PDA

View Full Version : Sarkozy: Crimea cannot be blamed for joining Russia



quincy
08-02-2015, 12:03
Crimea cannot be blamed for seceding from Ukraine – a country in turmoil – and choosing to join Russia, said former president of France, Nicolas Sarkozy. He also added that Ukraine “is not destined to join the EU.”
http://rt.com/news/230283-sarkozy-crimea-russia-blamed/

FatAndy
08-02-2015, 13:58
NikolyA just wants to presidents again, and the best specialist in it is Vovan. ;)

But, if it's the first signs of self-standing French policy (first time for the last 50 years) - it will be good...

Yaks
08-02-2015, 14:15
Crimea cannot be blamed for seceding from Ukraine – a country in turmoil – and choosing to join Russia, said former president of France, Nicolas Sarkozy. He also added that Ukraine “is not destined to join the EU.”
http://rt.com/news/230283-sarkozy-crimea-russia-blamed/

of course. When you expel the native tatar population to central asia and import mass migration of Russians-you get the demographics that make seceding from Ukraine more likely.

And considering that the tatars didn't support the referendum it is pretty clear that had this historic wrong been corrected and the vote of the diaspora counted-the result would have been clear to remain.

but who cares about justice when it means the Russians can have a navy base rent free on territory it was allowed to keep from the Turks on condition
that it had no naval presence there. And who cares about the sovereignty of nations that Russia harps on about when it comes to Syria and Iran, when the country is Russia's neighbour and so the rules don't apply?

Judge
08-02-2015, 15:18
Condition of the Turks, how far do you wanna go back....

Yak, do you have a link to this condition, asking cos will use it when talking about Crimea to friends here..


Sarkozy, interesting thoughts, I wonder,would he have said the same if he was leader...

Yak, about justice, you are very knowledgeable in such things,strange you ask, Russia is sitting on 1000s of nukes, and not only nukes but an arsenal of weapons only 2nd to the US. .With such weapons, you make and break rules.

quincy
08-02-2015, 15:21
of course. When you expel the native tatar population to central asia and import mass migration of Russians-you get the demographics that make seceding from Ukraine more likely.



Different peoples from the Russian empire have been moving into Crimea since 1783.

Tatars and others were deported to Central Asia, on charges of supporting the Nazis but Japanese were also interned in California during the same time. If it's true would it have been worth swapping one dictator for another one?

What happened to the peoples who used to be in Crimea before the Tatars moved in? In the 15th century most of Feodosia was Christian

fenrir
08-02-2015, 16:43
The two tables in the link show the changes in the population of the Crimea over the last 220+ years.

http://www.iccrimea.org/population.html

Yaks
08-02-2015, 16:54
Different peoples from the Russian empire have been moving into Crimea since 1783.

Tatars and others were deported to Central Asia, on charges of supporting the Nazis but Japanese were also interned in California during the same time. If it's true would it have been worth swapping one dictator for another one?

What happened to the peoples who used to be in Crimea before the Tatars moved in? In the 15th century most of Feodosia was Christian

I don't know a single person who condones what happened to the Japanese in America infact it is a blight on their history and they know it. My family were locked up for 4 years in WW1 in oz for being "German" even though they had lived in oz since the 1860s when Germany didn't even exist(they were descended from Prussian Jews.) The difference is that after the war they were released and went about their lives exactly where they were. What Stalin did was ethnic cleansing pure and simple. Those wrongs were never corrected in during the Soviet Union. The large Russian population is an artificial construct of a policy to bring in Russians into all Baltic and Central Asian capitals as well as Crimea and Kaliningrad(the latter incidentally where my family originate from.)

But it is an absolute farce to talk of Crimea as Russian based on demographics when that changed all happened in the last 70 years.

Yaks
08-02-2015, 17:20
Condition of the Turks, how far do you wanna go back....

Yak, do you have a link to this condition, asking cos will use it when talking about Crimea to friends here..


Sarkozy, interesting thoughts, I wonder,would he have said the same if he was leader...

Yak, about justice, you are very knowledgeable in such things,strange you ask, Russia is sitting on 1000s of nukes, and not only nukes but an arsenal of weapons only 2nd to the US. .With such weapons, you make and break rules.

Breaking the rules is why Russia is facing sanctions.

but here it is:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Paris_(1856)

Russia broke the treaty a few years later. But that treaty was the grounds for their claim on Crimea, which they made themselves void. The previous treaty(from the previous Russo-Turkish war) did allow Crimea to come under Russia's sphere of influence but it also recognised the Crimean khanate as independent. So either Russia could accept it as Tatar territory and have a naval presence in the black sea, or they can claim it is Russian territory but have no naval presence in the black sea at all. They can't have both.

As for who was there before the Tatars(and remained mostly there alongside them) that falls to some Jews(Karaites) and Greeks with a few others. Russians weren't among them. Russians are not indigenous to the peninsula.

fenrir
08-02-2015, 18:38
The large Russian population is an artificial construct of a policy to bring in Russians into all Baltic and Central Asian capitals as well as Crimea and Kaliningrad(the latter incidentally where my family originate from.)

But it is an absolute farce to talk of Crimea as Russian based on demographics when that changed all happened in the last 70 years.

You are absolutely right about that. Many Russians here (I won't even get into what Russians in Russia think) claim Estonia to be Russian land. They either ignore or refuse to believe the archeological evidence that the first Estonians arrived here nearly 11,000 years ago (and thus, have had a continual presence on the land) or the German/Swedish Periods. And many of them say the same things I here them saying about Ukraine: Estonia isn't a real country and doesn't have a right to exist.

Benedikt
08-02-2015, 18:40
NikolyA just wants to presidents again, and the best specialist in it is Vovan. ;)

But, if it's the first signs of self-standing French policy (first time for the last 50 years) - it will be good...



the French have enough of Hollande.And they want to sell their Brie and Camembert to Russia.
Sarkozy just has to woe the left and LePenn a little bit and he will get it.SHE herself is not strong enough to lead LeGrandNation. But together with Sarkozy, might be an interesting Scenario.

FatAndy
08-02-2015, 19:20
of course. When you expel the native tatar population to central asia and import mass migration of Russians-you get the demographics that make seceding from Ukraine more likely
...and representatives of etnic groups forming this demographics DON'T die under artillery fire and bombs of Ukrobandits, like in Slavyansk, Donetsk and Lugansk. That's only one of reasons the referendum was good and correct ;)


And considering that the tatars didn't support the referendum it is pretty clear that had this historic wrong been corrected and the vote of the diaspora counted-the result would have been clear to remain.
:D During 23 years of so called "independence" plus ~5 years of catastroika nobody prevented Crimean tatars from returning to Krym. If they didn't return - insha alla...

FatAndy
08-02-2015, 19:25
the first Estonians arrived here nearly 11,000 years ago (and thus, have had a continual presence on the land)
They have to learn from protoUkrs - those claimed 70000 years :rofl: What about digging out Baltic Sea? ;)


And many of them say the same things I here them saying about Ukraine: Estonia isn't a real country and doesn't have a right to exist.
:) How they dare!:9451: Estonians even have the army and 1 tank!

fenrir
08-02-2015, 21:32
They have to learn from protoUkrs - those claimed 70000 years :rofl: What about digging out Baltic Sea? ;)


:) How they dare!:9451: Estonians even have the army and 1 tank!

Actually, we have no tanks but we do have lots of soldiers/militia with automatic weapons and anti-tank missiles who are well-trained in guerilla warfare. That, plus the difficult terrain, makes Estonia hard to occupy. Even Stalin needed 7+ years to defeat the Forest Brothers after WW II and Putin is no Stalin and this time around we have allies.

Tzushima
08-02-2015, 21:42
Sarkozy sounds like a french Sarah Palin:10475:

FatAndy
08-02-2015, 21:59
we do have lots of soldiers/militia with automatic weapons and anti-tank missiles who are well-trained in guerilla warfare.
Will see. Or maybe no :)


and Putin is no Stalin
Sure, he's much more blood-thirsty.:happymad:

Uncle Wally
09-02-2015, 06:59
Actually, we have no tanks but we do have lots of soldiers/militia with automatic weapons and anti-tank missiles who are well-trained in guerilla warfare. That, plus the difficult terrain, makes Estonia hard to occupy. Even Stalin needed 7+ years to defeat the Forest Brothers after WW II and Putin is no Stalin and this time around we have allies.



Maybe Stalin just wasn't very interested in Estonia did you every think of that? And maybe Putin isn't either. If you weren't trolling these boards all the time I wouldn't think about Estonia at all.

Uncle Wally
09-02-2015, 07:04
Sarkozy sounds like a french Sarah Palin:10475:



Yeah well I think a lot of Ukrainians are wondering if it was such I good idea changing the government the way they did.

