Posted on 07/13/2024 5:06:55 AM PDT by Haddit
Do you not think America should have supported Ukraine in?
Mike Benz Umm.It's a good question.Umm.It's it's strange for you know, if, if I'm hesitating, it's because.To answer that question, there are so many layers that come before it that I haven't even really honestly had to think about where I actually fall on the underlying issue because the process is so corrupted, which is to say that anybody who is against it is targeted by the state it's effectively.We something called FISA, which has been joked by one of our senators as being, you know, the.Federal investigators stalking Americans. It's basically a way that we live through Russia. Gate this thing where anybody who supported a day taunt with Russia.Um, was, you know, was effectively deemed to be a Putin puppet. And then you could watch a federal investigation, you could bring in indictments and domestic spy craft on, you know, Trump's whole campaign because of his policy of neutrality with, with Russia effectively and or his in his NATO skepticism. They were.Able to argue, you know, that he was effectively a Russian puppet so they spied on his campaign.
(Excerpt) Read more at x.com ...
No it isn't, it's a thread to make you ignorant people start to realize that we can no longer save the world, because we are on the abyss of implosion just like the USSR imploded financially. Our nation and the other Allied nations have become tyrannical to the point of mirroring what the USSR was, but you idiots refuse to accept that reality, even after experiencing that reality during Covid. In other words, you never learn from clear examples starring you in the face. Some probably still believe that Covid was this very serious virus. The reality is that the majority died from other things, Covid just got the credit for the deaths.
You think we have absorbed and regurgitated the Russian propaganda. However, you refuse to see the propaganda coming from this illegitimate administration and the propaganda they have spewed since Donald John Trump rode down the escalator
You believe are so righteous, that it enables you punks to impugn us and call us names, because we disagree with your stance. You on the other hand are willing to sacrifice this nation for Ukraine, only to see Ukraine fall when this nation falls. Because you are all ignorant non critical thinkers who don't think, you just react like the Pavlov dogs you have all become. None of you has an once co common sense either
You are no different than the leftists, and you don't even recognize the irony of that. Like the liberals everyone has to share the same group think or the non group thinking people are ostracized.
You erroneously think our nation is impervious to all consequences. There have been many strong nations why dispel that notion of being impervious even with leadership of stupidity, especially when there are stupid people who are more than willing to follow that stupid leadership to their own demise. You not only lack critical thinking skills, you lack common sense as well.
I, for one, am only concerned about this nation, because without this nation the world will sink into totalitarianism. So even if Ukraine were to win, which I see no creditable evidence that supports that belief, they would end up losing on the final analysis.
Monterrosa-24, I don’t want people to die.
Our country, the USA, is lost. We are no longer a representative republic.
Globalists have taken over our country. That is why people mentioned illegal aliens.
Cities in Europe and the US have been taken over by Muslims.
Our intelligence community censored our comments on social media in 2020.
They censored Ukraine’s social media in 2014 and now.
The courts still allow them to censor us.
This Ukraine/Russia War is a lie to replace Putin just like they replaced
Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak and replaced him with Muslim Brotherhood
Mohammad Morsi, a friend of Hillary.
They replaced Libya’s Gaddafi.
They tried and failed to replace Syria’s President Assad.
They replaced Ukraine’s president in 2014.
They replaced America’s president in 2020.
There should be no question as to us supporting Ukraine.
We should unite and bring back our country where the people decide.
The same people that start these wars are the same people that
Sponsored Occupy Wall Street, Antifa, Black Lives Matter.
They sponsored the riots in 2016 at Trump rallies.
These are evil people.
They sponsored DEI, to deny jobs, promotions and government
contracts To White American men.
They sponsored the Covid lockdowns and censored us on social media.
