You seem to be getting increasingly confused and irrational.
:smile:
You posted that propaganda piece on Tatar DNA to “prove” that Crimea belongs to Tatars and that Tatars are Ukrainians hence Crimea belongs to Ukraine.
But you haven’t answered my question of why (a) she leaves out the Tauri and the Greeks, and (b) why she has zero Eastern European DNA.
You probably imagine that we haven’t noticed, but her post was republished by Euromaidan Press, an anti-Russian outfit, back in 2015 to “prove that Putin is wrong about Crimea”! :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
In other words, your "evidence" is not from some reputable scientific publication,
of course not, but from evidence-free, anti-Russian propaganda literature.
Not only you have no evidence for your spurious claims, but it was YOU who brought up the Crimean Tatars!
My original argument was (1) that “every country and continent should belong to its rightful owners” and (2) that if NATO wants to give Crimea to Ukraine after it’s been annexed by Russia, it should start by returning Tibet to the Tibetans, North Cyprus to the Cypriots, Kurdistan to the Kurds, etc.
You seem to have got mad at the suggestion that Tibet belongs to the Tibetans and started hurling invectives. And you’ve been incoherently ranting ever since.
It should be obvious that Crimea doesn’t need to be given to the Tatars the same way Tibet should be returned to Tibetans (1) because Tatars are an alien minority in Crimea whereas Tibetans are native to Tibet and (2) because Crimea has been Russian (not Tatar) since 1783; for the same reason, Crimea should not be given to Ukraine.
However, as I’ve repeatedly stated, the principle that every country and continent should belong to its rightful owners needs to be applied on the merits of each individual case.
In Crimea’s case, I never said that it MUST belong to Russia. On the contrary, given that when Russia took Crimea from the Turks, Russia and Ukraine were one country, Crimea in an ideal situation should be amicably shared by Russia and Ukraine (with some additional rights given to Crimean Greeks and others).
In fact, Crimea was initially shared after the dissolution of the Soviet Union and Russia was able to use the naval bases there. But this was rendered impossible when America insisted on drawing Ukraine deeper and deeper into its NATO spiderweb.
Very simple and easy to understand IMO. Unfortunately, the ignorant and the uneducated are unable to understand, and NATO jihadis don’t want to understand. This is why they irrationally insist that Crimea belongs to Ukraine, Ukraine belongs to NATO, and NATO belongs to America!
As for my referring to Crimean Tatars as “Mongols of Crimea” it’s the same as the Turkish government calling them “Crimean Turks”. It simply refers to their generally accepted Turkic/Mongol ethnicity:
Mongoloid adj.
1. Resembling or having some of the characteristic physical features of Mongolians; spec. designating or relating to the division of mankind including the indigenous peoples of eastern Asia, South-East Asia, and the Arctic region of North America, who are characterized by dark eyes with an epicanthic fold, pale ivory to dark skin, straight dark hair, and little facial and bodily hair. – Oxford English Dictionary, online version (2022).
Mongoloid
/ˈmɒŋ.ɡə.lɔɪd/ is the general physical type of some or all of the populations of East Asia, Central Asia, Southeast Asia, Siberia, the Arctic, parts of the Americas and the Pacific Islands, and small parts of South Asia. – Audiopedia
Mongoloid
Pertaining to a race of mankind, characterized by a faintly yellowish skin, an epicanthic fold, sparse body hair, and black straight head hair. – A Dictionary of Genetics (2007).
Mon•gol•oid
(ˈmɒŋ gəˌlɔɪd, ˈmɒn-) adj. 1. of, designating, or characteristic of one of the traditional racial divisions of humankind, marked by yellowish complexion, prominent cheekbones, epicanthic folds, and straight black hair and including the Mongols, Chinese, Japanese, Siamese, Eskimos, and, in some classifications, the American Indians. – Websters College Dictionary (2010).
Mongoloid
anthropological term designating one of the major groups of human beings originating from Asia, excluding the Indian subcontinent and including Native American Indians. – Forensic Science Communications, FBI Laboratory (2005).
