Lol devil's avacado. congrats, you're on my ignore list.
Czcibor said:
Isn't that what you have just said a typical example of Russian nationalistic history? I mean for example "it has always been a part of Russia historically, culturally and economically". Let's think:
-Kievan Rus? Independent state East Slavic state, started presumably by Vikings. (If you use them as argument then actually Moscovian Rus shall be used be subservient to Kiev)
-Then Mongols from Golden Horde... (do not look specially Russian, but I think that their way of governance actually left some lasting impact on Russian)
-Lithuania and Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth...
-Yes, finally decline (from half XVIIth century) and collapse of Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth in late XVIIIth century made most of the Ukraine ruled by Moscow... finally this "always" started... Shortly after also Ukraine sea coast was captured from Osman Empire.
-The western edges of Ukraine become first time in history governed by Russia in September 1939, after joint Axis-Russian invasion on Poland (before being part of Poland it was part of Austro-Hungarian empire)
No, just fact. The duchies around Kiev were undeniably rus. While it's true the golden horde weakened them enough for the Lithuanians to take over in the 14th century, 300 years later the areas were conquered by Muscovy (another rus state) and remained there for 400 years. So please let's not pretend Ukraine (except perhaps Western Ukraine), which by the way means "border land" in Russian, does not have deep connections with Russia.
Western sponsored? (aren't you here making risky assumption that western countries behave like Russia?) What about just local people being vivid seeing that nearby EU countries improved both economically and politically, while they tend too look like Russia, but even without natural resources.
Obviously I was referring to the massive amount of EU support given to the revolutionaries in Kiev. I didn't say the orange-revolution mob didn't want to get rid of Yanukovich.
This Crimean invasion did not make much sense, especially after alienating lukewarm Ukrainians, paying the cost of buying local population with expensive infrastructure projects and facing some economic damage (not even formal sanctions, just forcing EU to rethink its energy sources security and investing in some contingency plans) would be harmful for Russian interests on its own. But anyway Russia just did it...
"buying local population".. lol.
Half of my family is from Crimea; trust me, Crimeans don't need any persuading to vote for Russia. As for how much sense it made: I agree Putin should've used Crimea as a bargaining chip, but I guess events got out of hand. At any rate while it would be better to get all of Ukraine, I'd say taking over the most strategically important chunk (by far) was a good enough deal.
As for EU and its energy supplies: It depends on how threatened the EU feels by the Russians, as the current energy deal is mutually beneficial. At any rate, it will take many many years for new pipelines/LNG terminals/green power plants etc. to be put in place.
Why are assuming that only wrist slap or total blockade possible? Just moderate sanctions, while possibility of treating Russia like North Korea would be used in case if it tries to continue the conquest.
What do you mean with moderate sanctions? Like banning obscure banks from doing business in the EU? As I said, sanctions that actually hurt (i.e. energy exports, technology imports etc.) are likely to start a ****-storm which is not beneficial for the west. I mean, it's not like Putin is going to bend over, see his faults and submit himself to intimidation.
I mean, it's OK using sanctions against countries like Iran because they can't respond and the west doesn't really care about their cooperation/power, but starting it with Russia is a different world entirely.
EDIT:
We find it as interesting as whether as result of Russian colonial war in Caucasus next big Chechen target would be military or civilian. Your guess is?
You mean Chechen terrorists? And what's the point with this comment? You think I want Russia to rule Eastern Europe again or something?
Honestly, I think ordinary Ukrainians are much better off if Ukraine stays neutral and retains good relations with both Russia and the EU. And I think a federalization of Ukraine might help achieve that, as it would seriously ease the confrontations between Easterners and Westerners and thus put the foundation for dialogue.
