Jump to content

Kiev Burning


maqroll

Recommended Posts

It always amazes me that whenever there is a diplomatic flareup in the world, one of the very first moves countries make is to withdraw their ambassadors, the very people who should remain engaged in DIPLOMACY. Fools, all of them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Crimea is kind of complicated, I'm not trying to condone Putins actions but it was russian for 300 years till Kruschev arbitrarily gave it to ukraine and it's a very important strategic port for them. Plus it has an ethnic russian majority and the people there will almost certainly vote to join Russia.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Crimea is kind of complicated, I'm not trying to condone Putins actions but it was russian for 300 years till Kruschev arbitrarily gave it to ukraine and it's a very important strategic port for them. Plus it has an ethnic russian majority and the people there will almost certainly vote to join Russia.

Yet, as Awol pointed out earlier, the Russians were signatories (along with the UK, US and others) to a 'memorandum' (I thought that was something one sent as a reminder to get the bacon sarnies in) regarding Ukrainian sovereignty in order to secure Ukrainian nuclear disarmament.

The historical boundaries argument is spurious at the best of times but it doesn't wash as a way out of international promises (that those promises may not have carried any weight to start with is a different kettle of stuff).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Crimea is kind of complicated, I'm not trying to condone Putins actions but it was russian for 300 years till Kruschev arbitrarily gave it to ukraine and it's a very important strategic port for them. Plus it has an ethnic russian majority and the people there will almost certainly vote to join Russia.

Yet, as Awol pointed out earlier, the Russians were signatories (along with the UK, US and others) to a 'memorandum' (I thought that was something one sent as a reminder to get the bacon sarnies in) regarding Ukrainian sovereignty in order to secure Ukrainian nuclear disarmament.

The historical boundaries argument is spurious at the best of times but it doesn't wash as a way out of international promises (that those promises may not have carried any weight to start with is a different kettle of stuff).

I understand that, and Russia is more in the wrong I think, but the issue is that they made that agreement at a time when they were promised the continued ability to use the Crimean port and keep their fleet there etc.

Being how uber-nationalist the new government seems to be, once they get established it's certainly a possibility that they could take away Russia's ability to use Crimea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I understand that, and Russia is more in the wrong I think, but the issue is that they made that agreement at a time when they were promised the continued ability to use the Crimean port and keep their fleet there etc.

Were they? Even if they were that doesn't excuse breaking the promises in order to prevent possible future breaches of those promises by the other party.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Russia will move for the Crimea and just call it a day there. It would be disadvantageous for them to try and take over Ukraine. Whether they should be allowed to just claim the Crimea is a whole other matter, but I hope they just stop there and we avoid WWIII

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I understand that, and Russia is more in the wrong I think, but the issue is that they made that agreement at a time when they were promised the continued ability to use the Crimean port and keep their fleet there etc.

Were they? Even if they were that doesn't excuse breaking the promises in order to prevent possible future breaches of those promises by the other party.
They still are. They have their Black Sea fleet stationed there and regularly use the port. As I said, I'm sure they're concerned about losing access due to the nationalist govt, and it's the biggest port they use that doesn't freeze over in the summer.

But... Putins still a world class asshole.

Edited by Rovers13
Link to comment
Share on other sites

They still are. They have their Black Sea fleet stationed there and regularly use the port. As I said, I'm sure they're concerned about losing access due to the nationalist govt, and it's the biggest port they use that doesn't freeze over in the summer.

I'm not disagreeing with the fact that they are there and there is/was obviously some sort of arrangement but my question was about it being part of that memorandum (i.e. being wrapped up in the whole nuclear disarmament/territorial integrity issue and thus involving the UK, US and others). Edited by snowychap
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Russia will move for the Crimea and just call it a day there. It would be disadvantageous for them to try and take over Ukraine. Whether they should be allowed to just claim the Crimea is a whole other matter, but I hope they just stop there and we avoid WWIII

 

Relax, nobodys going to war over this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â