was the original reason the Russian Army went to war with Chechnya in the first place.

Isn't that the same reason the entire Western world, led by the USA following the terroist attacks on 9/11 is in a global 'war on terror' for over a decade?

Is it fine to wage wars costing the lives of hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions, to disregard Constitutional rights and freedoms and spend untold trillions on a war on terror because of terrorist attacks in New York, but a localised war in Chechnya is somehow out of this world because you think Russia should have just ignored repeated terror attacks and bombings in Moscow by Chechen terrorists?

Come on.