Same old Vlad the Merciful - as if!

[Mock Turtle]

Putin ‘threatens action’ against ex-Soviet states if they defy Russia

Vladimir Putin has issued a thinly-veiled threat to former Soviet Union countries – warning they could share the same fate as Ukraine for defying Russia. The Russian President made clear he would not hesitate to take the same action against them should they turn against the Kremlin, and would no longer ‘be allies’ with the country. Mr Putin’s comments followed those of the president of Kazakhstan, who had described the pro-Russian regions of Donetsk and Luhansk in the Donbas as ‘quasi-states territories’. As Kassym-Jomart Tokayev sat metres away from him at the St Petersburg Economic Forum, he claimed Kazakhstan – which left the USSR in 1991 – was part of ‘historic Russia’. ‘What is the Soviet Union? This is historic Russia,’ Mr Putin said, before praising Kazakhstan as a brotherly nation. ‘The same thing could have happened with Ukraine, absolutely, but they wouldn’t be our allies.’

So, same old Vlad the Mad, and not learning from the wise old tome 'How to Make Friends and Influence People', but preferring the stick always - and just so intelligent of course.

At the same conference in St Petersburg, Mr Putin said he anticipated Russia and Ukraine would restore relations after the ‘special military operation’ had concluded. ‘Sooner or later, the situation will return to normal,’ he added, during a Q&A session with Mr Tokayev.

He might like to bet on that. Except he probably won't be around long enough to see his mistakes, so it is a bit pointless to make a bet with him now.

Delusional Idiot of the Year, apart from Trump, that is?

 

[Estro Felino]

If they had given Donbas to Russia 3 months ago, nothing of this would have happened.

 

[ChristineM]

If they had given Donbas to Russia 3 months ago, nothing of this would have happened.

And why give away part of your land? Hey wait a moment, i kind of
Ike Umbria, can i have it... Pretty please?

 

[Estro Felino]

And why give away part of your land?

Because they speak Russian in Donbas

 

[ChristineM]

Because they speak Russian in Donbas

So? They speak Russian in several ex soviet controlled countries and areas of countries. What makes donbas special other than Putins greed?

Edit:. I will add that they speak English in several countries or areas that were once part of the British empire. So should the brits declare war on them to get a semblance of the empire back?

I really don't believe you said that

 

[Estro Felino]

So? They speak Russian in several ex soviet controlled countries and areas of countries. What makes donbas special other than Putins greed?

Edit:. I will add that they speak English in several countries or areas that were once part of the British empire. So should the brits declare war on them to get a semblance of the empire back?

I really don't believe you said that

If you want to debate, I started a thread about Donbas
How Poroshenko loved Donbas

 

[VoidCat]

Alaska isn't a country but it used to be part of Russia. Good luck to him if he decides to attack there since the US is helping Ukraine. Of course he wouldn't he's probably not that stupid.

 

[Augustus]

If they had given Donbas to Russia 3 months ago, nothing of this would have happened.

He would have asked for more.

He has already said this publicly in his Peter the Great analogy. It is about irredentist expansion and always was.

Because they speak Russian in Donbas

They speak English in America and Ireland, French in Québec and Switzerland, German in Switzerland and Austria, Arabic in Egypt and Syria let's go back to the colonial era, eh?

 

[Estro Felino]

He would have asked for more.

He has already said this publicly in his Peter the Great analogy. It is about irredentist expansion and always was.



They speak English in America and Ireland, French in Québec and Switzerland, German in Switzerland and Austria, Arabic in Egypt and Syria let's go back to the colonial era, eh?

I started a thread providing evidence of how the dear and gentle Poroshenko (and his successor) loved the Russians of Donbas. If you reply to that thread, this discussion can go on.
How Poroshenko loved Donbas

Because that video explains it all.

 

[Stevicus]

Putin ‘threatens action’ against ex-Soviet states if they defy Russia

Vladimir Putin has issued a thinly-veiled threat to former Soviet Union countries – warning they could share the same fate as Ukraine for defying Russia. The Russian President made clear he would not hesitate to take the same action against them should they turn against the Kremlin, and would no longer ‘be allies’ with the country. Mr Putin’s comments followed those of the president of Kazakhstan, who had described the pro-Russian regions of Donetsk and Luhansk in the Donbas as ‘quasi-states territories’. As Kassym-Jomart Tokayev sat metres away from him at the St Petersburg Economic Forum, he claimed Kazakhstan – which left the USSR in 1991 – was part of ‘historic Russia’. ‘What is the Soviet Union? This is historic Russia,’ Mr Putin said, before praising Kazakhstan as a brotherly nation. ‘The same thing could have happened with Ukraine, absolutely, but they wouldn’t be our allies.’