See also:
Tatar n.
1. A native inhabitant of the region of central Asia extending eastward from the Caspian Sea, and formerly known as Independent and Chinese Tartary. First known in the West as applied to the mingled host of Mongols, Tartars, Turks, etc., which under the leadership of Genghis Khan (1202–1227) overran and devastated much of Asia and Eastern Europe; hence applied to the descendants of these now dwelling in Asia or Europe; more strictly and ethnologically, to any member of the Tâtar or Turkic branch of the Ural-Altaic or Turanian family, embracing the Turks, Cossacks, and Kirghiz Tartars. – Oxford English Dictionary (online version, 2022).
Anthropologically, about 80% of the Volga Tatars belong today to Caucasoids and 20% to Mongoloids – “Mitogenomic Diversity in Tatars from the Volga-Ural Region of Russia” (2010).
I even demonstrated to you what a REAL Crimean Tatar looks like. I think even the blind can see the resemblance with Mongols:
WIKITONGUES: Neceadin speaking Crimean Tatar - Youtube
So, I’d highly recommend you go and educate yourself before discussing things of which you have no knowledge or understanding.
The fact is that the Crimean Tatars EMIGRATED. They weren’t “expelled”. Millions of people from England, France, Germany, and other European countries including Russia emigrated to America. It doesn’t mean they were “expelled” or “persecuted”.
Moreover, the vast majority of Crimean Tatars emigrated
to Turkey between 1783 and 1897 because they were a Turkic group. Clearly, they saw themselves as non-Europeans and preferred to live among their Turkish kinsmen than among Europeans. The Turkish government refers to them as “Crimean Turks” and “our kinsmen”.
Given that Tatars were a Turkic group that originated in Northern or Eastern Asia (Siberia), the original Tatars had Northern/Eastern Asian DNA.
As they migrated to Central Asia and then Europe, they mixed with the local, non-Asian populations and acquired non-Asian DNA.
If Tatars had been the “majority” in Crimea prior to its takeover by Russia in 1783, Crimean Tatars would have more than 50% Tatar DNA. But your own “witness” has majority-European not Tatar DNA and this is confirmed by Volga Tatars who are more European than Tatar.
This is entirely natural, as Tatars were a MINORITY that subjugated the local population and imposed its language on the locals. Even you have admitted that Tatars “became the majority by assimilating local populations”. Assimilation of other populations means Tatars assimilating non-Tatar DNA, resulting in Tatars with significant and even overwhelming non-Tatar DNA, e.g., your “witness” or “evidence”!
Three things become obvious from this:
1. Tatars proper were never a majority in Crimea.
2. People currently called “Tatars”, including Crimean Tatars, are in reality mostly European with some Tatar admixture.
3. Not all Crimeans who spoke or speak Tatar (a Turkic language) are Tatars proper. For example, many Tatar-speakers are in fact Greeks, also known as
Urums (from Arabic-Turkish
Rum, Roman).
This means that Crimean Tatars must be carefully distinguished by their ethnicity:
Tatars proper (with majority North/East Asian DNA).
Ethnically mixed Tatars (with a mixture of Tatar and non-Tatar DNA).
Tatarophone non-Tatars (with non-Tatar DNA but speaking Tatar), e,g., Crimean Greeks.
It follows that when applying the principle that “every country and continent should belong to its rightful owners”, a wide range of factors such as genetics, geography, history, language, and culture must be taken into consideration, and a decision must be taken on the merits of each individual case.
Tatars proper (“Crimean Mongols” or “Crimean Turks”) cannot be regarded as “rightful owners” because they came to the area as invaders.
Moreover, they are currently a small minority and therefore not an issue. It is made an issue by anti-Russian Westerners and CIA-NATO trolls.
In any case, Crimea has never belonged to Ukraine. It was taken by Russia (i.e., local Eastern Europeans) from the Turks (who were invaders from Central Asia) and it has been Russian ever since. So, nope, it doesn't "belong to Ukraine" and even less to America!
:grin: