Will Russia Attack Ukraine?

[Riverman]

The Russians stole Crimea from the Tatars.

You mean the Tatars which did invade and plunder Eastern Europe on behalf of the Ottomans before? The Russians fought more than one war to keep Crimea, they settled it, they built it up, they have their main naval base there and the locals want to belong to Russia.

Also the massive Russian presence in the Donbas dates from the late 19th century with the industrialisation which began in the late Tsarist period.

If you want to go back before the 19th century, than I have to expect a lot to come back to German lands...

Besides, the difference between Russians and Ukrainians on an ethnic base is rather minor anyway. Its because of religious-ideological reasons that they split recently in a more radical way. Which also means, that the main determinant should be what the people in a region want. I wrote before, many times, if the Ukrainians would have suggested a plebiscit, I would have been all for it. But obviously, the Ukrainians never made such a suggestion and don't care what he people in the region want. The Ukrainian nationalists want their state to be as big as possible, again no difference to the Russian side at all. No moral higher or lower ground, so to say.

[traveller]

This seems appropriate:

http://people.uncw.edu/kozloffm/glubb.pdf

”The weakness of pacifism is that there are still many peoples in the world who are aggressive. Nations who proclaim themselves unwilling to fight are liable to be conquered by peoples in the stage of militarism— perhaps even to see themselves incorporated into some new empire, with the status of mere provinces or colonies.

When to be prepared to use force and when to give way is a perpetual human problem, which can only be solved, as best we can, in each successive situation as it arises. In fact, however, history seems to indicate that great nations do not normally disarm from motives of conscience, but owing to the weakening of a sense of duty in the citizens, and the increase in selfishness and the desire for wealth and ease.”

[Tomenable]

You mean the Tatars which did invade and plunder Eastern Europe on behalf of the Ottomans before?

Crimean Coastal Tatars are mostly descended from ancient Bosphoran Greeks.

These Coastal Tatars are very similar genetically to Mariupol Greeks (who descend from KER1-like Bosphoran Greeks).

Mariupol Greeks were expelled by Joseph Stalin from Crimea to Mariupol.

There are also Crimean Steppe Tatars - and these are more Asiatic genetically, they have high Nogai admixture probably.

[Tomenable]

The Russians stole Crimea from the Tatars.

Ethnic structure of Crimea 1725 - 2001:



^^^
Most of the "Others" before 1850 were Crimean Greeks AFAIK (now they are called Mariupol Greeks):


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mariupol_Greek


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crimean_Tatars

[traveller]

You mean the Tatars which did invade and plunder Eastern Europe on behalf of the Ottomans before? The Russians fought more than one war to keep Crimea, they settled it, they built it up, they have their main naval base there and the locals want to belong to Russia.

Russia signed an agreement with Ukraine to move out from Sevastopol. They even started building a new major base on the eastern shore of the Black Sea. However, this didn’t go too well, which may be one of the reasons why they decided to resort to aggression and occupy Crimea.

As to the locals, Crimean Tatars have no warm feelings towards Moscow. They have been repressed by Russians for decades and forcibly relocated to Kazahstan by the Soviets. Many Ukrainians were forced to leave Crimea when the occupation started.

The Soviet army pensioners who all wanted to move to Crimea on retirement do probably support Russia. However, the youngest retired 30 years ago.

[Riverman]

Russia signed an agreement with Ukraine to move out from Sevastopol. They even started building a new major base on the eastern shore of the Black Sea. However, this didn’t go too well, which may be one of the reasons why they decided to resort to aggression and occupy Crimea.

As to the locals, Crimean Tatars have no warm feelings towards Moscow. They have been repressed by Russians for decades and forcibly relocated to Kazahstan by the Soviets. Many Ukrainians were forced to leave Crimea when the occupation started.

The Soviet army pensioners who all wanted to move to Crimea on retirement do probably support Russia. However, the youngest retired 30 years ago.

There are different opinions on the issue, and if its so clear, as you say, but others say something completely different, why didn't the Ukrainians propose a plebiscit and planned to take Donbas and Crimea back by force? There was no suggestion for a peaceful solution from the Ukrainians at all. It seems the anti-Russian stance is a minority position in Crimea:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lzO7gIT5GYU

The Ukrainian representatives talk is quite telling in the video.

[traveller]

There are different opinions on the issue, and if its so clear, as you say, but others say something completely different, why didn't the Ukrainians propose a plebiscit and planned to take Donbas and Crimea back by force?

.