So, same old Vlad the Mad, and not learning from the wise old tome 'How to Make Friends and Influence People', but preferring the stick always - and just so intelligent of course.

At the same conference in St Petersburg, Mr Putin said he anticipated Russia and Ukraine would restore relations after the ‘special military operation’ had concluded. ‘Sooner or later, the situation will return to normal,’ he added, during a Q&A session with Mr Tokayev.

He might like to bet on that. Except he probably won't be around long enough to see his mistakes, so it is a bit pointless to make a bet with him now.

Delusional Idiot of the Year, apart from Trump, that is?

It's an interesting yet messy history. Here's an interesting article with map which shows how the modern boundaries of Ukraine were formulated.

Ukraine: made by Lenin, unmade by Putin? - Big Think

A long time ago, the territory known as Ukraine was once referred to as Kievan Rus (aka "Russia"). But due to centuries of outside invasions, occupations, and annexations into other countries, the territory was held by others, particularly Poland-Lithuania at one point. Because of the political, cultural, and linguistic separation, their language and culture diverged.

During the 17th and 18th centuries, as Polish power in Eastern Europe waned, Russia slowly and incrementally retook the territory and incorporated it in the Russian Empire. The southern area of the region, including Crimean, were never Ukrainian at all; that area was controlled by the Khanate of Crimean (a holdover from the Mongol invasions) and also by Turkey, which was also eventually driven out by the Russians. In fact, Ukraine never once actually existed as an independent nation, not until 1991.

From the article:

So, is one Vladimir merely righting the wrong perpetrated by another Vladimir a century earlier? Not so fast. It’s not just Lenin’s fault. In the “Ukraine is not real” school of thought, currently quite popular in Russia, there are plenty of historical figures to blame for Ukrainians’ inflated sense of self.

“Both before and after the Great Patriotic War,” Putin went on, “Stalin incorporated in the USSR and transferred to Ukraine some lands that previously belonged to Poland, Romania, and Hungary. In the process, he gave Poland part of what was traditionally German land as compensation, and in 1954, Khrushchev took Crimea away from Russia for some reason and also gave it to Ukraine. In effect, this is how the territory of modern Ukraine was formed.”

This map, which often pops up in circles of Kremlin apologists, illustrates and elaborates that point.

All you need is Lvov
The map shows the area gifted to Ukraine by Lenin in 1922 (in blue), which contains not just the rebel city of Luhansk, but a stretch of land all the way to the Black Sea port of Odessa, and beyond to the present-day border of Romania.

Also included (in green) are the areas attached to Ukraine by Stalin, before and after the Second World War (a.k.a. the Great Patriotic War in the former Soviet Union). This includes the previously Polish city of Lviv (a.k.a. Lvov, Lemberg, Lemberik, Ilyvo, Lvihorod, and Leopolis — an indication of the area’s many overlapping cultures), and a formerly Austro-Hungarian and Czechoslovakian area known as Transcarpathia (see also Strange Maps #57).

And in purple, there is Crimea. Previously an Ottoman vassal state, the Crimean Peninsula was annexed by Russia in 1783. It remained part of Russia until Khrushchev transferred it from the Russian to the Ukrainian Soviet republic in 1954.

That transfer celebrated the 300th anniversary of “Ukraine’s reunification with Russia” (as per the Treaty of Pereyaslav in 1654) and expressed the “boundless trust and love the Russian people feel toward the Ukrainian people.” It was a natural consequence of the territorial, economic, and cultural proximity between Crimea and Ukraine.

That was the official story. According to this analysis by the Wilson Center, the transfer may very well have been designed specifically to increase the number of Russians in Ukraine, and thus Russia’s hold over it. And it may have been a way to shore up support from Ukrainian Communist leaders for Khrushchev in the ongoing power struggle for the supreme leadership within the USSR.

Chip away the additions by those three Communist leaders and what remains of “Soviet Ukraine” is a much smaller state. The relevant date here is 1654. In that year, Ukrainian Cossacks obtained Russian protection in their fight for independence from the Polish-Lithuanian commonwealth. The yellow area was added to the now Russian client state of Ukraine following the aforementioned Treaty of Pereyaslav.

