Topic: Is the West gearing up to invade Russia once again? - page 28. (Read 58230 times)
I lived in Chechnya in the beginning of 1990s, my grandfather family had a manor there. He was forced to sell it at 1/10 of real price to chechens. So dear trolls, please eat the own shit instead of trying to open your dirty mouth.
Do you really believe that russians were the major part of the dead (I know they were discriminated and even persecuted by the chechens)?
You know, the keyboard warriors may think otherwise, but anyone who knew the ground situation will agree with those figures. Even prior to the war officially started, there was a concentrated campaign in Chechenya against the non-Chechen minorities living there. And most of the civilian casualties occurred in Grozny, where the ethnic Russians constituted for the majority of population. And a lot of the rebel deaths were among foreign fighters from Saudi Arabia and Afghanistan.
Russian economy just entered recession because of sanctions. So, you are already paying for a mistake of your leader and the price will increase. I wonder if Crimea was worth it. Russia already had there the bases, the ships...
I'm curious whom are you going to buy with this here?
Those reports you have no evidence about are just imagination. Would Putin stay quiet about them?
I believe he would, based purely on Soviet experience of classifying everything.
Yes, it's speculation on my part, but again its a speculation based on extrapolation from prior historic experience.
As for NATO setting its eyes on Sevastopol, some of the info was indeed released into public domain.
Your answer is rhetoric.
There are millions of dollars leaving Russia every day.
If you were smart enough to profit with it, you know well that your fellow citizens won't be.
Now, think about it lasting for decades. Economic relations shattered because of this.
Those reports you have no evidence about are just imagination. Would Putin stay quiet about them?
Powerful people do stupid mistakes for no reason beyond their own ego.
There are millions of dollars leaving Russia every day.
If you were smart enough to profit with it, you know well that your fellow citizens won't be.
Now, think about it lasting for decades. Economic relations shattered because of this.
Those reports you have no evidence about are just imagination. Would Putin stay quiet about them?
Powerful people do stupid mistakes for no reason beyond their own ego.
15%, 20% of the population killed? I don't know, but I know you can solve all problems when you kill enough people. Unfortunately, I think I'm quoting Stalin.
Some 160,000 people were killed during the Chechen wars. The majority of them were ethnic Russians (~ 100,000), especially the residents of Grozny and the Chechen plains. The ethnic Chechens lost somewhere around 30,000 to 40,000 people. The remaining 20,000 were other ethnic minorities, such as Ukrainians, Greeks and Armenians.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/15/world/europe/15iht-chech.html
In 1989, there were 269,130 ethnic Russians in Chechenya. According to the 2010 census, there are 24,382.
On the other hand, In 1989, there were 715,306 ethnic Chechens in Chechenya. According to the 2010 census, there are 1,206,551.
Those numbers are numbers of the pro-Moscow administration in Chechnya, not from any unbiased or scientific entity.
Do you really believe that russians were the major part of the dead (I know they were discriminated and even persecuted by the chechens)?
The links I posted give numbers completely different of those.
No one knows, how many were killed.
Russian economy just entered recession because of sanctions. So, you are already paying for a mistake of your leader and the price will increase. I wonder if Crimea was worth it. Russia already had there the bases, the ships...
I don't know... I've been buying into Russian bonds in two equity funds since the abrupt drop after the reunification of Crimea. Made a tidy 8% revenue so far.
As i see it, those "sanctions" might actually help Russia to avoid a recession as they target those individuals who where most likely to transfer Russian wealth abroad.
As for the bases, the ships. After what was started in Kiev, it was obvious that Russia would not have had them for much longer. NATO already made several visits to Sevastopol the year before, both with ships and with delegations, inspected some of the previously off-limits installations, set Federal purchase tenders for a hospital in Crimea, to be converted to a military hospital.
That's just the tip of the iceberg. I am more than sure that Russia also had some intelligence reports about NATO's outlooks for Sevastopol that Russia didn't like, and that we, common mortals, will not see for a few decades.
15%, 20% of the population killed? I don't know, but I know you can solve all problems when you kill enough people. Unfortunately, I think I'm quoting Stalin.
Some 160,000 people were killed during the Chechen wars. The majority of them were ethnic Russians (~ 100,000), especially the residents of Grozny and the Chechen plains. The ethnic Chechens lost somewhere around 30,000 to 40,000 people. The remaining 20,000 were other ethnic minorities, such as Ukrainians, Greeks and Armenians.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/15/world/europe/15iht-chech.html
In 1989, there were 269,130 ethnic Russians in Chechenya. According to the 2010 census, there are 24,382.
On the other hand, In 1989, there were 715,306 ethnic Chechens in Chechenya. According to the 2010 census, there are 1,206,551.
I mentioned the current state of affairs, of course in the past things were different.
Famous last words, said by each successive generation...
Yugoslavia were dissolved, but their federative borders, between the states that composed it, were respected. They just created some new, inside Bosnia.
Um... That's the definition of re-writing borders, you know.
So, if you are OK with dissolving Yugoslavia (and killing a few thousand people in the process), then you'd be perfectly OK with dissolving the USA, dissolving Russian Federations, as long as the federative borders are kept after the dissovlement?
So, if you respect human life, you don't mess with borders without agreement.
The reverse also applies. How many people's lives do you see as an acceptable sacrifice to keep the status quo of the borders? 100? 1,000? 100,000? A million?
What do you see as agreement? Two old men at the top of the food chain shaking hands on it? A few million voices of people saying that the change is needed?
I already quoted Calgacus about the Romans: "you make a desert and call it peace"
The numbers of the death in Chechnya are controversial, as the numbers of the 2002 census.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Second_Chechen_War#Independent_estimates
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chechnya#Demographics
15%, 20% of the population killed? I don't know, but I know you can solve all problems when you kill enough people. Unfortunately, I think I'm quoting Stalin.
I don't have much sympathy for the Chechens, and, if I had, the Beslan School attack wouldn't left much. But I think it's beyond any reasonable argument to deny the will of the majority for independence.
The numbers of the death in Chechnya are controversial, as the numbers of the 2002 census.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Second_Chechen_War#Independent_estimates
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chechnya#Demographics
15%, 20% of the population killed? I don't know, but I know you can solve all problems when you kill enough people. Unfortunately, I think I'm quoting Stalin.
I don't have much sympathy for the Chechens, and, if I had, the Beslan School attack wouldn't left much. But I think it's beyond any reasonable argument to deny the will of the majority for independence.
Chechens are not a uniform nation. Think tribal. They have families, reporting to village elders, reporting to local warlords, who in turn loosely answer to that warlord who seems to wield most power. Currently it's Kadyrov. (By the way, I do think he knew who those 14 Chechens in Ukraine were, and once they were called back, his displeasure was probably relayed to them).
Right now Kadyrov has eliminated most of his local opposition. The Yamadaev family is almost extinct and nothing remains of the Chechen Vostok battalion. The few surviving members of the family are living as refugees outside Chechenya. Kakiyev has resigned from the Zapad battalion and handed over the command to Kadyrov. I have no idea about his whereabouts.
Borders are sacrosanct, can not be changed by violence or referendums, only by free agreement.
The history proves that to be very wrong. Yugoslavia for one...
Borders have changed so many times during the last 100 years that it's hard to keep track of the changes. If anything, they are the opposite of sacrosanct.
In my view, referendums is the best way of settling territorial disputes. According to UN charter peoples have right to self-determination.
If a large enough group of people living on some land decides that it's better off on its own or together with their relatives over the hill, then let them.
Do you really think that the majority of the chechens wanted to be part of Russia and that the 2003 referendum, after a devastating war and under military rule, and with 40,000 russian troops voting in about 550,000 voters, had real democratic meaning? 95,5% in favor, what a surprise... (http://www.economist.com/node/1651376). Or is your post 100% patriotism/sentiment and 0% reason?
There are two types of Chechen refugees in the West. The ones that were forced from their homes by other warring Chechen clans, and the ones who were doing the "warring". The latter are the most prominent, most loud-mouthed, and often give rise to the incidents, like the one in Canada. The former are quiet friendly people who just want to get on with their lives. Some returned to their homes once the war was over, others didn't have anywhere to return to. I know two such families. They bare no grudge against Russians, but they do bear grudge against other Chechens. They told me that before the war they were living pretty well, Russians and Chechens were getting along, one family told how in their village Russian and Chechen grannies would sit on benches exchanging latest gossip...
Chechens are not a uniform nation. Think tribal. They have families, reporting to village elders, reporting to local warlords, who in turn loosely answer to that warlord who seems to wield most power. Currently it's Kadyrov. (By the way, I do think he knew who those 14 Chechens in Ukraine were, and once they were called back, his displeasure was probably relayed to them).
Relations between Russia and Chechenia have always been uneasy. It is a matter of very fine balance. Apply too much pressure and you get an uncontrolled revolt. Apply too little pressure, show any weakness, and you'll get an uncontrolled revolt. Kadyrov and Putin have an understanding, a balance or power. Kadyrov is almost, but not entirely a monarch of Chechenia. But he knows if he tries to become an undisputed monarch, he might get displaced either by other Chechens or by Putin. On the other hand, if he shows too much that he is indulging Putin's whims, he will be displaced by other Chechens.
In the second Chechen war Chechens themselves were fighting with Islamic mercenaries and local bandits. If the majority didn't want to be a part of Russia by then, we wouldn't have peace there by now...
Some of the pro-Russian Chechen clans also participated in the first Chechen War, fighting against the bandits. People such as Said-Magomed Kakiyev were on the fore-front of the Russian front line forces.
Do you really think that the majority of the chechens wanted to be part of Russia and that the 2003 referendum, after a devastating war and under military rule, and with 40,000 russian troops voting in about 550,000 voters, had real democratic meaning? 95,5% in favor, what a surprise... (http://www.economist.com/node/1651376). Or is your post 100% patriotism/sentiment and 0% reason?
In the second Chechen war Chechens themselves were fighting with Islamic mercenaries and local bandits. If the majority didn't want to be a part of Russia by then, we wouldn't have peace there by now...
You complained about the others' remarks here ("losing credibility"). That's the path you yourself are walking now!
Again, some of our fellow russian forum members use double standards. Russia was the legitimate ruler of Chechnya, Ukraine was an illegitimate one of Crimea. In one case, the will of the people must be respected, in the other, no.
Since russian troops violated territory of Ukraine and open fire on some of the Ukrainian bases, there was aggression. You can deny it, but no one will give any credibility to your stand
Since russian troops violated territory of Ukraine and open fire on some of the Ukrainian bases, there was aggression. You can deny it, but no one will give any credibility to your stand
Crimea declared independence from Ukraine through referendum, so after that you can't say that Russian troops violated territory of Ukraine. And they were officially there even before that and according to the treaty (with Ukraine, yes), they were obliged to take on police functions if such a need arises (e.g. in case of coup d'etat). A referendum was also in Chechnya...
Who is actually using double standards here?
Yes, shore, the Catalans will do a referendum and then they can call in the russians. A referendum is irrelevant to change the status of a territory unless the state allows it, like the UK on the Scottish referendum. Why don't you organize a referendum with your neighbors, may be you can declare independence too
Do you understand that the very word (independence) denies by its own definition any permission from anyone outside (in-dependence means no dependence)?
So now I am all years to hear your alternative to declaring independence...
But Tatars were the population in place when the Soviet Union was formed. If you want to go up to Adam and Eve to look for the original people, be my guest.
Even during the period of the Crimean Khanate, the Tatars constituted for only a minority of the population. The majority of the population was composed of the Slavs, along with other minorities such as Goths, Greeks and Armenians.
But I already seen some arguing that the rest of eastern Ukraine must be annexed too and there you don't have any historical abusive act of transfer.
But you do. The County of Novorossia (Novorossijskaja Gubernija) was transferred to Ukraine by Lenin in 1917, who was conducting a coup d'etat.
http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9D%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%BE%D1%81%D1%81%D0%B8%D0%B9%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B0%D1%8F_%D0%B3%D1%83%D0%B1%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%BD%D0%B8%D1%8F
Technically that county was split into three smaller counties in 1802. Here, the history of Ekaterinoslavs county is interesting:
http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%95%D0%BA%D0%B0%D1%82%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%B8%D0%BD%D0%BE%D1%81%D0%BB%D0%B0%D0%B2%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B0%D1%8F_%D0%B3%D1%83%D0%B1%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%BD%D0%B8%D1%8F
As for Tatars, while they indeed were the dominating population of Crimea prior to 1795, their numbers have not changed much during the centuries (excepting Stalin's deportation, which everyone agrees was a crime on par with deportation of Russians to force-colonise Baltics)
http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9A%D1%80%D1%8B%D0%BC#mediaviewer/%D0%A4%D0%B0%D0%B9%D0%BB:%D0%9D%D0%B0%D1%81%D0%B5%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%B5_%D0%9A%D1%80%D1%8B%D0%BC%D0%B0_%D0%B2_XVIII-XXI_%D0%B2%D0%B2..jpg
I accept that the Russians of Crimea want to unite with Russia (but not the Tartars, that were the original inhabitants and were expelled by Stalin)
Who told you that the Tatars are the original inhabitants of Crimea? The Tatars are a Turkic / Asian ethnic group which migrated to Crimea relatively recently (16th century AD). The Slavs were living in Crimea peacefully for many thousands of years prior to their arrival. The Tatars enslaved the original population and dominated them, until they were defeated by the Russians in the 18th century.
Tatars were there before the XVI century. It seems they arrived with the mongols, in the XIII century. But they mixed with the local population, so present tatars have even longer standing there.
But Tatars were the population in place when the Soviet Union was formed. If you want to go up to Adam and Eve to look for the original people, be my guest.
We both know that the Tatars were not friendly people.
Again, some of our fellow russian forum members use double standards. Russia was the legitimate ruler of Chechnya, Ukraine was an illegitimate one of Crimea. In one case, the will of the people must be respected, in the other, no.
Since russian troops violated territory of Ukraine and open fire on some of the Ukrainian bases, there was aggression. You can deny it, but no one will give any credibility to your stand
Since russian troops violated territory of Ukraine and open fire on some of the Ukrainian bases, there was aggression. You can deny it, but no one will give any credibility to your stand
Crimea declared independence from Ukraine through referendum, so after that you can't say that Russian troops violated territory of Ukraine. And they were officially there even before that and according to the treaty (with Ukraine, yes), they were obliged to take on police functions if such a need arises (e.g. in case of coup d'etat). A referendum was also in Chechnya...
Who is actually using double standards here?
Jump to: