Ukraine Crisis... Poland... and the way i see it

I know it was subtle, but I used italics for the word 'officially', which changes everything. I was being a bit ironical.
Because, once again, I don't want to believe ANY propaganda.

(And actually, you probably knew it already, but just in case, there were Russian troops in Crimea BEFORE the conflict, I mean legally. The question is: did Russia send additional troops and thus surpassed the authorised 25,000 stationed men in Crimea, agreed with the Ukrainian government?)

Not only that, but it also used its troops in way which broke said agreement, which is why Putin claimed then that the men he later admitted were his soldiers were 'self-defence forces' who had bought their equipment at the local shop.

As I said, all this is just a game. It's what they commonly call geopolitics. In that case, it seems Putin won. And apparently, without killing too many people.

But the US/EU coalition didn't lose either. They got Maidan and Poroshenko.
The only ones to lose are the Ukrainians.

I just accidentally listened to a Michael Jackson's song that they, the people(s) of Ukraine could sing along. All I wanna say is that they don't really care about us.

;)

1. On Feb. 9, 1990, Secretary of State James Baker promised Gorbachev that "NATO's jurisdiction would not shift one inch eastward from its present position" in case of Germany reunion. Later same assurances was provided by Helmut Kohl, chancellor of Germany. Germany was reunited, and promises was forgotten almost immediately.

To date, Ukraine received a lot of promises, who can be sure that it would cost more than ones in the case above?

2. As per Treaty of Küçük Kaynarca, signed by the Russian Tsarina Catherine II on April 19, 1783, the Crimean Peninsula was taken away from the dominion of the Ottomans and handed over to Russia. However, one of the most important provisions of this treaty was the debarment of independence for the Peninsula and outlawing its submission to a third party: Should any such attempt be made, then Crimea would automatically have to be returned to the sovereignty of Turkey.

When Ukraine appeared as an independent nation following the disintegration of the USSR in 1991, Turkey acquired formal right to claim the Crimea back. It was not done at a moment but Ukrainian "ownership" of Crimea was debatable, independent Crimea was debatable even more. Now there is nothing to debate anymore.

3. Budapest memorandum does not apply to the 2014 Crimean crisis because separation of Crimea was driven by an internal political and social-economic crisis. Russia was never under obligation to force any part of Ukraine's civilian population to stay in Ukraine against its will.

You are very simply lying.


nytimes.com/2009/11/30/opinion/30sarotte.html?pagewanted=all


Quite right, what Turkey settled for was guarantees as to the rights of the Crimean Tatars (as fellow Turkic people). However, recently the views of Tatars have been ignored and Tatar leaders have been tortured to death, so perhaps Turkey might seek to press her claim to the region.


And again you are lying. Despite Russian claims to the contrary, the Budapest memorandum does not contain any 'get-out' clauses. It very simply states:


en.wikisource.org/wiki/Ukraine._Memorandum_on_Security_Assurances
Russia has not respected independence and sovereignty and then existing borders of Ukraine and is not respecting the independence and sovereignty and then existing borders of Ukraine.

So, you are about to confirm that words of top officials of world's superpower is not legally binding and can be ignored?


Don't think so.


So, if Western Ukraine will decide to rejoin Poland on a referendum, should Russia send their troops to protect existing borders of Ukraine?

Should Russia declare war to Romania due to changing Ukrainian borders near Zmeiny island?

You are very simply lying about what he said. Baker did not promise anything: he asked a simple question.


No, Russia is in no way required to send troops to defend Ukraine pursuant to the Budapest memorandum. Perhaps you'd like to read the memorandum instead of just lying about what it says?


Yawn. Romania is not a nuclear power and thus is in no way covered by the Budapest memorandum. Perhaps you'd like to read the memorandum instead of just lying about what it says?

Must be Harry.

We had a game here once, a long time ago, when we wrote a typical sentence, and other members would guess which poster does it best represent. "You are lying!" would be yours, Harry. ;)

My point was about Poland being in a military alliance with these nations in NATO, which was very much not the case in Piłsudski's day. Nation states act in their own self-interest. At present that is a mutual defensive military alliance. I agree business is coming before principal and Europe is subsidizing Russia to destabilize Ukraine. Germany is really the nation which has the most capacity to influence Russia by turning off the gas lines. It isn't likely to do it.


Large states at historically large boundaries which fail rarely maintain their previous boundaries. There is no serious effort to stop Russian expansionism. Crimea will not be returned.

The question is which part gets broken off next.

Russia has annexed Crimea. As Crimea is Ukrainian according to international law and the UN, so Russian troops have invaded Ukraine

Crimea is also Ukrainian territory according to an international agreement Russia signed in exchange for Ukraine giving up nuclear weapons.


As said many times in the past: if you don't want to be called a liar, don't tell lies. If fewer people told lies here, I'd call fewer people here liars.

Anyway, I don't need to tell you this: I'm completely sure that your grandmother warned you about lying and you therefore have all the information you will ever need about lying.

Harry, lying is deliberately distorting the truth.

They are brainwashed... so they are not lying - simply telling the truth according to their deluded reality

Blinkered and emotional really. While people in the Ukraine are really suffering because of Soviet expansionism and fake separatists who are really soldiers.

We can discuss that for hours. According to international law and the UN, Crimeans have the right to self-determination. Then we can talk about the process, legal or illegal, who's lying or not.

And according to international law and the UN, the US had no right to invade Iraq (and many other exotic places). No-one condemned them. Why?


That's your allegation.


South Sudan was a Sudanese territory and Kosovo was a Serbian territory.


Are you sure, 100% sure, that 'your' reality is the absolute right one? The world is quite complex, and our medias are rarely neutral (even tho they should be).

There are always private interests, strategies. We usually know very little of what is really happening.

As Descartes said (and Socrates before him in a way), you should always doubt what you're told, and what you think you know.
And especially when there are so many cards in the game.

i won`t go into Sudan but, as for comparison of Kosovo to Crimea, just few words.

First of all, both- Kosovo and Crimea are autohtonous Slavic (Proto Slavic/Sarmatian/ie Sythian) regions.

Russian state was born from within Kievan Rus. In the meanwhile Russian ethos consolidated. With time, Ukrainians followed. Also, Ruthenians followed. Not to say that Poles also have historical connection to the territory of what is today`s Ukraine. So, Slavs there needs to talk. They all have same rights, considering that, as Slavs- they are all autohtonous population. They all have their specific characteristics and interests. All that have to be respected. They needs to learn to share their history. So far, what i heard, new Ukrainian authorities (BDW, same as old ones), speaks only of Ukrainian and Russian rights. Nobody asks Ruthenians. Nobody asks Poles. Not to say that you have region in the Ukraine populated with Serbs from Balkan in the middle age. Region was given to them legally by back then official Russian state institutions. Nobody ask them of anything now (ever). Not that i complaint. i don`t complaint. Nobody asks Serbs even in Serbia for Serbia, so why ask them in Ukraine.

Let all sides in Ukraine talk and negotiate as long as possible. They all have their rights. Let us Slavs prove to be competent in Slavic world, if we don`t wish that hostile non-Slavs arrange how we should live.

Now, as for Crimea specifically. Russian state, statehood, ethos and culture invested a lot of in the region. Nobody asked ethnic Russians when Soviet communists simple drown borders of the Soviet Republic of Ukraine. Actually, nobody asked even Ukrainians. So, in case with Crimea, we have false dilemma. If we were to follow logic that all negative things done by communists needs to be corrected, if possible, then- its alright that ethnic Russians vote and decide for Crimea to join with Russia.

On the other side, Kosovo and Metohija (two regions in short called just Kosovo) has nothing to do with deeper Albanian history, while has all with Serbian history in any sense (culture, statehood, religion, archeological sites). Even North of today`s Albania (Malesia region) was Slaveno-Serbian in the middle age and just with arrival of Ottoman Turkish invaders things changed. Due to Turkish intervention ethnic structure of Malesia/Kosovo changed on the behalf of Albanians. Then, Italians continued where Turks were stooped, during WWII. Not to mention Albanian pogroms over Serbian during WWI when Serbian army temporarily needed to retreat out of Serbia pressured by Austro-Hungarian and Bulgarian attacks. Finally, NATO/EU/Islamic league leading powers intervention in 1999, ultimately changed ethnic balance on Kosovo on the behalf of Albanians. Under their supervision, Albanians- ethnic minority in Serbia, separated Kosovo from Serbia.

Do you people know that USA congress voted to support thesis of Albanian nationalists who state that are Slavs newcomers to the region and so, that Albanians have all rights to prevail on Kosovo? Yes, USA congress support this kind of thinking.

It is especially interesting that from about century in the past Italians, then Austrians too, now already followed by entire EU, normally using designation Albanians, while Albanians, STILL, call themselves Squitary (in Serbian- Shiftari). Just go google or Wiki about it and see it for yourself. So, non-European population that was fist of Turkish invasion on Slaveno-Serbs is declared to be native on Kosovo. In that spirit, west of Europe changing ethnic name of that people from Squitary to Albanians (BDW, Albanians- is from Slavic Alba and means `belo`- `white` in English), while is native Slaveno-Serbian population forced on assimilation and to abandon region.

So, handing of Novorossia in march 1920 to Ukraine, annexation of Kresy Wschodnie, Bucovina de Nord, and many other territorial changes like handing Vilno from Poland to Lithuania shoul be questioned as well?


