-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
paradox
(㇏(•̀ᵥᵥ•́)ノ)
war crimes in UA is nothing but propaganda.
The only reason Ukraine exists is thanks to soviet union.
exchemist
Veteran Member
Ukraine has existed for centuries.
From whom?
ronki23
Well-Known Member
Wasn't Ukraine initially split between Poland and Russia (before the Soviet Union) ?
What was Poland's view of this when it happened as Russia clearly did not like losing Ukraine back then
ronki23
Well-Known Member
What do the citizens of those regions want ?
HonestJoe
Well-Known Member
It obviously isn't that simple since not everybody will be of the same opinion. In general, ethnic Russians make up around 40% of the population in Luhansk and Donbass, but not even all of them want the regions to actually become Russian or even independent.
There has certainly been some flawed or poorly implemented policies by Ukrainian governments over the years in relation to ethnic Russian and the Russian language, though that is in the context of a long-term Russian opinion that Ukraine always should have been and remain under Russian control.
There have been various accusations about war crimes and human rights abused thrown around since the recent conflict (and to an extent since 2014 when fighting started in Luhansk and Donbass, with unofficial Russia intervention). Some will be true and some will be false. I expect both Russia and Ukrainian forces are guilty of some offences, though scale and level of command or government involvement is likely to vary.
As in pretty much all international politics, and certainly in war, nobody is a squeaky clean white-hat hero.
Crimea is different prospected since it has been directly controlled by Russia since 2014. There was a greater proportion of ethnic Russians there but the purported 97% referendum vote for Russian control has largely been dismissed as invalid (given the ethnic Russian population isn't anything close to that and, as mentioned, not even all of them would support direct Russian control). I'm not aware of any open conflict happening in Crimea in recent years though, so the question of actual war crimes there is moot.
exchemist
Veteran Member
To stay in Ukraine, of course.
exchemist
Veteran Member
No, Initially, if there can ever be said to be such a thing, Kievan Rus' ruled Ukraine and what is now western Russia. As the name implies it was centred on Kyiv and was in effect Ukraine+ extras.
ronki23
Well-Known Member
Ukraine and Poland have definitely been one country in the past.
As have Poland and Latvia/Lithuania
Russia ceased to be a separate country when
incorporated into the USSR. Russia only became
a country in 1991. So Putin's rationalizations based
upon history ring hollow.
Soviet Union - Wikipedia
incorporated into the USSR. Russia only became
a country in 1991. So Putin's rationalizations based
upon history ring hollow.
Soviet Union - Wikipedia
It's a complicated history, although at one point, there was no "Ukraine," and the center of Russian culture and national identity centered around Kievan Rus as far back as the 9th century. Too long to go into right now, but the territory now known as Ukraine was invaded (Kiev sacked numerous times) and occupied by various foreign (non-Russian/non-Ukrainian) powers which held control at different times. Russia itself also fell under foreign occupation and the hegemony of the Mongol Empire.
Eventually, the Eastern Slavic people of the region known as Ukraine diverged culturally and linguistically from their brethren in the north and east which they were cut off from and under occupation. Crimea was under control of the Tatars and called the Khanate of Crimea, one of the last vestiges of the old Tatar, or Mongol, Yoke which gripped Russia. The Ottoman Empire also had control of large sections of what is now southern Ukraine, while the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth controlled the northern part, including Kiev.
Ultimately, the territory would eventually come back under Russian control and become part of the Russian Empire, but by that time, the Ukrainian language and culture had already taken shape. They had been separated by circumstance for so long that they were no longer really the same language and nationality anymore. While they never actually had true political independence or sovereignty until 1991, they still formed a unique national identity. The Russians may have seen them as just other Russians who were living "U Kraina" or "on the border."
As for Poland, they may have had different geopolitical aspirations at the time, but they were facing pressures of their own and had to give up their hold over Ukraine little by little. Russia's power was growing, and there were other growing threats to their west. Poland ended up losing their sovereignty entirely after the Napoleonic Wars, divided up between Germany and Russia. It wasn't until after WW1 that they regained their independence, but among other things, both Hitler and Stalin seemed to want to undo the results of that conflict and return their empires back to the way they were before WW1, which is how we ended up with WW2. Since Stalin was on the side of the victors in that war, he got to keep his empire and his spoils of war, and the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic was an integral part of the Soviet Union, just as it had been part of the Russian Empire.
Strictly speaking, the right to secede was written into the Soviet Constitution. Every Soviet Republic had the right to secede from the Soviet Union at any time they wished. There was a constitutionally mandated process which allowed for that. Legally, they could have seceded at any time, but they all seemed to pick the same moment to do so. Even the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic seceded.
At this point, this amounts to a border dispute. Crimea probably should have been given its own status as an independent republic, as they didn't become part of Ukraine until 1954 anyway. It was never really "Ukrainian" except by fiat of the Soviet government at the time. Luhansk and Donetsk were also not part of the Ukrainian territory as it was considered under Imperial Russia. Under the Tsar, Ukraine was smaller. The present day borders of Ukraine were established during the Soviet era.
ronki23
Well-Known Member
Isn't the argument that the capital was Moscow so that's why Russia was in charge of the USSR?
exchemist
Veteran Member
Sure, that was later under the Poland-Lithuania Commonwealth. In fact I was fascinated to learn recently that that commonwealth practised religious toleration, because it spanned such wide variety of faiths. This seems to explain something that had long puzzled me. which is why so many Jews ended up in North Eastern Europe. When the Catholic West expelled them or made life unpleasant, which sadly and shamefully so often happened, they could go to Poland-Lithuania and have a decent life.
ronki23
Well-Known Member
So therein lies Russia's claims to Ukraine. Put it to a referendum for the citizens to decide ?
Russia had much power, but as a country, it
was subsumed into the USSER (per the link).
There's a word I donna get to use every day.
Secret Chief
nirvana is samsara
"Link"?
ronki23
Well-Known Member
USSER? Do you meant USSR?
The Kremlin is in Moscow so that's why they say Russia was in charge.
Apparently the Soviet Union spent the majority of its money on Latvia, Lithuania, the 5 Stans and Ukraine. There was a budgetary breakdown and Russia received the lowest % of funding
Where did that errant "E" come from!
Lame rationalization for such bloody violent conquest.