The previously independent part is the orange bit in the middle. Not so big now, are you, Ukraine? The larger point made by this map of a much, much smaller Ukraine is that the current version of that country owes its size to Russia, which therefore also has the right to un-create it.

The best neighbor is a small neighbor
In other words, this a license to remold Ukraine’s borders as Russia sees fit. It’s pretty safe to say that, absent the restraints of international law, that is how most large countries feel about their much smaller neighbors.

Except that this approach to international borders is against international law, and with good reason. It’s like throwing Pandora’s boomerang. Immediately following Putin’s speech, the internet resonated with claims that the Mongols wanted their Empire back (which at its height included much of Russia) and with questions when Putin would be handing Kaliningrad (once the Prussian city of Königsberg — see also Strange Maps #536) back to Germany.

Given that just about every country harbors some territorial grievance toward its neighbors — yes, even Luxembourg — the proliferation of this attitude would transform the arena of global politics from Twelve Angry Men into Fight Club in no time.

This last bit quoted above is the most salient point. In the days before there was such a thing as international law, countries would settle their territorial disputes the old fashioned way.

Of course, it's perfectly natural for any group of people with common ethnic/linguistic/cultural ties to want sovereignty and independence, and if they feel they've had their land unjustly taken from them, they're going to want it back. A lot of this is the result of nationalism, as well as differences of opinion over what constitutes a real "nation."

On the surface, it appears that some aspects of European geopolitics have been regressing back to the 19th and early 20th centuries, back when the Great Powers ruled the roost and pretty much governed the entire world, in one form or another. The U.S. had also emerged as one of the Great Powers by that time, and indeed, there are those in this country who ostensibly want a regression back to this earlier era.

Of course, the prevailing nationalistic attitudes back in those days is what led us into two world wars and a Cold War, along with countless other tribal wars and enmities which developed in the wreckage and aftermath of colonialism, when the borders of various African, Asian, and Middle Eastern countries were haphazardly drawn by other governments who had no real clue as to what they were doing.

Even the earlier redrawing of European boundaries at Versailles in 1919 turned out to be an utter disaster. This also included the dismemberment of the Ottoman Empire, which probably could have been handled better.

This map shows the linguistic regions of Europe, which don't always correspond to the national boundaries. It also includes language groups which don't comprise independent nations.

Interestingly, with the Serbians, Croatians, and Bosnians, they speak basically the same language, yet they differ by religion. That's another key component which gets overlooked.

A key difference with the Soviets (at least early on, along with others of a more socialistic and internationalistic mindset) was that they reacted strongly against the tsarist Russification policies. The idea was that non-Russian Soviet Republics could still retain their native language and culture, as long as they were socialist and remained loyal to the Soviet government. The term "Union of Soviet Socialist Republics" does not contain the word "Russia," even though Russian was the lingua franca throughout the country.

My main point in saying all of this is that, too many people erroneously believe that Russia's invasion of Ukraine is about "restoring the USSR," but it's not. It could be about restoring the old Russian Empire, but it's not Soviet, not communist, not socialist, and not internationalist. This is a clash between rival nationalists, both sides stubbornly believing that certain patches of land belong to them.

The only reason the West feels the need to get involved is because they fear that the Soviet Union is coming back like some kind of old ghost. Such a belief is not founded in fact, yet it seems to be the driving force behind the Western narrative thus far.

 

[Augustus]

I started a thread providing evidence of how the dear and gentle Poroshenko (and his successor) loved the Russians of Donbas. If you reply to that thread, this discussion can go on.
How Poroshenko loved Donbas

Because that video explains it all.

15 seconds out of context versus a decade of real world actions and hours of speeches?

You are not exactly disproving your blind religious devotion to Saint Vladimir.

Have you watched the whole speech?

 

[sun rise]

If they had given Donbas to Russia 3 months ago, nothing of this would have happened.

Nice fantasy. They tried it with Hitler and Putin is much the same.

 

[Estro Felino]

15 seconds out of context versus a decade of real world actions and hours of speeches?

You are not exactly disproving your blind religious devotion to Saint Vladimir.

Have you watched the whole speech?

Poroshenko says in 2014 : "only by that we will win this war".
So the war did not start last February.

 

[ChristineM]

If you want to debate, I started a thread about Donbas
How Poroshenko loved Donbas

I thought i was replying to your posts on this thread

 

[Mock Turtle]

It's an interesting yet messy history. Here's an interesting article with map which shows how the modern boundaries of Ukraine were formulated.

Ukraine: made by Lenin, unmade by Putin? - Big Think

A long time ago, the territory known as Ukraine was once referred to as Kievan Rus (aka "Russia"). But due to centuries of outside invasions, occupations, and annexations into other countries, the territory was held by others, particularly Poland-Lithuania at one point. Because of the political, cultural, and linguistic separation, their language and culture diverged.

During the 17th and 18th centuries, as Polish power in Eastern Europe waned, Russia slowly and incrementally retook the territory and incorporated it in the Russian Empire. The southern area of the region, including Crimean, were never Ukrainian at all; that area was controlled by the Khanate of Crimean (a holdover from the Mongol invasions) and also by Turkey, which was also eventually driven out by the Russians. In fact, Ukraine never once actually existed as an independent nation, not until 1991.

From the article:













This last bit quoted above is the most salient point. In the days before there was such a thing as international law, countries would settle their territorial disputes the old fashioned way.

Of course, it's perfectly natural for any group of people with common ethnic/linguistic/cultural ties to want sovereignty and independence, and if they feel they've had their land unjustly taken from them, they're going to want it back. A lot of this is the result of nationalism, as well as differences of opinion over what constitutes a real "nation."

On the surface, it appears that some aspects of European geopolitics have been regressing back to the 19th and early 20th centuries, back when the Great Powers ruled the roost and pretty much governed the entire world, in one form or another. The U.S. had also emerged as one of the Great Powers by that time, and indeed, there are those in this country who ostensibly want a regression back to this earlier era.

Of course, the prevailing nationalistic attitudes back in those days is what led us into two world wars and a Cold War, along with countless other tribal wars and enmities which developed in the wreckage and aftermath of colonialism, when the borders of various African, Asian, and Middle Eastern countries were haphazardly drawn by other governments who had no real clue as to what they were doing.

Even the earlier redrawing of European boundaries at Versailles in 1919 turned out to be an utter disaster. This also included the dismemberment of the Ottoman Empire, which probably could have been handled better.

This map shows the linguistic regions of Europe, which don't always correspond to the national boundaries. It also includes language groups which don't comprise independent nations.

Interestingly, with the Serbians, Croatians, and Bosnians, they speak basically the same language, yet they differ by religion. That's another key component which gets overlooked.

A key difference with the Soviets (at least early on, along with others of a more socialistic and internationalistic mindset) was that they reacted strongly against the tsarist Russification policies. The idea was that non-Russian Soviet Republics could still retain their native language and culture, as long as they were socialist and remained loyal to the Soviet government. The term "Union of Soviet Socialist Republics" does not contain the word "Russia," even though Russian was the lingua franca throughout the country.

My main point in saying all of this is that, too many people erroneously believe that Russia's invasion of Ukraine is about "restoring the USSR," but it's not. It could be about restoring the old Russian Empire, but it's not Soviet, not communist, not socialist, and not internationalist. This is a clash between rival nationalists, both sides stubbornly believing that certain patches of land belong to them.

The only reason the West feels the need to get involved is because they fear that the Soviet Union is coming back like some kind of old ghost. Such a belief is not founded in fact, yet it seems to be the driving force behind the Western narrative thus far.

I suppose one could take any point in history and claim some rights as to territory, but my main point is that Putin seems intent regardless of what others might want, and unfortunately using the stick rather than the carrot where such often just doesn't work. But then he does seem to be following in the footsteps of Hitler as to such.

 

[Augustus]

Poroshenko says in 2014 : "only by that we will win this war".
So the war did not start last February.

Yes, Ukraine also forced Saint Vladimir to invade Crimea. Ukraine is a very bad country to keep making poor, peace loving Saint Vladimir keep invading it and stealing its territory. Only the true peace loving leaders make their name conducting brutal wars to prevent people leaving their country, then conduct brutal wars to force people to join their country.

Ukraine even worse for publicly acknowledging Saint Vladimir had engaged in an act of war against them by using military force to steal their territory.

Ukraine very very bad. NATO worse. Saint Vladimir very good and holy. Noble and kind man. Loves humanity and freedom.

 

[Estro Felino]

Yes, Ukraine also forced Saint Vladimir to invade Crimea. Ukraine is a very bad country to keep making poor, peace loving Saint Vladimir keep invading it and stealing its territory. Only the true peace loving leaders make their name conducting brutal wars to prevent people leaving their country, then conduct brutal wars to force people to join their country.

Ukraine even worse for publicly acknowledging Saint Vladimir had engaged in an act of war against them by using military force to steal their territory.

Ukraine very very bad. NATO worse. Saint Vladimir very good and holy. Noble and kind man. Loves humanity and freedom.

Chronology, first. Events must be put in chronological order.

2013-2014
1) Ukraine goes nationalist and anti-Russian.
2) Russian speaking people in Crimea are the 98% of the population in that peninsula. They are harassed and threatened by the Ukrainian government.
3) They ask Moscow for help. And Moscow helps them. Crimeans want to be annexed via referendum.
4) The referendum takes place and Crimea is annexed.
5) Poroshenko focuses on the Russians of Donbas and gives that speech I posted (below).
6) Donbas people are harassed, persecuted, bombed throughout 6 years (15-21).
7) Putin decides to help them by invading Ukraine.

I am a lawyer. I am able to demonstrate this in any National and International Court..
But the fact is that I am uncontradictable, so nobody will ever show up.

 

[Augustus]

Chronology, first. Events must be put in chronological order.

2013-2014
1) Ukraine goes nationalist and anti-Russian.
2) Russian speaking people in Crimea are the 98% of the population in that peninsula. They are harassed and threatened by the Ukrainian government.
3) They ask Moscow for help. And Moscow helps them. Crimeans want to be annexed via referendum.
4) The referendum takes place and Crimea is annexed.
5) Poroshenko focuses on the Russians of Donbas and gives that devilish speech I posted (below).
6) Donbas people are harassed, persecuted, bombed throughout 6 years (15-21).
7) Putin decides to help them by invading Ukraine.

I am a lawyer. I am able to demonstrate this in any National and International Court..
But the fact is that I am uncontradictable, so nobody will ever show up.

Your timeline is fantasy.

Ukraine kicks out a corrupt Russian stooge.

Russia sulks because it demands the right to dominate its neighbours and have them dance to its beat.

Russia uses force to punish its neighbours for not wanting to be Russian vassals. People in Donbas suffer from being ruled by pro Russian warlords (hence they don't welcome the Russian invaders like Russia seemed to expect).

Some people fall for the propaganda and blame the evil Ukrainians for forcing Saint Vladimir to be violent and oppressive just as he has been his whole career both domestically and in foreign policy.

Why do you think he compared himself to Peter the Great? A brutal, oppressive leader who justified these by territorial expansion and national greatness.

Why do you think he brutally crushes any people who want to leave Russia, yet demands the right to force people to join Russia?

 

[Estro Felino]

Your timeline is fantasy.

Ukraine kicks out a corrupt Russian stooge.

Russia sulks because it demands the right to dominate its neighbours and have them dance to its beat.

Russia uses force to punish its neighbours for not wanting to be Russian vassals. People in Donbas suffer from being ruled by pro Russian warlords (hence they don't welcome the Russian invaders like Russia seemed to expect).

Some people fall for the propaganda and blame the evil Ukrainians for forcing Saint Vladimir to be violent and oppressive just as he has been his whole career both domestically and in foreign policy.

Why do you think he compared himself to Peter the Great? A brutal, oppressive leader who justified these by territorial expansion and national greatness.

Why do you think he brutally crushes any people who want to leave Russia, yet demands the right to force people to join Russia?

With all due respect, can you substantiate your claims?
Because I have overwhelming evidence brought to Italy by journalists like Giorgio Bianchi, Giulietto Chiesa who went to Donbass and the real people told them that what Poroshenko said in that video is 100% true. Poroshenko has been doing anything to persecute the Russian population in the two republic of Donbas.
As Poroshenko in that video said, the Kyiv Government gave them no pensions. No kindergartens, no schools.
So...is this a way to turn the victims into the perpetrators?

 

[Estro Felino]

Why do you think he compared himself to Peter the Great? A brutal, oppressive leader who justified these by territorial expansion and national greatness.

The Romanovs and the Habsburgs have fought to defend Europe from the invaders.
Siege of Vienna, and so on