Can you show any proof, other than UNIAN news releases that trying to show that half of russian army fightring near Donetsk already?

yes,USA are hypocrites are they not?

Ukrainians and Russians are brothers always and forever so things will work out. Only problem is evil EU/NATO propaganda infiltrating the average people and turn them against each other.

Oh, to be eighteen again. Such optimism.


Why do you think that E. Ukranian refugees asked a BBC journalist about reports they'd heard about Ukranian children being abducted and sent to the USA for organ harvesting, or that Ukranian troops were firing on refugees as they walked to Russia, or that large numbers of Polish snipers were picking off escaping refugees? Did they hear that from the evil West?

"peace is on the way, by the sword they say"
Slavic people always fight each other, but eventually it will settle down, it is like a family. As I said they are brothers. Jugoslavia too will come a back. They are brothers so they will naturally drift together.

Look, If EU never put its nose where it don't belong none of this would be happening, Ukraine would be happy In Eurasian Union. Poland+Belarus+Ukraine+Russia. happy family.

What are you smoking?
Do you actually know any Polish people who live here, in Poland? The vast majority would rather be in the EU.

You don't only need to be a teenager to say such things: you also need to know absolutely nothing about this part of the world and to not remember even setting foot in Poland. Oh, and it helps to have at least grandparent with a somewhat questionable memory.

Yes, talking about peace is real threatening isn't it? Ukrainians + Russians = :D Jugoslav Unity <3
Poles have mixed feeling, and mostly thinking short term. I would not claim "all Poles think like this" or "all poles think like that" I can only speak for myself. Unlike Harry here who supposedly knows everything and if he don't know, you magically become a liar.

The EU/Nato powers caused this mess in the first place. Don't act like you guys don't know.

Not threatening, just utterly delusional and conclusive proof that the speaker knows bugger all about Poles (and Ukrainians).


Few Poles trust Russia as far as they can throw that country, and with very good reason.


No, son, you became a liar a long time ago and every time you tell a lie you become one again; if you're sick of me pointing out your lies, just stop telling them.


Yet another lie from you; or was it really the EU or NATO who invaded Crimea? Do give us the benefit of your expert view from your parents' Canadian basement.

I get it, you want division and chaos, while I want Peace and Slavic unity,
are you a Brit who claims your the voice of Poland or an Aussie? of course it don't matter, you would "know best" for the Polish people with your "I know better mentality"

I recall when this crisis broke out it had something to do with a pathetic trade agreement of some sort by the EU that got turned down.

This crisis started with maidan, Crimea followed after, or is your memory a little hazy?

stop describing your teenage experiences and projecting them at me.

I want what the vast majority of Poles want: a peaceful and prosperous Poland in the heart of Europe. You are just showing that you know nothing about Poles and Polish history.


None of those.


No, actually it was when a vastly unpopular and utterly corrupt regime tried to ignore its electorate once too often and then tried to crush the opposition, and then your Russian hero ordered an invasion of Ukraine; but do feel free to try to tell the Kremlin approved lies here, I do enjoy pointing you out as a liar.


I spent precisely none of my teenage years in Canada or in a basement, it's a real pity (for you, less so for the rest of the world) that you have spend all of your teenage years in a Canadian basement.

Do not pity me, unless you live in fantasy.
Poland can prosper, its not like without the west Poland will not prosper. Rzeczpospolita (Belarus+Ukraine+Poland) = Slavic Unity. even today with Kasubs and Silesians = Slavic unity

Hmm, Keep your opinion. Just remember I have mine and it does not make it a lie, because its true.

With the EU, Poland will do a hell of a lot better, as anybody who has been here knows. Ukraine would also do much better, which is why Ukrainians want into the EU.


No, you have your fantasy and I have Polish reality; pretty simple really.

yes, just like Greece, maybe Spain etc. EU does not equal prosperity. Norway, Switzerland prove that. EU is not magic, Ukraine will probably be worst off that's why the EU trade deal was called off.

no, you have a biased opinion that you insist everyone must believe in

Ukraine will be worse off, the chocolate guy has signed a deal that has no visa waiver, he must start paying for gas, introduce huge IMF imposed austerity cuts, open the market for dumping, introduce starvation pensions and destroy communities. He also has to win the confidence of the Russian speaking population.

This ain't going to fly, the nazi coup wasn't really thought through was it.

It can't have been thought about at all, seeing how it never happened. But now you're back, any chance that you can start to address the numerous lies that you've been caught telling here? Given how you've come straight back with the 'nazi' lies, perhaps you'd care to address the lies you were telling us about the Neo-nazis you claimed to be in control of the armed forces, national security, economy, justice and education ministries? Or perhaps you'd prefer to deal with why you were lying about the former acting president? Or perhaps the current interior minister? You told us so many lies you're almost spoilt for choice when deciding which one to address first!