Will the Dutch crush Kiev's EU, dreams?

[Tom Cat]

I've read another article were 3 out of 4 Dutch do not want Ukraine getting any EU, privileges.
Maybe Makje can give more details?



Orange Resolution: Will the Dutch Close the Door on Kiev's European Dreams?


http://m.sputniknews.com/politics/20160111/1032932512/netherlands-referendum-ukraine-analysis.html

[Markje]

Kiev has had a very unpleasant start to the New Year. With economic problems mounting, and the threat of renewed conflict in the Donbass looming, now, adding to their troubles, the Dutch plan on holding a referendum to see whether they can't reverse Amsterdam's ratification of the EU-Ukraine Association Agreement.

Not entirely true... The population of the netherlands *forced* the government to hold a Referendum (6th of april) which is non-binding by amassing the necessary 300.000 votes (they got 450.000 for this referendum).
That process in itself was quite anti-democratic, as it forced people to use real paper-post to mail a letter with signature to an organization in Netherlands. Old-skool non-electronic non-internet consent-forms.

Unfortunately, the Referendum is not binding, meaning the government can ignore it. However doing so is a political suicide.

Geenstijl.nl a popular right-wing dutch blog, has lobbied with the current politicians in the opposition and a few government parties to get a majority vote in the 2nd chamber. Meaning that if they hold to their word, the referendum's outcome will be respected.

The Dutch, it seems, aren't so thrilled about all the promises made in Brussels on their behalf regarding Association, and the much talked-about visa-free travel regime for Ukrainians.

Not only those, but also the military aid, and other provisions in the "trade agreement" (those who have read it, as i have, know why I use the quotation marks, only 20 pages of the full 186 are about trade, the rest are about military aid, visa's and other provisions).

According to a recent survey by Een Vandaag, a popular current affairs program on the Dutch public television channel NPO 1, a majority of the country's citizens are opposed to the ratification of the agreement.

Entirely correct. If the number of turnup is above the required 30% for a legal outcome, it is expected Dutch will vote against Ukraine's treaty.

Planning to hold an advisory referendum on the agreement in early April, the Dutch are throwing a wrench into Brussels' plans, leading European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker to warn that a 'no' vote on association might cause an EU-wide 'continental crisis'.

Major Dutch newspapers translate this as 'oooooh panic, panic, democracy is waking up where we didn't expect it to!!!!'

The referendum, it's worth recalling, was the initiative of Dutch Euroskeptics, who managed to collect over 400,000 signatures last September, taking advantage of a new democratic tool which allows citizens to call for a plebiscite on recently-adopted laws or treaties.

Correct, but not only the Dutch Euroskeptiks, but also a large blog named geenstijl.nl whom launched the dutch website 'geenpeil.nl' to promote the anti-vote of the treaty and why you should vote in any case, against or for.

Een Vandaag's survey, which polled over 27,000 residents, showed that the majority of Dutch citizens are likely to vote to reject the treaty, with 53% of those asked saying they would "definitely" do so, and 17% noting they were "likely" to do so." If the referendum receives over 30% turnout, its status must be considered official.

I thought the turnout is 38% to be considered legally official. (I will look this up later)
[edit] Nope it has to be 30% , correct.

In theory, the referendum is only advisory in character, and the government might still ignore it. However, in practice, experts suggest, doing so would mean a serious blow to the government's approval ratings.

Correct, see above.

In November, Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte said that the referendum would not stop Ukraine's European integration, but turned around and added that the government would still take account of the results. Since then, the government has decided to launch a campaign in support of the Association Agreement, which came into force on January 1. According to some critics, the government will now be doing everything it can to discourage sufficient voter turnout.

Mark Rutte still hasn't started campaigning in a pro-vote message. Other than that: wholly true, they even cut the usual budget of such referendums for sufficient voting booths from $40.000.000 to $20.000.000 meaning lots of cities chose to slash the number of voting booths to a bare minimum to cut costs.

Speaking to Dutch evening newspaper NRC Handelsblad, Joop van Holsteijn, a professor in electoral research at Leiden University, pointed out that a record low sum –only 20 million euros, has been allocated to municipalities to carry out the referendum (in contrast to the last parliamentary elections, where municipalities received over 42 million). "I see this as childlike pettiness. The law on the referendum is there, and people have the right to use it," Holsteijn complained.

Ah, they noticed that too.

