this post was submitted on 17 Jul 2023
0 points (NaN% liked)

World News

39004 readers
2786 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News [email protected]

Politics [email protected]

World Politics [email protected]


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Traffic on the single bridge that links Russia to Moscow-annexed Crimea and serves as a key supply route for the Kremlin’s forces in the war with Ukraine came to a standstill on Monday after one of its sections was blown up, killing a couple and wounding their daughter.

The RBC Ukraine news agency reported that explosions were heard on the bridge, with Russian military bloggers reporting two strikes.

RBC Ukraine and another Ukrainian news outlet Ukrainska Pravda said the attack was planned jointly by the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) and the Ukrainian navy, and involved sea drones.

all 16 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

At this point, any Russian families remaining in Crimea really should leave for their own safety. They know full well they live on stolen land.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Crimea is 76% russian. It was almost 70% russian before 2014 and it is around 76% russian today. Almost all of these people lived there already.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

As others have pointed out, Crimea is not 82% Russian. The majority of the populace speaks Russian, but a shared language does not indicate a shared culture. They don't want to be part of Russia, and were illegally invaded.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Crimea wasn't "invaded". Russia was already there as it leased the port and officially managed it for military use already. That's why there was no fighting. They already ran the checkpoints, they already were the entire military presence in the region. The changeover from "this is Ukraine" to "this is Russia now" was entirely the signing of papers and changed absolutely nothing about the presence in the region or the average day to day. They certainly took it over, but to say it was invaded is somewhat misleading, more of a "we've decided that this is ours now".

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

This is a gross and flagrant distortion of events in Crimea leading up to the illegal annexation. It leaves out the fact that the operation of the checkpoints was still subject to Ukrainian governmental oversight, the fact that prior to the take-over, Russia illegally brought soldiers in unmarked uniforms over the border (the "little green men"), and the fact that the "changeover" was far from violence-free, let alone just a "signing of papers."

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

The denial of reality going on here is absurd. Pre 2014 I know they operated the checkpoints because I went to Crimea for 2 weeks in 2009. I'm not saying that there wasn't also fuckery involved but denying the reality of events is nonsensical. There is even a vice documentary that shows just how casual the transition was. It's extremely painful discussing these topics with people online whose only understanding of these regions comes through the lens of this war.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I never said Russia didn't operate the checkpoints. But prior to 2014, Crimea was indisputably Ukrainian territory, and Russia operated security checkpoints inside Ukraine at Ukraine's discretion.

No one is claiming that the annexation of Crimea involved violence at the scale of the current war, but it was not non-violent, either. Characterizing it as just "signing of papers" is false.

It’s extremely painful discussing these topics with people online whose only understanding of these regions comes through the lens of this war.

What other lens should we look at the annexation through? It was clearly the early stages of this war.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'm not saying it wasn't Ukrainian territory. I'm saying that the presence there was 100% russian military because it was functionally operated as their military port.

This is precisely why there was no battle over it, no deaths, no nothing. Just "this is russia now" and continued operation of it as they always had but with different flags.

What other lens should we look at the annexation through? It was clearly the early stages of this war.

I'd much prefer a non-war lens of the place and how cool it is. Most people in america hadn't even heard of it until the annexation, it's very unfortunate.

I don't think calling it the early stages of this war is quite accurate but it's not really that important and kinda gets into unnecessary semantics. The war probably wouldn't be happening if the Minsk agreement had been kept. Russia were never going to let Crimea go because they needed it as a military port but they avoided Donetsk and Luhansk up until the Minsk agreement failed. If they had taken these regions in 2014 it would have been a breeze for them as Ukraine had no military to speak of, which is why the civil war was fought by the nazi volunteer batallions (azov, right sector, etc etc). Ukraine's military was ramped up between 2014 and 2021. They did not really have much of anything until the 2016 Stategic Defense Bulletin followed by the State Program for the Development of the Armed Forces (2017-2020). In 2014 the military was only 90k active personnel with over half being civilian staff.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

We'd all prefer a non-war lens of Crimea. You're right, it was a cool and interesting place, and hopefully still will be when the war is over.

But Russia has no say over whether another country's territory will be used as Russia's military port. The fact is, Ukraine was amenable to hosting Russia's military there, so long as Russia didn't try to actually own the land, but they've forfeited their right to use it now.

Ultimately, Russia's military will be ousted from Crimea along with the rest of Ukraine, and that will be that. Had they never annexed it or escalated to open warfare, they would still be operating there freely today, with a much friendlier Ukraine happily hosting them.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I uhh. Don't share your optimism or actually care who runs it, I only really care that the people I know there remain safe. For them and for myself the flag be waved around is somewhat meaningless compared to the human impact of all this nonsense, particularly because some of my socialist friends are gone now. With that said I don't see Crimea changing hands again, nor does anyone I have spoken to currently in Crimea. I might change that assessment if the counteroffensive ever actually sees the first line of dragon's teeth but so far it's been completely underwhelming. Everyone also sees the deployment of clusterbombs as a "let's salt the earth so it's worthless to them" move rather than anything that will change the counteroffensive's prospects.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

There is an easy way to end the war: Russian withdrawal. It really is as simple as that.

At any point in history Russian Federation had no right or business to occupy any part of Ukraine. It was up to Ukraine to decide what to do with those areas.

While we all want the war to stop, it cannot be done at any price. Ukraine must be allowed to return the areas stolen from it and Russia must return to pre 2014 borders. Either they do it willingly or with force. No one likes it, but it's Russia that chose to attack, not Ukraine.

I hope your friends are safe, but at the same time I hope they have the sense to leave Crimea until things settle.

And let's hope for peace, but recognize that it cannot be achieved by giving into the offender's demands.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

There is an easy way to end the war: Russian withdrawal. It really is as simple as that.

Not physically possible under russian law.

While we all want the war to stop, it cannot be done at any price. Ukraine must be allowed to return the areas stolen from it and Russia must return to pre 2014 borders. Either they do it willingly or with force. No one likes it, but it’s Russia that chose to attack, not Ukraine.

Again, this is not possible under Russian law. The notion that it'll be done with force is similarly unrealistic, nukes would fly before these were taken by force. But before that happens you'd have to see the removal of the Russian warships off the coast which will be obliterating anything that comes near Crimea. It just isn't ever happening without a navy or an airforce.

I hope your friends are safe, but at the same time I hope they have the sense to leave Crimea until things settle.

They're fine for now. It's relatively quiet there because the defensive line is so far away, barring these bridge incidents.

And let’s hope for peace, but recognize that it cannot be achieved by giving into the offender’s demands.

We'd be there already if not for boris fucking johnson. I really don't know why you care about the "offender's demands" either. Are you a nationalist? People are what matter. I could not give a shit about what flag exists between the two, right now it's just a situation where two extremely shit sides throw thousands of lives into a meatgrinder and all I want to see is the meatgrinder stop.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

all I want to see is the meatgrinder stop.

Even at the cost of Ukrainian territorial integrity? That’s for the Ukrainians to decide, and so far they’re picking the meat grinder. More power to them.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yes. I could not give a shit about "territorial integrity". This is nationalism. I'm not a nationalist, I don't like states especially bourgeoise states.

You are putting nationalism ahead of people's lives.

That’s for the Ukrainians to decide

No it isn't. It's for the Ukrainian rulers to decide. The people don't get any choice in it, that's the problem. And everyone that opposed this war was rounded up and arrested, every left wing party in the country was shut down, and the left wing tv channels were also shut down, all under the "they're pro russia" excuse simply for being against the war. There is no "let the ukrainians decide" under that environment.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Support for the war is high in Ukraine. Where did you get your sources for freedom of speech being suspended in Ukraine and people with anti war sentiments getting arrested?

It’s ironic, you claim to care about the people, but you don’t care about what the people of Ukraine actually want.