Well, Russia did arrange for the representatives council to vote for joining Russia. Before that, they installed armed guards throughout the building and isolated the council. I would guess there was only one “right decision” possible.

There was also a plebiscite that only Russia recognises. Likewise, everyone knew how to vote. A bit like Austria 1937. Nowadays in Russia, expressing the “wrong” opinion is a criminal offence.

In Donbas, the rebels “found” weapons and heavy artillery and scores of “volunteers” moved in from Russia. I’m sure Ukraine would have found a way to deal with the discontent of Russians in a peaceful manner, but Russia doesn’t want that. They like the “grey zone” - Donbas, Crimea, Abkhazia, South Ossetia, decades-long complaining about how Russians in neighbouring countries weren’t respected enough, secretive support of extremist movements and parties all over the world, “troll farms” to push conflict etc etc. Divide et impera.

Now they are bombing Russian-majority cities to ashes because they don’t really care about the people.

[Tomenable]

Ethnic structure of Crimea 1725 - 2001:



^^^
Most of the "Others" before 1850 were Crimean Greeks AFAIK (now they are called Mariupol Greeks):

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mariupol_Greek

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crimean_Tatars

^^^
Ethnic history of Crimea until the emergence of Crimean Tatars (video + timeline):

Timeline:

The oldest known inhabitants were Taurians (Tauri) - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tauri

1000 BC - Tauri and Cimmerians inhabit Crimea
600 BC - Tauri and Scythians inhabit Crimea
500 BC - Tauri, Greek settlers and Scythians
480 BC - Tauri, Bosporan Greeks and Scythians
200 BC - Bosporan Greeks, Tauri, Scythians and Sarmatians
109 BC - Bosporan Greeks (vassals of Pontic Greeks), Scythians, Sarmatians
63 BC - Bosporan Greeks (vassals of Rome), Scythians and Sarmatians
250 AD - Bosporan Greeks, Scythians and Sarmatians
300 AD - Bosporan Greeks and Ostrogoths
375 AD - Hunnic Empire conquers Crimea
453 AD - Goths regain independence, Byzantines liberate Bosporan Greeks
650 AD - Bulgars subjugate Crimean Goths
750 AD - Khazar Empire conquers most of Crimea
965 AD - East Slavs form the Principality of Timutarakan in eastern Crimea
988 AD - Principality of Timutarakan captures Chersonesus, but gives it back
1000 AD - Pechenegs conquer northern parts of Crimea
1036 AD - Pechenegs defeated by Kievan Rus, north Crimea captured by Cumans
1083 AD - Byzantine Crimeans conquer the Slavic Principality of Timutarakan
1200 AD - north Crimea (Steppes) ruled by Cumans, southern by the Byzantines
1204 AD - Byzantine Crimean territories are now ruled by the Empire of Trebizond
1238 AD - Mongol Golden Horde invades northern Crimea and defeats the Cumans
1266 AD - Genoese Italians buy the city of Caffa (Feodosia) from the Mongol Khan
1313 AD - Golden Horde's Khan converts to Islam - Islam spreads into Crimea
1330 AD - Principality of Theodoro gains independence from the Empire of Trebizond
1400 AD - Crimea invaded by Tamerlan (Timurids), Genoa captures Greek cities
1449 AD - Independent Crimean Khanate emerges in former Golden Horde areas
1475 AD - Turkey invades southern Crimea, conquering Theodoro and Genoese lands

Video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f0-fLgWoxIY

[Tomenable]

And probably Belarus will soon officially join the invasion:

"According to our information, the #Lukashenko regime is preparing a provocation on the border with #Ukraine to justify an invasion of Ukraine":

https://twitter.com/PavelLatushka/st...USAFJtHi_-A3FQ

[Tomenable]

You mean the Tatars which did invade and plunder Eastern Europe on behalf of the Ottomans before?

Truth be told, Ukrainian Cossacks were raiding & plundering Crimean Khanate and Ottoman cities along the Black Sea coast just as fiercely.

[Vallicanus]

@Riverman

Looking at Tomenable's table above, how Russian was Crimea before the late 19th century?

Tatars were three-quarters or more of the Crimean population till the later 19th century.

[Riverman]

@Riverman

Looking at Tomenable's table above, how Russian was Crimea before the late 19th century?

Tatars were three-quarters or more of the Crimean population till the later 19th century.

The current Crimean population is in any case no more Ukrainian than Russian. So given the historical context and current situation, any conquest of the Ukraine would be more of a catastrophy for the current inhabitants than remaining in the Russian Federation. Basically, just like in Donbas, I expect more traumatised and displaced people from giving these territories back to the Ukraine than letting it being part of Russia. Probably some Crimeans would even prefer independence, probably that would even be a 2nd best solution to the problem, who knows. But bringing them back under the control of the current Selenski regime, is for sure nothing "nice" to do these people. Its also drastically against vital Russian interests, which brings me to the conclusion there is no sort of moral or humane argument for bringing them back, even less by force, under Ukrainian control.

This is one of the instances when the people from Democracy Now made a valuable analysis of the geostrategical situation:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EzotonmeTn0

Just like I said, better make peace soon, better take negotiations serious and don't start the 3rd World War. I have to add: I hope so much that the European leaders stay strong and oppose the American and some Eastern European warmongers and make their desire clear, that they want to build the Russians a diplomatic bridge to peace. I know the Americans and some Eastern Europeans, especially the Poles, will press hard for taking even more aggressive and hostile measures against Russia, and to prevent any peaceful, diplomatic solution from happening. But as much I do hope that the European leaders which are at least somewhat more reasonable than the American cowboys block this and don't let themselves dragged into this catastrophy.

Don't start World War III for the American warmonger.

[Riverman]

A simple question: Who of you really thinks, honestly, that a conquest by the Ukrainians would be perceived as some sort of liberation by the majority of the inhabitants of Donbas and Crimea? Seriously, that would be a foreign conquest, by all means. It would be no liberation.

[bigsnake49]

@Riverman

Looking at Tomenable's table above, how Russian was Crimea before the late 19th century?

Tatars were three-quarters or more of the Crimean population till the later 19th century.

Inconvenient truths. The Tatars were slaughtered by the Russians, particularly by the butcher Stalin. If your historical horizon is longer than 100 years they have absolutely no historical claim.

[bigsnake49]

A simple question: Who of you really thinks, honestly, that a conquest by the Ukrainians would be perceived as some sort of liberation by the majority of the inhabitants of Donbas and Crimea? Seriously, that would be a foreign conquest, by all means. It would be no liberation.

They don't want the Russians either. It's only the Russian speaking politicians of the Donbas and Donetsk that want to be part of Russia. Russia will the pariah of the whole wide world whereas billions will be poured into Ukraine for reconstruction. Which country would you want to be in? Also remember that there are Ukrainians in those two provinces, not just Russians. So what happens to them?

[Riverman]

They don't want the Russians either. It's only the Russian speaking politicians of the Donbas and Donetsk that want to be part of Russia. Russia will the pariah of the whole wide world whereas billions will be poured into Ukraine for reconstruction. Which country would you want to be in? Also remember that there are Ukrainians in those two provinces, not just Russians. So what happens to them?

Since the pro-Russians/Russians in the rest of Ukraine being persecuted, I'd say they should stay/go to those new Russian provinces and vice versa, for those which can't stand the respective regime.
A lot will stay in their homes, even if they don't like Putin or Selenski regime respectively, but some might choose.
I see in any case no better or more fair solution. Anyone denying that millions of pro-Russian Ukrainian citizens still exist, despite all the phased propaganda and purged media, is in denial.
To give the Russian elements a clearly defined territory is the best solution. Then the majority of the Ukrainians can develop all the quicker the way they want and those pro-Russians which can't stand that have options too.
You think living together after this war hopefully ends soon will get any easier than before?
An Ukrainian reconquest would just cause more suffering and refugees. Its just about "Ukrainian greatness" and the anti-Russian grudge which keeps this going, no "liberation" of suppressed people.

[traveller]

Riverman, you could make some money:

https://www.vice.com/en/article/epxk...aid-propaganda

[Vallicanus]

The current Crimean population is in any case no more Ukrainian than Russian. So given the historical context and current situation, any conquest of the Ukraine would be more of a catastrophy for the current inhabitants than remaining in the Russian Federation. Basically, just like in Donbas, I expect more traumatised and displaced people from giving these territories back to the Ukraine than letting it being part of Russia. Probably some Crimeans would even prefer independence, probably that would even be a 2nd best solution to the problem, who knows. But bringing them back under the control of the current Selenski regime, is for sure nothing "nice" to do these people. Its also drastically against vital Russian interests, which brings me to the conclusion there is no sort of moral or humane argument for bringing them back, even less by force, under Ukrainian control.

This is one of the instances when the people from Democracy Now made a valuable analysis of the geostrategical situation:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EzotonmeTn0

Just like I said, better make peace soon, better take negotiations serious and don't start the 3rd World War. I have to add: I hope so much that the European leaders stay strong and oppose the American and some Eastern European warmongers and make their desire clear, that they want to build the Russians a diplomatic bridge to peace. I know the Americans and some Eastern Europeans, especially the Poles, will press hard for taking even more aggressive and hostile measures against Russia, and to prevent any peaceful, diplomatic solution from happening. But as much I do hope that the European leaders which are at least somewhat more reasonable than the American cowboys block this and don't let themselves dragged into this catastrophy.

Don't start World War III for the American warmonger.

More cheap propaganda from our in-house Kremlin stooge.

[Vallicanus]

Don't worry.

If the USA pulls the plug on NATO your beloved Russians will be parking their tanks on the Atlantic coast of Europe.

[Tomenable]

45 Russian "diplomats" to be expelled:

https://www.gov.pl/web/special-servi...to-be-expelled

[Riverman]

Don't worry.

If the USA pulls the plug on NATO your beloved Russians will be parking their tanks on the Atlantic coast of Europe.

That's a piece of nonsense-propaganda. Just because the Russians decided to invade Ukraine, to prevent American troops on their Southern border, their pro-Russian minority in Donbas being expelled and Crimea taken away, the sanctions never lifted - which is bad enough, like I said all the time, they don't plan to "conquer Europe to the Atlantic". They are not even capable of doing that and can be happy if they manage to control Ukraine. Such claims are just beyond ridiculous and being only brought up by anti-Russian propagandists.

I was obviously not for Russia invading Ukraine, I think its wrong and a humane catastrophy for not good enough reasons. But talking about the ongoing war and the one sided, biased American dominated propaganda, one has to be realistic and more objective. The Ukrainian regime is, overall, not on higher moral ground at all, because its their actions which led to this escalation and its their refusal of taking negotiations seriously which causes this war to escalate even further and being dragged on. The war is wrong, so are both sides. The one sided anti-Russian propaganda is what makes me angry, because its an unfair nonsense portrayal of what really happens there and in the end sheer warmongering for World War III and even more dependence of the Europeans from the American overlord.

[Riverman]

Olaf, stay strong:
https://www.arte.tv/de/afp/neuigkeit...sofort-beenden
At least some politicians are still accountable and no short-sighted warmongers, like the USA and Poland in particular.

Don't let Europe be dragged into their dirty war fames. Don't let Europe being blackmailed and pushed into an escalation.
The Americans should have no excuse for their dangerous gambling. Its not the Europeans which demand the escalation of this war, not at all.
Ask the Germans, the French...
We want to help the victims of this war and an end to this war as soon as possible, not escalating to World War III.

[Ailchu]

because it is a lost cause
first of all Belgium has no military spine
second there is no unity, Belgium is not a nation, it is something surreal

for which country would you fight? what would that country have to do different? i think people in western europe are completely spoiled by wealth that they don't know anymore how good they have it.

[Riverman]

for which country would you fight? what would that country have to do different? i think people in western europe are completely spoiled by wealth that they don't know anymore how good they have it.

That's part of the problem, as is the "post-heroic" education and new "gender roles" among many things. But its more than that, because many Western states and governments don't represent the will of the people as much, as that people would be ready to sacrifice anything for it. Add to that, the constant media argumentation and educational tone of "power, state and politicians" being generally bad or problematic.
Belgium in particular is of course a special case, its whole history and background is.

[Northener]

The worst is, now Biden is not aggressive, warmongering enough. And suddenly he gets under pressure, all the arguments and allegations, which were denied to save his presidency, being confirmed. And we have to be concerned, because obviously, those maniacs in the USA want escalate the war even further, and keep the Ukraine in the war to wear Russia down. And that's just awful, ugly, totally irresponsible and they let it all happen, just like they did nothing when Russia sought a peaceful solution, because they want the war and they want to escalate it to bring Russia down.
And these kinds of games the Americans play, they every couple of years, is just dangerous and horrible. I don't give that more credit than Putin, which is, in comparison, a humble.

If you see the following fragment from Dugin, Putin's ideological Rasputin, the context is clear. He is visible relieved about the war. 'Now we are on an island' and he seems to be glad. It's so funded in an extremist hate towards liberal democracy, "the seapowers". It's same as in the past with for example Lenin, they absorb western theory and then they construct an anti-these, full of resentment... Dugin and Putin want to turn the clock back to czaristic times. That's the real agenda of the Kremlin...it's an extreme collectivistic even totalitarian aim...