The official number of Crimean Tatars in Turkey is 150,000 with some Crimean Tatar activists estimating a figure as high as 6 million. - Crimean Tatars, Wikipedia
So, you seem to be not only ignorant but also confused. — Apollodorus
1. Given that Turkic tribes (a) were non-local invaders and (b) were involved in the enslavement and exploitation of earlier local populations, it cannot be claimed that they are “rightful owners” of Crimea. — Apollodorus
2. Given that several non-Turkic ethnic groups existed in Crimea (Tauri, Scythians, Greeks, Goths, etc.) prior to the arrival of the Tatars, it cannot be claimed that the Tatars were “the majority”. On the contrary, if we consider that even ordinary Tatars had several domestic, agricultural, and sex slaves, we can see that the non-Tatar population must have been significant. Indeed, about 75% of Crimea’s population under the Khanate (or Tatar State) itself were non-Tatar slaves and freedmen, i.e., mostly Slavs from Russia, Ukraine, and Poland, and Caucasians from places like Georgia and Circassia. — Apollodorus
3.2. By 1897, Tatars were only 35% of Crimea’s population. — Apollodorus
3.4. When Stalin in 1944 resettled Crimean Tatars to Turkic areas within the Soviet Union (e.g., Uzbekistan), the Tatars were already a small minority — Apollodorus
3.5. Tatars currently amount to about 10% of Crimea’s total population. — Apollodorus
4. Given that the Crimean Tatars were involved in the capture, enslavement, and sale into slavery of millions of Slavs whose total number exceeded that of the Tatars, it cannot be claimed that the Slav population owes anything to Tatars in relation to the latter’s subsequent “expulsion” from Crimea. — Apollodorus
5. On the principle that “every country and continent should belong to its rightful owners”, if anyone has a legitimate claim to being “rightful owners” of Crimea, it is the Tauri (Taurians) and their descendants. But the Greeks also have a claim to parts of Crimea as they built cities, established international trade, and brought prosperity and civilization. They also civilized the Russians who in turn liberated Crimea from the Turkic invaders. — Apollodorus
Now, if someone is of “Northern Asian, Northern European, Mediterranean, and Middle Eastern” descent, then by definition, that person isn’t an indigenous Crimean! — Apollodorus
If he is 42% European and only 28% Tatar then why does he call himself “Tatar” and not “European”? — Apollodorus
In the meantime, I think the apparently arbitrary self-designation “Crimean Tatar” is highly problematic and lends itself to manipulation for political and/or commercial purposes. — Apollodorus
A 'proof' is hard to find. I can provide evidence though. So what position of mine do you want evidence for? — Olivier5
You really think that the Soviet Union would have altered it's policies toward the Eastern European countries it held under it's control? Nonsense. It just wanted to water down the organization, make it into an UN type organization where it would have a veto-vote.Yes, but The USSR, fearing the restoration of German militarism in West Germany, had suggested in 1954 that it join NATO, but this was rejected by the US and UK. — Isaac
Article 2
The Parties will contribute toward the further development of peaceful and friendly international relations by strengthening their free institutions, by bringing about a better understanding of the principles upon which these institutions are founded, and by promoting conditions of stability and well-being. They will seek to eliminate conflict in their international economic policies and will encourage economic collaboration between any or all of them.
OK! So she mentioned that. So I stand corrected, enough to be corrected earlier in the article that I didn't notice it. Yet the issue is that now in every age group and income group, there is a majority for NATO membership. Which was left out. (So at least I have better in Finnish literacy than you are, Aussie.) — ssu
In this media environment, it is perhaps unsurprising that support for NATO membership is high: about 60% in Sweden and 75% in Finland.
...On 23 March, 44% of young people surveyed were for NATO and 21% against. Last week, 43% of them were for NATO and 32% against: a double-digit leap. Support for membership rises with each age bracket, with the elderly most staunchly in favour. — The Article
Russia joining NATO in the 1990's was a far more possible outcome and then it could have worked — ssu
Yes, the 1990's and basically early 2000's were the time that something really radical could have been done in Russia-US relations. As I've said earlier in this thread, people thought this could be a real possibility. A German military attache to Finland said to me with a straight face that Russia could possibly join NATO. That was then.Yeah but The Russia–NATO Council was established in 2002 for handling security issues and joint projects. — Isaac
I have. The numbers [15] tell it instantly. Although the topic doesn't make it random.You do realise I've just been randomly cutting and pasting sections from the relevant Wikipedia articles? — Isaac
As for the expansion [of NATO], including through new members of the alliance — Finland, Sweden — Russia wants to inform you that it has no problems with these states,” Putin said on Monday, speaking at a gathering in Moscow of leaders from the member countries of the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO), the Russia-backed military alliance. “Therefore, in this sense, expansion on account of these countries does not pose a direct threat to Russia.”
"The expansion of military infrastructure on this territory will undoubtedly cause us to respond,” Putin told the leaders of the five former Soviet republics, adding that NATO’s “endless expansionary policy” also “required additional attention on our part.
Russia's response to Finland and Sweden joining NATO clearly shows that actually NATO enlargement was more of an excuse than the real reason for invading Ukraine. — ssu
Sweden has already stated that it doesn't want foreign bases or nuclear weapons on it's soil, and neither Finland has any appetite for them also. And actually NATO has no desire to do this — ssu
All this just makes it more clear that Russia was more interested in subjugating and annexing more land from Ukraine than in "countering the NATO threat". This should be obvious to everyone at least now. — ssu
Medvedev predicts that, because of the war in Ukraine, “in some states, hunger may occur due to the food crisis” – a statement of breathtaking cynicism. As of May 2022, about 25m metric tons of grain are slowly rotting in Odesa, on ships or in silos, since the port is blocked by the Russian navy. “The United Nations World Food Programme (WFP) has warned that millions of people are ‘marching towards starvation’ unless ports in southern Ukraine which have been closed because of the war, are reopened,” Newsweek reports. Europe now promises to help Ukraine transport the grain by railway and truck – but this is clearly not enough. A step more is needed: a clear demand to open the port for the export of grain, inclusive of sending protective military ships there. It’s not about Ukraine, it’s about the hunger of hundreds of millions in Africa and Asia. Here should the red line be drawn.
Treaty obligations will a mean significant increase in defense spending. Finland has already ordered 64 new F-35 warplanes, the elite joint strike fighter developed by Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman and BAE Systems (BAESY). The JSFs cost between $110 million and $135.8 million. More importantly, aligning with NATO is a commitment to interoperability with the American defense ecosystem. This directly benefits the big U.S. contractors. The market for their goods is expanding and they will face no competition for the foreseeable future.
American defense contractors are reliable technology partners. The companies are also backed-up by the largess of the U.S defense budget, a record $810 billion in 2021. There is no appetite politically to decrease military spending. And that sentiment is spreading globally, thanks to the carnage in Ukraine. Raytheon, Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman are currently the best way to play this bigger trend. At share prices of $90, $424, and $443, the stocks trade at 15.5x, 14.9x, and 16.3x forward earnings respectively.
Why is this type of behavior by Russians so common? Why is the brutality systemic? — Christoffer
Nothing to do with Russians being Russians IMO. It has to do with materialism.
If you think that humans are just meat machines, that human rights are a fiction, that might makes right, then you will find that brutality is the best way to rule those meat machines. — Olivier5
perhaps someone else does read them.
Because thinking that NATO and Warsaw Pact were the same and had similar objectives in nonsense. — ssu
With Russia, it's all about control and influence.
— ssu
Well, how is it different with America? — Apollodorus
— ssu
Of course not because they are Russians... — Christoffer
the behavior is systemic in their politics, which leads to their war behavior accordingly. So it's ingrained in Russian traditional culture, it's part of their type of hero culture, their type of masculinity norms, and fascist power hierarchies. — Christoffer
exaggerated to maximum impact by a country desperate for weapons — Isaac
Between the racists, the people who cannot read, and the people who play Nazi-PR, the US-hegemony cheerleader squad had assembled quite the front. — Streetlight
The number of mass graves and war crimes still being uncovered speaks against exaggeration — Christoffer
I'm speaking about the behavior of their politics influencing... — Christoffer
the behavior is systemic in their politics, which leads to their war behavior accordingly. So it's ingrained in Russian traditional culture, it's part of their type of hero culture, their type of masculinity norms, and fascist power hierarchies. — Christoffer — Isaac
Well, no. Seeing as they're being uncovered by the very parties in whose interest it is to exaggerate to maximum effec — Isaac
maybe you're just wrong and the findings in Ukraine by these independent investigators paint a far worse picture than you want to accept. — Christoffer
Yeah Christoffer isn't a racist, he is just indistinguishable from one. — Streetlight
Why is this type of behavior by [Jews] so common? Why is the brutality systemic? We can criticize other nations for brutality and war crimes, but it generally happens as isolated cases, mostly under one asshole doing it. But in this, there are so many [Jews] showing total moral bankruptcy, a systematic level of the behavior. If it's ingrained in [Jewish] traditional culture, conservative values of "masculine power", national heroes, to achieve greatness, then they truly are living in the past as I've been saying. No wonder they want to expand the empire, create a new world order and create a massive [Jewish homeland] with a proud people under a strong man. It almost reminds me of...
Re-writing really needs at least a few pages to go by...
the behavior is systemic in their politics, which leads to their war behavior accordingly. So it's ingrained in Russian traditional culture, it's part of their type of hero culture, their type of masculinity norms, and fascist power hierarchies. — Christoffer
— Isaac — Isaac
Yes, maybe I am. Maybe I'm not. — Isaac
Scarily similar to some of the early anti-Semitism in 30s Europe though, much of the writing at the time talked about the culture of Jewry rather than the actual genetic Jew. Didn't take long to mutate into pure racism. — Isaac
Can you imagine? I feel sick typing that. — Streetlight
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.