Commenting on the roots of the Dutch people's negative attitudes toward post-Maidan Ukraine, independent Russian newspaper Svobodnaya Pressa suggested that the story, running late last year, on the discovery of stolen paintings from a Dutch museum in the hands of pro-Kiev 'nationalists' in east Ukraine plays an important role.

Not true. Most Dutch only know Ukraine from the soccer-tournament and therefore vote 'no'.

"Late last year," the paper notes, "NPO 1 reported that a collection of 24 works, and a large amount of silver stolen 11 years ago from a museum in Western Friesland had wound up in the Donbass, in the hands of a pro-Kiev 'nationalist group'. The men refused the museum's offer of 50,000 euros to get the pieces back, demanding at least 5 million euros. Moreover, according to the report, Oleh Tyahnybok, a Ukrainian politician and former Rada MP from the Svoboda Party, and former Ukrainian Security Service Head Valentyn Nalyvaichenko [two formerly key figures in post-Maidan Kiev] were tied to the crime."

All true. Except for the location, it was all near l'viv and not donbass. Guess the keywords had to be used again in accordance with AndrewFI's theories.

Speaking to the newspaper, Alexei Kuznetsov, the head of the Center for European Studies at the Moscow-based Institute of World Economy and International Relations, emphasized that he is convinced that in any case, "every effort will be made to persuade people not to vote against [association]. The EU has seen many cases of the manipulation of public opinion before, and Brussels is quite capable when it comes to conducting information warfare against its own population."

They are already doing so. Cutting the budget, trying to bury all anti-ukrainian news in the gov't news agencies, they even go so far as to call a no-vote a racist vote. (gee, i didn't know that Ukrainians were a race).

As for Juncker's prediction that the referendum might cause a 'continental crisis' if the Dutch vote the wrong way, Kuznetsov noted that "many intelligent people in the West, including in the EU, already understand that supporting the coup d'état in Ukraine was a big mistake. It led to the partial collapse of an EU neighbor which had been relatively stable up to that point…Still, given that Ukraine is not a member of the EU, whatever the outcome of the referendum will be, it will not cause a crisis in the EU itself."

I'd agree with the parts I can verify. I hope the rest is true too, it would be a small plus in my book.

Juncker's words, the analyst suggested, are an example of the kind of information warfare he's talking about. "This is an attempt to intimidate the Dutch and to impose on them the 'right' kind of behavior –from the EU leadership's point of view. There is nothing to back up these words…"

Absolutely true. Who says propaganda is dead in the EU.

For his part, Boris Shmelev, Deputy Director of the Diplomatic Academy of the Russian Foreign Ministry, is more pessimistic, suggesting that too much is at stake for the EU establishment, and that nothing will be able to stop the agreement from going ahead.

Most Dutch understand this to be true too, which is why everyone is excited about voting to show Europe that if they go ahead, it is without mandate from the ordinary people and shown for an anti-democratic farce. Never was it so obvious the leaders are non-democratic in the EU if they choose to ignore this (no) outcome.

"The West in general and the leaders of major European countries in particular have invested a great deal of effort and political capital in the formation of the Association Agreement. For them, any setbacks – a refusal to sign or even a delay, would be highly undesirable. It would mean a powerful political defeat for the EU leadership, and for the entire policy of the EU in Ukraine and the entire former Soviet space."

Absolutely true, parts of the agreement already became effective 1-jan-2016, before the Dutch Gov't can say yes as they have to wait for the referendums outcome (even if they ignore it). Its especially painful as Dutchies head the EU these coming 6 months!!!

"Every effort will [therefore] be made," according to Shmelev, "to change the mood of the Dutch people with respect to the agreement."

Very true, which is why Mark Rutte our president chooses not to campaign for a 'yes' vote. It will be counterproductive and only strengthen the resolve of the people to vote "no".

Ultimately, Svobodnaya Pressa suggests that with the referendum now less than three months away, the big question is: "will the Dutch and European authorities be able to convince the Dutch people that the Association Agreement with Ukraine is a good thing? And if not, will they at least take account of the results of the referendum, or will the geopolitical agenda find itself to be more important than the vaunted values of European democracy?"

My estimation: No they cannot change our no-vote and no they will not respect the no-vote.

Mark.

[msmoby]

No... the EU has had the Irish vote no to a vital piece of legislation .. they just waited until the Irish woke up to their folly and persuaded them to vote yes, next time 

[andrewfi]

It may require several referenda in order to get the 'correct' result. I am sure that Brussels and other external actors will employ a mixture of patience and provocation to sway matters into the right direction.

[Tom Cat]

Must be a Ukrainian thing whenever there's a problem, just blame Russia.

'Fake video was created outside of Ukraine - possibly in Russia' - Avakyan

http://uatoday.tv/society/tigran-avakyan-deputy-internal-affairs-minister-for-european-integration-574966.html

[msmoby]

Must be a Ukrainian thing whenever there's a problem, just blame Russia.

Wow, has the 'messenger' just let his mask slip ...  ? 

Naturally, that the Kremlin have used their military to take over and held a 'referendum' in Crimea and encouraged - and were physically involved in Donbas is no excuse ....

[Markje]

Must be a Ukrainian thing whenever there's a problem, just blame Russia.

Wow, has the 'messenger' just let his mask slip ...  ? 

Naturally, that the Kremlin have used their military to take over and held a 'referendum' in Crimea and encouraged - and were physically involved in Donbas is no excuse ....

There was no military takeover of crimea.

http://ruadventures.com/forum/index.php/topic,22510.msg428877.html#msg428877
http://ruadventures.com/forum/index.php/topic,22510.msg428958.html#msg428958
http://ruadventures.com/forum/index.php/topic,22510.msg429154.html#msg429154

Take a good hard look at those military oppressed people, forced to vote for something they didn't want:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2582006/Jubilation-Crimea-95-cent-vote-join-Russia-Ukrainian-prime-minister-warns-separatist-leaders-ground-burn-feet.html
To cut down on propaganda, lets list only the captions below of the first few pictures of this newsitem:

* Crowds of ethnic Russians have been celebrating in Crimea after the region voted in favour of splitting from Ukraine and rejoining Russia
* Fireworks explode in the sky over Lenin Square after the end of a referendum in Simferopol, Crimea, Ukraine
* Western leaders refuse to recognise Sunday's referendum in Crimea, in which 96 per cent backed a merger with Russia

(which has nothing to do with the picture shown)

* Despite threats from the Ukranian president to hunt down the politicians responsible for pushing the vote through, there were celebrations in Simferopol
* Crimean voters have overwhelmingly backed joining Russia sparking scenes of celebration in Lenin Square in the regional capital of Simferopol
* The Crimean regional speaker has called the vote an important Russian and global event
* In a phone call to Barack Obama, President Putin said the vote conformed to international law, despite Washington's insistence that it was conducted illegally
* Despite the celebrations, tensions remain high in the east of Ukraine after days of violent clashes

This last two also have nothing to do with picture shown, I guess propaganda bullshit must be inserted, even in images of people celebrating.

*William Hauge has denounced the vote as a 'mockery of democracy' and said Russia will have to accept 'economic and political consequences' after stirring tensions in the region

Over the image of people kissing and celebrating.

* Jubilant scenes in the regional capital of Simferopol broke out following the early results, as a regional politician said Crimea could apply to join Russia tomorrow
* The speaker of the Crimean parliament has said he expects Russia's response to the vote to be 'fast'
* Around 300 miles from Crimea, Russian President Vladimir Putin watched the closing of the Sochi Paralympic Games

Ironically, this is the first image not of celebrating people, but really a pic of Putin himself.

* The referendum has been denounced by Wester leaders and Ukraine's own government as illegal and illegitimate

Again propaganda over a pic about people celebrating.

* Crimean prime minister Sergei Askyonov has joined in the celebrations despite threats from the country's prime minister to hunt down those who pushed for the referendum
* The Crimeans have been celebrating in Lenin Square, beside a statue of the former Soviet leader, showing the close historical ties between the peninsula and Russia

Whatever else happened in Ukraine, not a single Lenin statue was damaged in all of Crimea.
I will stop quoting the pictures now, you can read the rest yourself.



Incidentally, if you search for "crimea referendum party" on google, all you get is pro-western propaganda. I had to use yandex to find this article in the western press.

If you know anything about preparing , planning , logistics etc. You can clearly see that this party has been planned thoroughly beforehand, meaning that everyone knew what was going to happen before the ballots were cast.

Some people call this proof that it is a big sham. Others (those who visit there regularly) say that this had been a long time coming and only formalizing what the people wanted since 1991.

Mark.

[Gipsy]

Must be a Ukrainian thing whenever there's a problem, just blame Russia.

Wow, has the 'messenger' just let his mask slip ...  ? 

Naturally, that the Kremlin have used their military to take over and held a 'referendum' in Crimea and encouraged - and were physically involved in Donbas is no excuse ....

There was no military takeover of crimea.

http://ruadventures.com/forum/index.php/topic,22510.msg428877.html#msg428877
http://ruadventures.com/forum/index.php/topic,22510.msg428958.html#msg428958
http://ruadventures.com/forum/index.php/topic,22510.msg429154.html#msg429154

Take a good hard look at those military oppressed people, forced to vote for something they didn't want:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2582006/Jubilation-Crimea-95-cent-vote-join-Russia-Ukrainian-prime-minister-warns-separatist-leaders-ground-burn-feet.html

I dunno man, you keep harping on about something that never happened. Its trying to convince the world black is white.

Incidentally, if you search for "crimea referendum party" on google, all you get is pro-western propaganda. I had to use yandex to find this article in the western press.

If you know anything about preparing , planning , logistics etc. You can clearly see that this party has been planned thoroughly beforehand, meaning that everyone knew what was going to happen before the ballots were cast.

Some people call this proof that it is a big sham. Others (those who visit there regularly) say that this had been a long time coming and only formalizing what the people wanted since 1991.

Mark.

 

Its a complete and utter waste of time trying to convince the (descendant)"Irish numbskull".
He has his own "knowledgeable" and "experienced" views of the subject.

 

[Gipsy]

Must be a Ukrainian thing whenever there's a problem, just blame Russia.

Wow, has the 'messenger' just let his mask slip ...  ? 

Naturally, that the Kremlin have used their military to take over and held a 'referendum' in Crimea and encouraged - and were physically involved in Donbas is no excuse ....

So in comparison, you are saying that the British should have stayed out of the Northern Ireland conflict, or the Falkland Island conflict?.

[Gipsy]

It may require several referenda in order to get the 'correct' result. I am sure that Brussels and other external actors will employ a mixture of patience and provocation to sway matters into the right direction.

It will be exactly the same as the Irish referendum, a new modified/manipulated proposal, which was in fact the exact same as the original, just to baffle the "Kartoffeln kopfe", and get the EU desired end result.

[andrewfi]

Yes, the Irish model was in my head as I wrote.

This has the potential to be a very serious issue because it will make public and obvious the reality of the EU Association Agreement as it applies to Ukraine. In Ukraine some people are already coming to realise that the agreement was very much a one way street. If only more people had actually read the document before falling for the lies they wanted to hear.

[msmoby]

There was no military takeover of crimea.

More delusion / deflection.. There was a military takeover - by the 25k Russian military personnel stationed there

1/ they fired on OSCE military observers and UA military personal - fired overhead - that is use of force. It suggests what will happen if you do not obey / comply


2/They surrounded UA bases - stripped the personnel of weapons giving the option of joining or leaving the peninsula - military force

3/ They surrounded the  Crimean parliament building - then conducted a room to room search - rounding up UA personnel and expelling the Prime Minster - use of force.

I could go on and on .. but I am certain you really get the point - the circumstances to hold a referendum needed use of force - threatened or otherwise - to create the circumstances to hold a 'referendum'

That the maj. of people living on the peninsula were pleased about these events is not contested

[msmoby]

Must be a Ukrainian thing whenever there's a problem, just blame Russia.

Wow, has the 'messenger' just let his mask slip ...  ? 

Naturally, that the Kremlin have used their military to take over and held a 'referendum' in Crimea and encouraged - and were physically involved in Donbas is no excuse ....

So in comparison, you are saying that the British should have stayed out of the Northern Ireland conflict, or the Falkland Island conflict?.

You have by your own admission been lurking' - so were you inattentive when I pointed out that  Crimea and N.Ireland were similar - in that both had planted people inserted to 'redress' the ethnicity balance.. Plus there was ethnic cleansing of the indigenous population.

Regarding the use of British troops in N.Ireland... If you know your history they were sent  as Stormont couldn't cope - the Nationalist population were oppressed re jobs and how constituency boundaries were drawn to ensure a Brit majority - even in Stroke city.. Derry / Londonderry.

The Police force - esp. the B Specials were hardly 'fair'..

SO... The Troops came to police and to be fair... they were - initially - welcomed in Nationalist areas with cups of tea -as they were perceived as being a far better option than the Police.

That this relationship broke down was a combination of extreme Nationalist terrorist acts and Westminster's ill - advised use of Interment without trial... which is why I know alienating sections of a population is STUPID and counter -productive..

 

[Manny]

That the maj. of people living on the peninsula were pleased about these events is not contested

So you think that the views of the majority should have been ignored?

[andrewfi]

Hey Moby, how is the holiday going? How come you are power posting your usual tripe?
Doesn't your target want to spend time with you?
Is she busy with other stuff and forgot to give you any pocket money?

You're posting as though you're stuck in the library in dreary Manchester again.

[Markje]

There was no military takeover of crimea.

More delusion / deflection.. There was a military takeover - by the 25k Russian military personnel stationed there

They were there for years! It was called "Sevastopol army base" that Russia leased from Ukraine.

1/ they fired on OSCE military observers and UA military personal - fired overhead - that is use of force. It suggests what will happen if you do not obey / comply

2/They surrounded UA bases - stripped the personnel of weapons giving the option of joining or leaving the peninsula - military force

Try that with any other country with any army base and you will be fired upon back..... Shows perfectly the intentions of said military observers / bases. they are trying to defect to Russia along with the peninsula whilst keeping up appearances. I see you are still gullible. So how is it a military takeover if the other guys wont even shoot back?

Even the Netherlands shot back at the Nazi's for 3 whole days during WW-2 , even though everybody knew back then there was 0 chance of winning.

3/ They surrounded the  Crimean parliament building - then conducted a room to room search - rounding up UA personnel and expelling the Prime Minster - use of force.

It is logical that if you leave the administration of a country (Crimea was already fully autonomous by this time, they had seceded from Ukraine), that its representatives should walk away voluntary. If they don't , use of force is even expected.

Of course, just like any other referendum for seceding from another country. The whole independence thingy the USA had going on with England was far less bloodless I can tell you , including any other event in history where (parts of) countries tried to break away. I have never seen such a peaceful transition as Crimea. (Netherlands Antilles exempted). Even Kosovo was much , much worse and Yugoslavia had to know they could not beat Europe + USA. So why wouldn't Kiev stand up to unidentified militia. I am sure they would've gotten help from the "world-police". It would have been even better if Kiev officially asked Russia to use their military of Sevastopol to get rid of the militia. Then the west really would have had reasons to complain to Russia if they used that as a pretense for the Referendum.

I could go on and on .. but I am certain you really get the point - the circumstances to hold a referendum needed use of force - threatened or otherwise - to create the circumstances to hold a 'referendum'

You could go on and on, and every time you dig the hole deeper that you are in.

Were the people doing the voting forced? No. not a single average Joe was threatened in any way to vote or to vote 'yes join Russia'.

That the maj. of people living on the peninsula were pleased about these events is not contested

Pleased? They were extatic throwing huge street-parties with fireworks. You do have a flair for understatement in this remark.

The take over of Crimea was peaceful. Not a single gun was fired, the cannons silent. Thus democracy in all its glory at work. The people got to decide their vote and they voted yes overwhelmingly. So no military takeover then.

Mark.

[Markje]

That the maj. of people living on the peninsula were pleased about these events is not contested

So you think that the views of the majority should have been ignored?

They were ignored for 25 years.

When someone finally listened to the people living there, there was a huge celebration!

Mark.

[Markje]

New vote in the EU:

Even if Netherlands votes no, after the referendum turns out no, they  are going to ignore the democracy and vote "yes" still, despite it not being unanimous now.

77% pro and 23% against.

Source : http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-//EP//TEXT+MOTION+P8-RC-2016-0068+0+DOC+XML+V0//EN

Read paragraph 44, amendement 17. It says so very clearly.

Great, its official. Democracy is dead.

Good that all political parties in NL and their voting-behaviour is highlighted. Next time, I will vote for the right-radicals as they seem to be the only pro-democracy party I can stomach.

Mark.