The arrest of 1,400 J6 Trump Supporters
Using 51 CIA officers to tell us Hunter’s laptop was fake
Using the CIA and FBI to force social media to censor us
Anti Free Speech Katherine Maher director of NPR
Katherine Maher formally CEO of the Wikimedia Foundation
Imprisoning Christians praying outside of abortion centers
Using DEI to deny jobs, promotions and government
contracts To White American men
Covid Gain of Function Bioterrorism
Usurping the law to force the Jab on us
Usurping the law to deny us Ivermectin
Usurping the law to force EVs on us
Usurping the law to
Lawfare against Roger Stone
Lawfare against Rudy Giuliani
Lawfare against Michael Flynn
Lawfare threatening to indict Michael Flynn’s son
Lawfare against Steve Bannon
Lawfare against Peter Navarro
Lawfare against Mark Meadows
Lawfare against Dan Scavino
Lawfare against Rowan County clerk Kim Davis
Lawfare against John Eastman
Lawfare against Jeff Clark
Lawfare against Alex Jones
Lawfare against Jeremy Brown
Trump campaign lawyer Sidney Powell
Trump campaign attorney Kenneth Chesebro
Lawfare against Michael Cohen
Lawfare against Paul Manafort
Lawfare against George Papadopoulos
Lawfare against Rick Gates
Lawfare against Allen Weisselberg
Opposition research on Justice Samuel Alito
The FBI swat of whistleblower Vanessa Sivadge
whistleblower Marcus Allen
Lawfare against Julie Kelly
Lawfare against Dan Bongino
Lawfare against Charlie Kirk
Lawfare against former CIA officer Bryan Dean Wright
Lawfare against Sharyl Attkisson
Lawfare against Elliott Broidy
Lawfare against Pro-lifer Cal Zastrow
Viktor Orban: Trump said he would force Ukraine to stop fighting Russia
The Washington Examiner ^ | March 11, 2024 | Joel Gehrke
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/foreign-policy/2914261/viktor-orban-trump-said-he-would-force-ukraine-stop-fighting-russia/
Former President Donald Trump intends to end the war in Ukraine by ending the military assistance that Ukrainian forces require to fight Russia’s invasion, according to Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban.
“He has a very clear vision that is hard to disagree with. He says the following: first, he will not give a single penny for the Russo-Ukrainian war,” Orban told Hungarian state media. “That’s why the war will end, because it’s obvious that Ukraine cannot stand on its own two feet.”
Orban offered that prognostication after returning to Budapest from the United States, where he met with American conservatives at the Heritage Foundation in Washington, D.C., and visited Trump at Mar-a-Lago in Florida. Russian President Vladimir Putin’s spokesman allowed that “it is not clear” what Trump’s plan might be, but he welcomed Pope Francis’s suggestion that Ukraine show “a white flag” in a bid for peace.
The summit, in May, 2017, was Trump’s first overseas trip as President. The Saudis treated him as a fellow-monarch, spending an estimated sixty-eight million dollars on festivities, including a ceremony in which Trump and a group of royals danced, with swords in hand, to a traditional chant. In meetings, Bannon told me, Trump was blunt about American aims: “No. 1, Trump said to them, Stop funding Islamic terrorism. No more f—king games.” At the summit, the Saudis, the Qataris, and others promised to fight extremism, and the Saudis agreed to pay for a jointly run counterterrorism center. The United States announced that it would sell the Saudis some hundred and ten billion dollars’ worth of arms. A Pentagon official later said, “When completed, it will be the largest single arms deal in American history.” Like the pledge to fight terrorism, these agreements were nonbinding, but Bannon maintained that Trump had produced a decisive change in Saudi policy.
I know you don't give a flip about the U.S. However, I could careless what you think about me, because you are nothing but a useful idiot for those who are trying to destroy this nation.
Both my father & grandfather fought in WWII, Granddad in Germany, dad in Italy.
My grandfather became Consulate General to Scotland, which is the equivalent to an Ambassador while still in the military. He was responsible for holding state dinners for Queen Elizabeth & Prince Phillip when they came to Balmoral Castle. Upon his return stateside he worked for the State Dept. at the highest GS classification. My dad was recalled for the Korean conflict, which destroyed his opportunity to start hi private practice.
If you read Russian social med and what the Duma says about America you would know who the KGB boy is really after. I think you know and you are just on the Comintern’s side.
You ignorant little pustule. I have no delusion about Putin I can't say the same for you as you fail to see who Biden really is, and there is overriding evidence as to what a scumbag he is.