Tzushima
09-02-2015, 07:27
Yeah well I think a lot of Ukrainians are wondering if it was such I good idea changing the government the way they did.

Yanikovych abdicated :gay:

Uncle Wally
09-02-2015, 07:44
Yanikovych abdicated :gay:



Abdicated? Is that what you call in when hundreds of people come to your home with pitchforks screaming to see your blood? Abdicked is more like it. Have you been in the saki?

Tzushima
09-02-2015, 07:53
As the One True King of Ukraine, Yanukovych should be at the head of the "Eastern Ukrainian Army" to take back his stolen lands from Western Hordes, it seems like he should have gathered his strength by now, relaxing in Yalta or wherever he's been.

Uncle Wally
09-02-2015, 08:18
As the One True King of Ukraine, Yanukovych should be at the head of the "Eastern Ukrainian Army" to take back his stolen lands from Western Hordes, it seems like he should have gathered his strength by now, relaxing in Yalta or wherever he's been.



He's in Russia I believe. He was president not king because he was elected after Ukraine became tired of the western backed thieves. His down fall was not siding with Russia but trying to play the EU off Russia. If you remember he was trying to make a deal with the EU just Putin gave a much better deal and more money. Even now the EU won't give Ukraine the cash they need because the richest part of Ukraine the part that will enable Ukraine to pay the banksters back don't want to go along with the robbery. Without the east there is no coal no gas no factories and no money!

Tzushima
09-02-2015, 08:36
He's in Russia I believe. He was president not king because he was elected after Ukraine became tired of the western backed thieves. His down fall was not siding with Russia but trying to play the EU off Russia. If you remember he was trying to make a deal with the EU just Putin gave a much better deal and more money. Even now the EU won't give Ukraine the cash they need because the richest part of Ukraine the part that will enable Ukraine to pay the banksters back don't want to go along with the robbery. Without the east there is no coal no gas no factories and no money!

so really the Ukrainians should be thanking Putin for Yanukovich.

fenrir
09-02-2015, 08:43
Maybe Stalin just wasn't very interested in Estonia did you every think of that? And maybe Putin isn't either. If you weren't trolling these boards all the time I wouldn't think about Estonia at all.

And yet again you show your ignorance of history. Good job!

Uncle Wally
09-02-2015, 08:55
so really the Ukrainians should be thanking Putin for Yanukovich.



Please put the saki down.



How do you come to that? Russia did not put him in power like America just put the new Ukrainian government in. We all heard the phone talks with Nuland. He had a lot of support in the east and enough people in western Ukraine. His election was not in dispute. Please go back and read up on how this all started. Ukraine was in talks with the EU. They offered 3 billion dollars when Ukraine's debt was 17 billion, Putin offers 15 billion and discounts on gas. What is so hard to understand?



On a side note. The new president of Ukraine is a lying sack of, well you know. While in Germany he pulls out Russian passports and tells everyone they were taken from "Russian military personnel" captured in Ukraine. That can't be because when you go into the Russian army they take your passport away and give you a military ID. You only get it back when you get out. So where did he get the passports from? Why won't he give out the names of these Russians military personnel or show them and not just their passport? It's just like they keep saying there are 9000 Russian troops with tanks and heavy weapons but no photos? Strange when you consider how good US satellite are.

Tzushima
09-02-2015, 08:59
clearly Yanukovich would still be in power if not for the dastardly CIA and it's meddling Neo-Nazi friends.:cheerleader:

Judge
09-02-2015, 09:04
I wouldn't think about Estonia at all.
You would now, make sure you get his name right.


http://rt.com/uk/230439-estonian-president-sky-news-fail/

Uncle Wally
09-02-2015, 09:06
And yet again you show your ignorance of history. Good job!



My "ignorance"?

I just read how the president of Estonia walked out on an interview because the interviewer didn't know his name! That's how much the world cares about the, he he, great nation of Estonia.

Uncle Wally
09-02-2015, 09:09
clearly Yanukovich would still be in power if not for the dastardly CIA and it's meddling Neo-Nazi friends.:cheerleader:



Now your gettin it! There is hope for you yet.

If you didn't know it was nazi captured in WW2 that helped build the CIA.

Judge
09-02-2015, 09:26
Breaking the rules is why Russia is facing sanctions.

but here it is:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Paris_(1856)

Russia broke the treaty a few years later. But that treaty was the grounds for their claim on Crimea, which they made themselves void. The previous treaty(from the previous Russo-Turkish war) did allow Crimea to come under Russia's sphere of influence but it also recognised the Crimean khanate as independent. So either Russia could accept it as Tatar territory and have a naval presence in the black sea, or they can claim it is Russian territory but have no naval presence in the black sea at all. They can't have both.