Literal text of amendment 17:

Joint motion for a resolution
Original:
44. Expresses deep concern about the
context surrounding the upcoming Dutch
consultative referendum on the EU-
Ukraine AA/DCFTA; trusts that the
decision of the Dutch people will be taken
on the basis of the merits of the
agreement, recognising its tangible effects
on the EU and the Netherlands in
particular;

Amendment:
44. Insists that the result of the Dutch
referendum on the EU-Ukraine
Association Agreement must be fully
respected; calls on the Commission to
take adequate measures in line with the
result of the referendum, including an
immediate suspension of the Association
Agreement if the majority in the Dutch
referendum says no;

amendment 17 rejected with a 76% against-vote.

[Gipsy]

I think that it would be political suicide for a government to refuse to recognise a national referendum, especially if the result mirrors the current projections.

[Gipsy]

Must be a Ukrainian thing whenever there's a problem, just blame Russia.

Wow, has the 'messenger' just let his mask slip ...  ? 

Naturally, that the Kremlin have used their military to take over and held a 'referendum' in Crimea and encouraged - and were physically involved in Donbas is no excuse ....

So in comparison, you are saying that the British should have stayed out of the Northern Ireland conflict, or the Falkland Island conflict?.

You have by your own admission been lurking' - so were you inattentive when I pointed out that  Crimea and N.Ireland were similar - in that both had planted people inserted to 'redress' the ethnicity balance.. Plus there was ethnic cleansing of the indigenous population.

Regarding the use of British troops in N.Ireland... If you know your history they were sent  as Stormont couldn't cope - the Nationalist population were oppressed re jobs and how constituency boundaries were drawn to ensure a Brit majority - even in Stroke city.. Derry / Londonderry.

The Police force - esp. the B Specials were hardly 'fair'..

SO... The Troops came to police and to be fair... they were - initially - welcomed in Nationalist areas with cups of tea -as they were perceived as being a far better option than the Police.

That this relationship broke down was a combination of extreme Nationalist terrorist acts and Westminster's ill - advised use of Interment without trial... which is why I know alienating sections of a population is STUPID and counter -productive..

As is alienating posters on a forum.
You have most certainly learnt nothing.

[msmoby]

The take over of Crimea was peaceful. Not a single gun was fired, the cannons silent. Thus democracy in all its glory at work. The people got to decide their vote and they voted yes overwhelmingly. So no military takeover then.

Mark.

The take over of Crimea was peaceful. Not a single gun was fired, the cannons silent. Thus democracy in all its glory at work. The people got to decide their vote and they voted yes overwhelmingly. So no military takeover then.

Mark.

Markje you've obviously kept ignoring these videos..

breaking into the Crimea parliament - ordnance exploded ,..

AxDabblW-w0

Military Observers prevented from entry ....  'strange' that a 'peaceful occupation' should be so 'secret' ...

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-ukraine-crisis-crimea-airbase-idUSBREA2L0BN20140322

''Russian troops forced their way into a Ukrainian airbase in Crimea with armored vehicles, automatic fire and stun grenades on Saturday, injuring a Ukrainian serviceman and detaining the base's commander for talks.

A Reuters reporter said armoured vehicles smashed through one of walls of the compound and that he heard bursts of gunfire and grenades.

Colonel Yuliy Mamchur, the commander of the base, said a Ukrainian serviceman had been injured and that he himself he was being taken away by the Russians for talks at an unspecified location.

Asked if he thought he would return safely, he said: "That remains to be seen. For now we are placing all our weapons in the base's storage."

Belbek was one of the last military facilities in Crimea still under Ukrainian control following Russia's armed takeover and subsequent annexation of the peninsula, which has a majority ethnic Russian population and is home to one of Russia's biggest naval bases.''



So, Markje..we all know the Russians stationed on their rented bases were used to takeover Crimea and create the circumstances for the 'referendum'... people died ... gun shot wounds ...  'strange', eh

I think that it would be political suicide for a government to refuse to recognise a national referendum, especially if the result mirrors the current projections.

..and yet that was EXACTLY what the Kremlin did in Chechn'ya whilst condemning Kiev for 'oppressing' self-determination

Ref Crimea...Markje know that I object to how the circumstances were created to hold the 'referendum' ..along with 100 other nations at the UN...Those objections incl. the NL ..

http://ruadventures.com/forum/Smileys/animated/coffee.gif

As is alienating posters on a forum.
You have most certainly learnt nothing.

I - once again - noted the lack of a single attempt to counter anything I posted ... 

I learnt that posting facts in a place were folks counter it with bollox about my personal life - means I might be irritating ... I have no need for 'virtual love' .. off for the first fresh coconut of the day..

