Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

News from occupied Ukrainian territories (Crimea, Donbass, Lugansk) #3

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • News from occupied Ukrainian territories (Crimea, Donbass, Lugansk) #3

    It seems time has come to create the third part of the topic

    You can find the first one here and the second one here


  • #2
    International Criminal Court: Russia's Invasion Of Ukraine Is A 'Crime,' Not A Civil War

    http://www.forbes.com/sites/paulrode.../#2bfb586a7fec

    Comment


    • #3
      Rally participants mock Holodomor victims outside Ukrainian Cultural Center in Moscow. PHOTO

      http://en.censor.net.ua/photo_news/4...n_moscow_photo The rally challenging the fact of Holodomor – the man-made famine in Ukraine (1932-1933) orchestrated by Stalin's regine – was held outside the Ukrainian Cultural Center in Moscow.

      As reported by Censor.NET citing Vlada.io, a few dozen protesters led by member of Moscow's Yakimanka district municipal authority Dmitry Zakharov said that they refused to recognize the Holodomor as genocide of the Ukrainian people.



      Protesters held a banner reading: "The myth of the Holodomor is a lie and political gain from the bones." According to the rally participants, "the myth of the Holodomor" was coined in order to embroil "fraternal peoples."

      The protesters also mocked the memory of the Holodomor victims by placing pork parts in front of the Ukrainian Cultural Center.

      "The best proof that the famine of 1932-33 was indeed the genocide of Ukrainians is contemporary Russians' reaction to it. Rather than express sympathy and remember the famine victims together with Ukraine, Russia continues mocking them.

      "The Muscovites led by a member of Moscow's district municipal authority placed dressed pork in front of the building of Ukrainian Cultural Center today," journalist Denys Kazanskyi wrote.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by swmarmalade View Post
        Rally participants mock Holodomor victims outside Ukrainian Cultural Center in Moscow. PHOTO
        A pathetic action. However, Holodomor is a controversial subject, at least "the official approach" to the issue.
        What do you think about Yanukovych's interrogation as a witness: http://www.rapsinews.com/judicial_ne...277225023.html
        I really don't know what ukraininan officials feared about (they prevented the first attempt of the interrogation)

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by swmarmalade View Post

          It seems time has come to create the third part of the topic
          what for ? those two parts are not enough ?

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by fox_aka_fox View Post
            A pathetic action. However, Holodomor is a controversial subject, at least "the official approach" to the issue.
            What do you think about Yanukovych's interrogation as a witness: http://www.rapsinews.com/judicial_ne...277225023.html
            I really don't know what ukraininan officials feared about (they prevented the first attempt of the interrogation)
            Why is it a controversial subject? What's controversial about it?

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Tux1 View Post
              Why is it a controversial subject? What's controversial about it?
              The number of victims is exaggerated. Because there wasn't any reliable statistic of this subject, so "deceased by famine" include almost all ukrainians deceased at the time and even those, who wasn't born at the time (unlike normal circumstances, by statistical prediction), regardless of the reasons. And numbers vary considerably, from a couple of millions to 6-7 millions. Ukrainian officials and historians believe, that it was a planned and deliberate elimination of ukrainian people, other believe that famine had been caused by natural causes with some "contribution" of criminal Stalin regime. Some think that blame entirely is Stalin's, some blame local authorities. Some think Stalin wanted to kill only freedom-loving ukrainians, some think the aim was "kulaks" as a class. And so on.

              In my opinion, it was the combination of Stalin's cruelty, natural cases and "overdoing" of local authorities. I think because of famine a couple of millions of ukrainians (and kubans, and volgans, and other) had died. Yes, it was an appalling crime of soviet regime. But, as with Chernobyl disaster, the wrongdoing had been elevated to the rank of the "pillar" of ukrainian ideology and became one of the central causes of our enmity toward russians (not soviet regime or Stalin, precisely russians). I think we must put aside this horrific memory, especially if to keep in mind that grain from ukrainians had been taken away not by special "russian squads", but by local authorities, often the same ukrainians.

              Comment


              • #8
                no idea what it means "occupied Crimea"

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by desyeuxverts View Post
                  no idea what it means "occupied Crimea"
                  here it means "annexed Crimea"... illegal thing anyways...

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    But well I mean, Crimea wasn't annexed, they held a referendum to leave Ukraine, become independent and join Russia. Ukrainians in Crimea wanted to do it, not like they were Russians from Russia who came to Crimea, occupied Ukrainians and took the peninsula away.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by desyeuxverts View Post
                      But well I mean, Crimea wasn't annexed, they held a referendum to leave Ukraine, become independent and join Russia. Ukrainians in Crimea wanted to do it, not like they were Russians from Russia who came to Crimea, occupied Ukrainians and took the peninsula away.
                      that "referendum" was just a circus under kindling of anti-ukrainian hysteria and illegal. Russian military occupied some buildings and polling stations, blocked ukrainian military units etc.
                      So, it was annexed.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I'm afraid to say that it's rubbish and I strongly object to above mentioned. There were no Russian military in Crimea apart from legally allocated troops in Sevastopol. What is more, the reverse was true, those military didn't occupy any buildings in Crimea to make people vote, those military forces ( the
                        very small number of troops ) together with Ukrainians in Crimea maintained a peace and safety of other citizens from growing hazard of
                        Crimea being attacked by the other Ukrainians who supported the illegal government after Yanukovich run away. In contrast,
                        Ukrainians in Crimea of all nationalities voted volunterely without any form of pressure, and a whopping 97.78 per cent voted in the favor of independence and subsequently joint Russian Federation. In addition, lots of Ukrainian military units gave up their oath to serve Ukraine and they run off to Crimea to protect it, others run to Donetsk and Luhansk to protect those regions. The another interesting thing is that after coup detat the new fake government didn't have much control over army and anything at all, because it was chaos in the country and instead of sorting things out, what they did is overthrowing the monuments of Kutuzov. They destroyed statues to Gagarin. They demolished memorials to Lenin. Another dramatically striking change they applied first is the new law that canceled criminal liability for promoting the fascism and they tried to introduce the criminal liability for using Russian language.

                        As regards Crimea, again, what stands out from the above is that it wasn't annexed. On the other hand, people held the highest act of democracy there by protecting their wish and will, and even if it was profitable for Russia, it is not bad as far as people are happy there, if Russians came there and forced people to do something against their will, this would be the highest crime. But the total reverse was true.
                        Last edited by desyeuxverts; 12-13-2016, 09:14 PM.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by desyeuxverts View Post
                          I'm afraid to say that it's rubbish and I strongly object to above mentioned. There were no Russian military in Crimea apart from legally allocated troops in Sevastopol.
                          They left the place where they should be allocated anyways.
                          Originally posted by desyeuxverts View Post
                          What is more, the reverse was true, those military didn't occupy any buildings in Crimea to make people vote, those military forces ( the
                          very small number of troops ) together with Ukrainians in Crimea maintained a peace and safety of other citizens from growing hazard of
                          Crimea being attacked by the other Ukrainians who supported the illegal government after Yanukovich run away.
                          Firstly, that's hypocrisy - you believe that 97% of population was pro-Russian, so it was more likely that pro-Ukrainian citizens to be attacked. Secondly, Russia has no any right to maintain "peace" in other country without its or UN's permission.
                          Hence, Russia just wanted to hinder Ukrainian government to stifle separatists coup.

                          ​Also, the post-Yanukovych government was legal and democratic and result of declaration of will of Ukrainian people.
                          Originally posted by desyeuxverts View Post
                          In contrast,
                          Ukrainians in Crimea of all nationalities voted volunterely without any form of pressure, and a whopping 97.78 per cent voted in the favor of independence and subsequently joint Russian Federation.
                          97.78% is just a joke. Lots of Russian citizens voted there. Also huge batch filled bulletins was intercepted on the eve of "referendums" in DNR&LNR. Same trick in Crimea.
                          That was just a circus.
                          Originally posted by desyeuxverts View Post
                          In addition, lots of Ukrainian military units gave up their oath to serve Ukraine and they run off to Crimea to protect it, others run to Donetsk and Luhansk to protect those regions.
                          That was minority who really gave up.
                          Originally posted by desyeuxverts View Post
                          The another interesting thing is that after coup detat the new fake government didn't have much control over army and anything at all, because it was chaos in the country
                          1. It was revolution, not a coup. 2. new government is not a fake but real and most democratic ever, unlike pro-russian puppet Yanukovych.
                          Russia vilely used the mess in Ukraine to annex Crimea.
                          Originally posted by desyeuxverts View Post
                          and instead of sorting things out, what they did is overthrowing the monuments of Kutuzov. They destroyed statues to Gagarin.
                          Government didn't do this. And I never heard of Kutuzov and Gagarin. What a city it was?
                          Originally posted by desyeuxverts View Post
                          They demolished memorials to Lenin.
                          Good. Decommunisation is always good. I would do the same here, in Russia.
                          Originally posted by desyeuxverts View Post
                          Another dramatically striking change they applied first is the new law that canceled criminal liability for promoting the fascism
                          that's freedom of speech. there's a tiny percent of fascists in Ukraine anyways.
                          Originally posted by desyeuxverts View Post
                          and they tried to introduce the criminal liability for using Russian language.
                          They never tried to ban Russian language. You seem to overwatch Russian media, lol.
                          Originally posted by desyeuxverts View Post
                          As regards Crimea, again, what stands out from the above is that it wasn't annexed.
                          It sure was annexed.
                          Originally posted by desyeuxverts View Post
                          On the other hand, people held the highest act of democracy there by protecting their wish and will, and even if it was profitable for Russia, it is not bad as far as people are happy there, if Russians came there and forced people to do something against their will, this would be the highest crime. But the total reverse was true.
                          Aggressive anti-Ukrainian agitation, no Ukraine supporters allowed to speak, no consent of Ukrainian government, brainwahsed population voting for undemocratic Russia - all this stuff has nothing to do with democracy.
                          Russian "democracy":


                          And no sane person would join the country where he will have to live according to laws of Milonov and Mezulina...

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by desyeuxverts View Post
                            There were no Russian military in Crimea apart from legally allocated troops in Sevastopol.
                            No, there was a large contingent of russian troops from the "mainland". Even Putin recognized it if I'm not mistaken. But if to believe that there were only local-based russian troops, they obviously exceeded their permissions way too far.

                            Originally posted by desyeuxverts View Post
                            In contrast,Ukrainians in Crimea of all nationalities voted volunterely without any form of pressure, and a whopping 97.78 per cent voted in the favor of independence and subsequently joint Russian Federation.
                            It wasn't a normally conducted referendum. There were many evident shortcomings and manipulations. However, I agree that vast majority (but maybe not 97 or 90, or even 80%) of locals supported the transition of Crimea to Russia.

                            Originally posted by desyeuxverts View Post
                            As regards Crimea, again, what stands out from the above is that it wasn't annexed. On the other hand, people held the highest act of democracy there by protecting their wish and will, and even if it was profitable for Russia, it is not bad as far as people are happy there, if Russians came there and forced people to do something against their will, this would be the highest crime. But the total reverse was true.
                            By international laws, Crimea was annexed, like you this or not. I don't think that Russia had forced locals to vote for the transition or oppress Crimean citizens now. It seems that they are quite happy with their current position. At least, they obviously don't want to rejoin Ukraine.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Peenn View Post
                              1. It was revolution, not a coup. 2. new government is not a fake but real and most democratic ever, unlike pro-russian puppet Yanukovych.
                              Ahaha, it's hilarious! As with "Crimea was annexed" it's also true that "there was the coup in Ukraine". It's not a revolution, as I say again and again. Nothing "revolutionary" happened in Ukraine. Only some of our "top-politicians" changed. We have the same corrupt country (only the poorer one); we still have totally oligarchs-controlled media, politicians and political parties; we still have the same oligarchs-controlled economy. It seems that more and more ukrainians begin to understand that they had been manipulated yet again. But many participants of so-called "revolution" can't accept that. Yes, they would admit that life becomes worse, that leaders of the "revolution" not justified their expectation, that the corruption, against which many of them had risen become even more prominent, but they still believe, that the country had changed and current problems soon will be overcome. As for "democratic" essence of our current government, you are a fool or been brainwashed, to think so.

                              Originally posted by Peenn View Post
                              They never tried to ban Russian language. You seem to overwatch Russian media, lol.
                              They only abolished a law, which permits to recognize Russian as a local official language. And your "most democratic government of Ukraine to this day" did so instantly after they seized the power, on February 23, 2014. See, they hadn't any other more urgent issues, even Crimea was minor in comparison. Yes, after that they hurriedly had tried to rectify this obvious folly and Turchinov "vetoed" the abolishment of the law, but it was too late, the harm was done. The law and "the language problem" in Ukraine is greatly overestimated, I agree, but the "pro-ukrainian" policy, when ukrainian politicians try to suppress Russian language in one way or another is harmful one.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X