In addition, you claim what the Duma has to say as being what Putin thinks. There is no way you can even come close to proving that claim. Not only do you buy into the propaganda, you make up you own propaganda.
I think our stupid leaders have created a situation that was not only unnecessary, it was ill-advised for geopolitical reasons. Driving Russia & Putin into the arms of China, serves no one well. But because you are also afflicted with tunnel vision, you fail to even see that reality.
Are you still under the delusion that Putin's economy is tanking? Wouldn't surprise my if you did, because you fail to see that it's our nation that's in a freefall economically. Europe's economy is in even worse shape.
Two more spot on posts. You’re awesome my man. 🙂👍
Putin is a dictator so both the Duma and Russian social media trend what he wants it to trend.
Konstantin Samoilov, the Russian who blogs from Tashkent in Uzbekistan has built quite a case about the crashing Russian economy. If you think the Russian economy is doing great then you must be a true believer in Russian gov stats.
I don’t write to convince you of anything. You are just a mentally ill stooge. I write to bring the truth to lurkers and news hounds on FR who never write anything. But your writing is not convincing, so it really doesn’t need to be countered. Now go gloat over Lenin Plaza staying in Russian hands for a while you stinking filthy pig.
Putin is a dictator so both the Duma and Russian social media trend what he wants them to trend.
Konstantin Samoilov, the Russian who blogs from Tashkent in Uzbekistan has built quite a case about the crashing Russian economy. If you think the Russian economy is doing great then you must be a true believer in Russian gov stats.
You are a liar. I have done more against Biden than you’ve ever done.
I don’t write to convince you of anything. You are just a mentally ill stooge. I write to bring the truth to lurkers and news hounds on FR who never write anything. But your writing is not convincing, so it really doesn’t need to be countered. Now go gloat over Lenin Plaza staying in Russian hands for a while you stinking filthy commie pig.
I don’t believe I presented it wrong, bert. I don’t believe you understand the point I made, and the aspect with which I take issue with.
My observation is that the zealots on these threads divide people into two camps, supporters of Russia or supporters of Ukraine. To them, there is no other option.
If you either support Russia or you DON’T support Ukraine, then you are a “Putin Lover” or “Putinista” as those who frequent these threads like to brand people.
If you either support Ukraine or you DON’T support Russia, then you are a supporter of the “Globohomo-ists”, or a “Zeeper”.
I find both camps idiotic. These threads might be useful in some way, providing insight or commentary that cannot be obtained because they are filled with propaganda from both sides, name calling, and just outright stupidity.
There is much I agree with wholly in your post, DoodleBob. I believe we are very close in our perspective.
I view Putin as a KGB thug whose spots will never change, and I despise him and all like him.
“Putin did not start the conflict in eastern Ukraine, he provided aide”
Yes Putin did via subversion by Russian intelligence operatives created the “separatist” movement in eastern Ukraine. That was not “aid” he was giving, it was his proxy war against Ukraine.
“In 2014 we executed a color revolution that eventually led to a coup d’état of the duly elected Ukrainian President, Viktor Yanukovych. “
That’s Putin’s/Russian explanation of events, which ignores the Russian subversion with Yanukovych which had been taking place, and was recognized in Ukraine.
“The Minsk Agreements I & II. Germany’s Angela Merkle, France’s François Hollande, and Ukraine’s Petro Oleksiiovych Poroshenko all admitted that they had no intention to ever implement the Minsk Agreements. That they used them only to buy time to build Ukraine’s military, train & arm them because war was in their future. Because they wanted to use Ukraine as the battlefield where the hostilities would be held, and the Ukrainians would become the combatants and the fodder for the Russian military. “
Where’s the proof for all that?????
“Shortly after Russia invaded, Putin & Zelenskyy began engaging in talks for a peaceful resolution, which they had come to an agreement, that Russia would return all land thy controlled except for the Crimea, if Zelenskyy would declare Ukraine would remain neutral and not join NATO.”....”Then along came Boris Johnson who convinced Zelenskyy not to enter into a peace agreement claiming that Putin was a liar.”
“THEY” had not “come to an agreement”. The matters had been discussed but Ukraine had not made any agreement and Ukraine rejected the terms without any help from Boris Johnson.
The problem is that the US and the UK forced Ukraine to give back their nuclear weapons to Russia after the collapse of the Soviet Union. Maybe we shouldn't have done that. But since we did that, we are obligated to help Ukraine. Because it's the moral thing to do.
“Both Republican and Democrats kids taking money. Including Romney”
Besides Hunter Biden, who, where, when, how??
And what does any of that have to do with Putin invading Ukraine? Zip, zilch, nada.
16 April 2024: Russia to grow faster than all advanced economies says IMF
You are so wrapped up in the propaganda you do not even know old news.
7 Jun 2024: Why is Russia’s economy booming?
Just keep listening to your little blogger.
Konstantin Samoilov is a great source and your globalist IMF is garbage. Why is the Ruble down? Why does Putin go begging to North Korea? Why are Russian planes not being maintained? Why did the Russian car industry die. Why does Russia only get the second-best Chinese cars marketed with traditional Russian car names? Why did Russia make it taxes progressive and higher? Where did the graduated “flat” tax go?
Trump is still fighting when under fire. You Leftists will not get him or intimidate him. He is the first step in getting real border control.
Well, Robert, I think you proved my point beyond any doubt. Thank you, I guess.
What did the United States achieve or gain by giving Ukraine $100 billion dollars?
Me: “In 2014 we executed a color revolution that eventually led to a coup d’état of the duly elected Ukrainian President, Viktor Yanukovych. “
The truth is what we saw. We saw a color revolution started to rile up hatred amongst the citizenry.
Viktoria Nuland was present handing out either cookies as some claim or sandwiches which she herself claims along with drinks.
Victoria Nuland never shook the mantle of ideological meddler
We saw deadly violence escalate and blamed on Viktor Yanukovych. We saw Viktor Yanukovych run out of office and flee for his life. That is Prima facie evidence that he was ejected via a coup d'état. Which many of you Ukraine supporters claim is not true.
No, that is claims made by U.S. military analysts
Yes Putin did via subversion by Russian intelligence operatives created the “separatist” movement in eastern Ukraine. That was not “aid” he was giving, it was his proxy war against Ukraine.
That is propaganda. No evidence has been presented that confirms that Russian troops were involved. The fighting in eastern Ukraine began almost immediately after Russia retook the Crimea. Crimea was not captured from Ukraine by Catherine the Great, it was captured from the Ottoman Empire which had control of it for centuries. Another fact that those supporting Ukraine deny and say that it is irrelevant even if true, because Nikita Khrushchev, who never married his long time partner who bore is children was form Ukraine.
Why Did Russia Give Away Crimea Sixty Years Ago?
The following is the introduction by the author Mark Kramer
Crimea was part of Russia from 1783, when the Tsarist Empire annexed it a decade after defeating Ottoman forces in the Battle of Kozludzha, until 1954, when the Soviet government transferred Crimea from the Russian Soviet Federation of Socialist Republics (RSFSR) to the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic (UkrSSR). The transfer was announced in the Soviet press in late February 1954, eight days after the Presidium of the USSR Supreme Soviet adopted a resolution authorizing the move on 19 February. The text of the resolution and some anodyne excerpts from the proceedings of the Presidium of the USSR Supreme Soviet meeting on 19 February were published along with the very brief announcement.[1] Nothing else about the transfer was disclosed at the time, and no further information was made available during the remainder of the Soviet era.
Not until 1992, just after the Soviet Union was dissolved, did additional material about this episode emerge. A historical-archival journal, Istoricheskii arkhiv (Historical Archive), which had been published in the USSR from 1955 until 1962, began appearing again in 1992 with transcriptions of declassified documents from the former Soviet archives. The first issue of the revived Istoricheskii arkhiv in 1992 contained a section about the transfer of Crimea that featured documents from the Russian Presidential Archive and from a few other archives whose collections are now housed at the State Archive of the Russian Federation (GARF). Unfortunately, these documents do not add anything of substance to what was published in the Soviet press 38 years earlier; indeed, they are mostly identical to what was published in 1954. (Apparently, the editors of Istoricheskii arkhiv were unaware that the scripted proceedings of the USSR Supreme Soviet Presidium meeting had already been published in 1954.) The documents do confirm that the move was originally approved by the Presidium of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU) on 25 January 1954, paving the way for the authorizing resolution of the Presidium of the USSR Supreme Soviet three weeks later. But the declassified files reveal nothing more about the motives for the transfer, leaving us with just the two official rationales that were published in 1954:
(1) the cession of Crimea was a “noble act on the part of the Russian people” to commemorate the 300th anniversary of the “reunification of Ukraine with Russia” (a reference to the Treaty of Pereyaslav signed in 1654 by representatives of the Ukrainian Cossack Hetmanate and Tsar Aleksei I of Muscovy) and to “evince the boundless trust and love the Russian people feel toward the Ukrainian people”; and
(2) the transfer was a natural outgrowth of the “territorial proximity of Crimea to Ukraine, the commonalities of their economies, and the close agricultural and cultural ties between the Crimean oblast and the UkrSSS.”
Neither of these ostensible justifications holds up to scrutiny. Even though 1954 was the 300th anniversary of the Treaty of Pereyaslav, there is no connection between that treaty and the Crimean peninsula. Pereyaslav, in central Ukraine not far from Kyiv, is nowhere near Crimea, and the treaty had nothing to do with the peninsula, which did not come under Russian control until 130 years later. Moreover, the description of the treaty as having produced the “unification of Russia and Ukraine” is hyperbolic. The treaty did provide an important step in that direction, but years of further struggling and warfare had to take place before full unification occurred. In retrospect the Treaty of Pereyaslav is often associated (inaccurately) with Russian-Ukrainian unity, but it is hard to see why anyone in the USSR would have proposed celebrating the 300th anniversary of the document by transferring Crimea from the RSFSR to the UkrSSR.
The notion that the transfer was justified solely by Crimea’s cultural and economic affinities with Ukraine is also far-fetched. In the 1950s, the population of Crimea — approximately 1.1 million — was roughly 75 percent ethnic Russian and 25 percent Ukrainian. A sizable population of Tatars had lived in Crimea for centuries until May 1944, when they were deported en masse by the Stalinist regime to barren sites in Central Asia, where they were compelled to live for more than four decades and were prohibited from returning to their homeland. Stalin also forcibly deported smaller populations of Armenians, Bulgarians, and Greeks from Crimea, completing the ethnic cleansing of the peninsula. Hence, in 1954, Crimea was more “Russian” than it had been for centuries. Although Crimea is briefly contiguous with southern Ukraine via the Isthmus of Perekop, the large eastern Kerch region of Crimea is very close to Russia. The peninsula did have important economic and infrastructural ties with Ukraine, but cultural ties were much stronger overall with Russia than with Ukraine, and Crimea was the site of major military bases from Tsarist times on, having become a symbol of Imperial Russian military power against the Ottoman Turks.
Even though the publicly enunciated rationales for the transfer of Crimea to the UkrSSR were of little credibility, some of the comments published in 1954 and other information that has come to light since then do allow us to gauge why the Soviet authorities decided on this action. Of particular importance were the role of Nikita Khrushchev, the recent traumas inflicted on Ukraine, and the ongoing power struggle in the USSR.
Khrushchev had been elevated to the post of CPSU First Secretary in September 1953 but was still consolidating his leading position in early 1954. He had earlier served as the head of the Communist Party of Ukraine from the late 1930s through the end of 1949 (apart from a year-and-a-half during World War II when he was assigned as a political commissar to the front). During the last several years of Khrushchev’s tenure in the UkrSSR, he had overseen the Soviet government’s side of a fierce civil war in the newly annexed western regions of Ukraine, especially Volynia and Galicia. The civil war was marked by high levels of casualties and gruesome atrocities on both sides. Despite Khrushchev’s later role in denouncing Stalinism and implementing reforms in the USSR, he had relied on ruthless, unstinting violence to establish and enforce Soviet control over western Ukraine. Occasional armed clashes were still occurring in the mid-1950s, but the war was over by the time Crimea was transferred in February 1954. The repeated references at the meeting of the USSR Supreme Soviet Presidium on 19 February to the “unity of Russians and Ukrainians” and to the “great and indissoluble friendship” between the two peoples, and the affirmation that the transfer would demonstrate how wise it was to have Ukraine “under the leadership of the Communist Party and the Soviet government,” indicate that Khrushchev saw the transfer as a way of fortifying and perpetuating Soviet control over Ukraine now that the civil war had finally been won. Some 860,000 ethnic Russians would be joining the already large Russian minority in Ukraine.
A somewhat similar approach was used in the three newly annexed Baltic republics, especially Latvia and Estonia, both of which had had very few Russian inhabitants prior to the 1940s. The Stalinist regime encouraged ethnic Russians to settle in those republics from the late 1940s on, and this policy continued under Khrushchev and Leonid Brezhnev. Proportionally, the transfer of Russians to the Baltic republics was greater than in Ukraine, but in absolute numbers the transfer of Crimea brought into Ukraine much larger numbers of Russians and a region closely identified with Russia, bolstering Soviet control.
The transfer of Crimea to the UkrSSR also was politically useful for Khrushchev as he sought to firm up the support he needed in his ongoing power struggle with Soviet Prime Minister Georgii Malenkov, who had initially emerged as the preeminent leader in the USSR in 1953 after Joseph Stalin’s death. Having been at a disadvantage right after Stalin’s death, Khrushchev had steadily whittled away at Malenkov’s position and had gained a major edge with his elevation to the post of CPSU First Secretary in September 1953. Nevertheless, the post-Stalin power struggle was by no means over in early 1954, and Khrushchev was trying to line up as much support as he could on the CPSU Presidium for a bid to remove Malenkov from the prime minister’s spot (a feat he accomplished in January 1955). Among those whose support Khrushchev was hoping to enlist was Oleksiy Kyrychenko, who had become first secretary of the Communist Party of Ukraine in early June 1953 (displacing Leonid Mel’nykov, who had succeeded Khrushchev in that post in December 1949) and soon thereafter had been appointed a full member of the CPSU Presidium. In 1944, when Khrushchev himself was still the Communist Party leader in Ukraine, he reportedly had suggested to Stalin that transferring Crimea to the UkrSSR would be a useful way of winning support from local Ukrainian elites.[2] Regardless of whether Khrushchev actually did bring up this matter with Stalin (the veracity of the secondhand retrospective account is uncertain), it most likely reflects Khrushchev’s own sense as early as 1944 that expanding Ukraine’s territory was a way of gaining elite support in the republic. In particular, Khrushchev almost certainly regarded the transfer of Crimea as a means of securing Kyrychenko’s backing. Khrushchev knew that he could not automatically count on Kyrychenko’s support because the two of them had been sharply at odds as recently as June 1953, when Kyrychenko endorsed Lavrentii Beria’s strong criticism of the situation in western Ukraine — criticism that implicitly attacked a good deal of what Khrushchev had done when he was the leader of the republic in the 1940s. Khrushchev hoped that the transfer of Crimea to Ukraine would dispel the lingering tensions from this episode and thereby help to solidify Kyrychenko’s support in the forthcoming showdown with Malenkov.
The earlier published documents, and materials that have emerged more recently, make clear that the transfer of Crimea from the RSFSR to the UkrSSR was carried out in accordance with the 1936 Soviet constitution, which in Article 18 stipulated that “the territory of a Union Republic may not be altered without its consent.” The proceedings of the USSR Supreme Soviet Presidium meeting indicate that both the RSFSR and the UkrSSR had given their consent via their republic parliaments. One of the officials present at the 19 February session, Otto Kuusinen, even boasted that “only in our country [the USSR] is it possible that issues of the utmost importance such as the territorial transfer of individual oblasts to a particular republic can be decided without any difficulties.” One might argue that the process in 1954 would have been a lot better if it had been complicated and difficult, but no matter how one judges the expeditiousness of the territorial reconfiguration, the main point to stress here is that it is incorrect to say (as some Russian commentators and government officials recently have) that Crimea was transferred unconstitutionally or illegally. The legal system in the Soviet Union was mostly a fiction, but the transfer did occur in accordance with the rules in effect at the time. Moreover, regardless of how the transfer was carried out, the Russian Federation expressly accepted Ukraine’s 1991 borders both in the December 1991 Belovezhskaya Pushcha accords (the agreements that precipitated and codified the dissolution of the Soviet Union) and in the December 1994 Budapest Memorandum that finalized Ukraine’s status as a non-nuclear weapons state.
Crimea had originally been an “autonomous republic” (avtonomnaya respublika) in the RSFSR, but its status was changed to that of an “oblast’” (province) in the RSFSR in 1945, ostensibly because the forced removal of the Crimean Tatars had eliminated the need for autonomy. After the Crimean oblast was transferred to the UkSSR in 1954, it retained the status of an oblast’ within Soviet Ukraine for 37 years. In early 1991, after a referendum was held in the UkrSSR and a resolution was adopted a month later by the UkrSSR parliament, the status of Crimea was upgraded to that of an “autonomous republic.” Crimea retained that designation within Ukraine after the Soviet Union broke apart. In the Russian Federation, however, the category of “autonomous republic” does not exist. In the treaty of annexation signed by the Russian and Crimean governments on 18 March 2014, the status of the peninsula was changed to simply a “republic” (Respublika Krym), joining 21 other “republics” of the Russian Federation’s now-85 federal “subjects,” with Crimea and the city of Sevastopol added as separate entities.[[3]
One of the ironies of the transfer of Crimea to Ukraine in 1954 is that when the chairman of the Presidium of the USSR Supreme Soviet, Kliment Voroshilov, offered his closing remarks at the session on 19 February 1954, he declared that “enemies of Russia” had “repeatedly tried to take the Crimean peninsula from Russia and use it to steal and ravage Russian lands.” He praised the “joint battles” waged by “the Russian and Ukrainian peoples” as they inflicted a “severe rebuff against the insolent usurpers.” Voroshilov’s characterization of Russia’s past “enemies” seems eerily appropriate today in describing Russia’s own actions vis-à-vis Ukraine. A further tragic irony of the Crimean transfer is that an action of sixty years ago, taken by Moscow to strengthen its control over Ukraine, has come back to haunt Ukraine today.
Mark Kramer is Director of the Cold War Studies Program at Harvard University and a Senior Fellow of Harvard's Davis Center for Russian and Eurasian Studies
Me: “The Minsk Agreements I & II. Germany’s Angela Merkle, France’s François Hollande, and Ukraine’s Petro Oleksiiovych Poroshenko all admitted that they had no intention to ever implement the Minsk Agreements. That they used them only to buy time to build Ukraine’s military, train & arm them because war was in their future. Because they wanted to use Ukraine as the battlefield where the hostilities would be held, and the Ukrainians would become the combatants and the fodder for the Russian military. “
Where’s the proof for all that????
Poroshenko Admits. “Ukraine Was Never Going To Implement The Minsk Agreement.”
Angela Merkel and François Hollande’s crime against peace
Me: “Shortly after Russia invaded, Putin & Zelenskyy began engaging in talks for a peaceful resolution, which they had come to an agreement, that Russia would return all land thy controlled except for the Crimea, if Zelenskyy would declare Ukraine would remain neutral and not join NATO.”....”Then along came Boris Johnson who convinced Zelenskyy not to enter into a peace agreement claiming that Putin was a liar.”
“THEY” had not “come to an agreement”. The matters had been discussed but Ukraine had not made any agreement and Ukraine rejected the terms without any help from Boris Johnson
The overwhelming amount of what you believe is "truth" is actually propaganda.
No Chad, you don't think, and that is a problem for everyone. Because non-thinkers do not come to logical conclusions. Instead, they come to emotional conclusions.
Thank you for proving my point. No guessing involved, because it's a fact.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.