[Markje]

And the smearing campaign has started,

Apparently Russia is using Dutch NGO's to fund this referendum against Ukraine.

 

[Wiz]

Moby

Next time use the correct video so people can understand.... what is been said!

from: msmoby on 22 January 2016, 04:18:44

I pointed out that  Crimea and N.Ireland were similar - in that both had planted people inserted to 'redress' the ethnicity balance.. Plus there was ethnic cleansing of the indigenous population.

Regarding the use of British troops in N.Ireland... If you know your history they were sent  as Stormont couldn't cope - the Nationalist population were oppressed re jobs and how constituency boundaries were drawn to ensure a Brit majority - even in Stroke city.. Derry / Londonderry.

The Police force - esp. the B Specials were hardly 'fair'..

I am sure you know your history but  Crimea and N. Ireland are NOT Similar cases, as you claim.

N. Ireland is part of the same island that previously was one Nation before the Brits divided in 2 to continue their colonial imperialistic policy. You are a descendant of Scottish settlers that were  imported by the British to 'redress' the ethnicity imbalance and secure their occupation. Additionally there was ethnic cleansing of the indigenous Catholic Nationalist population.

Crimea historically was part of the Russian Empire since 1873 and the majority of people are of Russian decent and had Russian Passports too! Read history or you know it and choose to lie!

I see you are scouting again for you know who!   

[msmoby]

Dear Wiz,

Thanks for confirming that both N. Ireland and Crimea had populations planted and suffered ethnic cleansing

Differences

1/ The British started the process LONG before the Russians - Ireland was not a nation - rather a collection of warring fiefdoms

2/ The Russians have signed TWO major treaties re who 'owns Crimea and broke them both



Yes, Ireland is an Island and Crimea a peninsula - but from Russia  - one needs a ferry to get there and hence the necessity to build a long bridge link  - so, it is effectively an island....

But thanks for proving that it was you that needed the History lesson and that you actually back me up re the planting and ethnic cleansing that brought about 'majorities'

The bloody imperialists ....

[Markje]

Thanks for confirming that both N. Ireland and Crimea had populations planted and suffered ethnic cleansing

And both of you are wrong.

Crimea used to belong to Kievan Rus, the founder of both Ukraine and Russia, but they lost it after a huge war with the Mongolian Horde. (ooooh reallly) in the middle ages (around 1500).
So you could say it was ALWAYS Russian starting back to the foundation of Russia/Ukraine.

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

In the mid-10th century, the eastern area of Crimea was conquered by Prince Sviatoslav I of Kiev and became part of the Kievan Rus' principality of Tmutarakan. In 988, Prince Vladimir I of Kiev also captured the Byzantine town of Chersonesos (presently part of Sevastopol) where he later converted to Christianity. An impressive Russian Orthodox cathedral marks the location of this historic event.

Followed by later:

In the medieval period, it was acquired partly by Kievan Rus', but fell to the Mongol invasions as part of the Golden Horde. They were followed by the Crimean Khanate and the Ottoman Empire, which conquered the coastal areas as well, in the 15th to 18th centuries.

So it was the Crimean Khanate (I.E. Tatars) who were the invaders, Russia stole it back from them in 1783.

Differences

1/ The British started the process LONG before the Russians - Ireland was not a nation - rather a collection of warring fiefdoms

Wrong again.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Ireland

The Irish Parliament was abolished from 1 January 1801 in the wake of the republican United Irishmen Rebellion and Ireland became an integral part of a new United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland under the provisions of the Acts of Union 1800.

this is later than Russia whom started to acquire Crimea again after having lost it to the Tatars/Mongols in 1500.

2/ The Russians have signed TWO major treaties re who 'owns Crimea and broke them both

If you count only the last 70 years or so, NATO signed numerous treaties supposedly to respect countries integrity and other major rights and broke them all on half the north-african continent + middle east. I think Russia took their example 

And look how happy their citizens are, as opposed to Crimeans who are still happy about the outcome.

Yes, Ireland is an Island and Crimea a peninsula - but from Russia  - one needs a ferry to get there and hence the necessity to build a long bridge link  - so, it is effectively an island....

Hair splitting, a peninsula is attached to land and an Island isn't. Crimea isn't an island and unless major earthquakes destroy its land bridge , it will never be.

Mark.