As for who was there before the Tatars(and remained mostly there alongside them) that falls to some Jews(Karaites) and Greeks with a few others. Russians weren't among them. Russians are not indigenous to the peninsula.

Before that treaty, Catherine the Great took Crimea and just after there was another war, can understand why the treaty didn't last...

Also reading more in the wiki links, one bit of info is interesting, you find that the Crimea Tartars would raid Russia and sell Russians as slaves to the Ottoman empire,this all stopped when Russia first took Crimea.....it's always useful to look at the timeline of events.

fenrir
09-02-2015, 10:57
My "ignorance"?

I just read how the president of Estonia walked out on an interview because the interviewer didn't know his name! That's how much the world cares about the, he he, great nation of Estonia.

And what precisely does that have to do with Stalin's reaction to the Forest Brothers? You constantly demonstrate that you don't know sh-t about what you are talking about and then try to dodge that sad fact by bringing up totally irrelevant items.

Uncle Wally
09-02-2015, 11:14
And what precisely does that have to do with Stalin's reaction to the Forest Brothers? You constantly demonstrate that you don't know sh-t about what you are talking about and then try to dodge that sad fact by bringing up totally irrelevant items.



What, like nobody knows whatshisname the president of Estonia?

If Stalin really cared about a bunch of guys hiding in the woods he would have could have devoted more forces to their extinction. Maybe I'm missing something about the illustrious nation of Estonia but I don't think so.

Yaks
09-02-2015, 12:13
Before that treaty, Catherine the Great took Crimea and just after there was another war, can understand why the treaty didn't last...

Also reading more in the wiki links, one bit of info is interesting, you find that the Crimea Tartars would raid Russia and sell Russians as slaves to the Ottoman empire,this all stopped when Russia first took Crimea.....it's always useful to look at the timeline of events.

yeah and the Bukharan slave trade of Russians stopped when Russia conquered Uzbekistan. But that doesn't mean Uzbekistan can't be a country today. if people are raiding your territory you defend your territory. or you do a deal. doesn't mean you can charge across the steppe yourself.

Uncle Wally
09-02-2015, 12:23
yeah and the Bukharan slave trade of Russians stopped when Russia conquered Uzbekistan. But that doesn't mean Uzbekistan can't be a country today. if people are raiding your territory you defend your territory. or you do a deal. doesn't mean you can charge across the steppe yourself.


You think Russia over steppe the bounds?

fenrir
09-02-2015, 12:46
What, like nobody knows whatshisname the president of Estonia?

If Stalin really cared about a bunch of guys hiding in the woods he would have could have devoted more forces to their extinction. Maybe I'm missing something about the illustrious nation of Estonia but I don't think so.

Stalin did but you don't know about it because of your deficient knowledge of history. Remember what I have said about your ignorance? You keep proving me right.

FatAndy
09-02-2015, 14:01
Actually, we have no tanks
My mistake, yes... :eh: - in the clip about mighty Latvian army the guy says in last seconds that one of three Latvian tanks was given to Estonians temporarily.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tWK8behbSn0


What, like nobody knows whatshisname the president of Estonia?
I know - Tomas Hendrik Ilves. Was born in Stockholm, later brainwashed in USA. The main thing to distinguish him from other presidents - he wears butterfly type tie, like Goofie or Donald Duck ;)


BTW, comrades, back to Krym.

Somewhat GfK agency, Urkainian branch, has published the funny investigation - http://www.gfk.com/ua/documents/presentations/gfk_report_freecrimea.pdf

quincy
11-02-2015, 01:24
Before that treaty, Catherine the Great took Crimea and just after there was another war, can understand why the treaty didn't last...

Also reading more in the wiki links, one bit of info is interesting, you find that the Crimea Tartars would raid Russia and sell Russians as slaves to the Ottoman empire,this all stopped when Russia first took Crimea.....it's always useful to look at the timeline of events.

apparently the slave trade had been going on for a few centuries

stopping the slave trade might not be something anyone should be apologising for. According to available sources Crimea had been a territory populated by different nationalities over the centuries, the Tatars being one of them, preceded by Byzantine Greeks, slavonic tribes, native people with histories going back to antiquity, different peoples from the Black sea region in general. Most of them had 'disappeared' by the time Russia arrived on the scene in 1783