Russia defends its recognition of Ukraine rebel passports

[Deleted]

So we can expect them to join Russia soon?
The referendum votes are already counted are they?

depends on what you mean with soon. not before the conclusion of the current war. which honestly i don't see how they can win unless russia increases their support, but obviously russia doesn't want to do that too much right now.

[Shalcker]

Mhh, why should I google "homes destroyed ukraine" if everyone knows that homes are indeed being destroyed in Ukraine? The only problem here is that you have Russian or pro-Russian media-resources saying it's Ukraine bombing its own people, and then you have all other media-resources saying it's Russia-backed armed groups shelling Ukrainian people. At this point only you can decide what you want to believe.

Both are true? Because it's Ukrainians fighting Ukrainians, their tolerances are exactly the same.

- - - Updated - - -

No, they aren't. They aren't issued under Russian authority.

They are recognized under Russian authority.

So Russia isn't really trying to just help those people but to use them as a pretext to declare the rebels official representatives of the Ukraine.

No, it's Ukrainians fighting Ukrainians. Both represent Ukraine. Neither represents Ukraine as a whole.

People from either side are equally welcome to Russia. Once they end their conflict (by fulfilling Minsk agreements) their documents will be unified as well.

Only if they called those documents "passports" instead of, say, "temporary residence and work permits".

Noone is going to be fooled. Response would be exactly the same as current move, and current decision has a lot less complications as far as Russian legal system is concerned.

[Skandulous]

http://www.cnn.com/2014/03/05/world/...dio-recording/

[swdan]

Correct me if I'm reading this wrong, but. Due to the blockade in place by Kiev people from the east are unable to travel to the west to renew their passports

nay. there is no blockade. they can easily cross the line for whatever reson as long as they are not criminals

So we can expect them to join Russia soon?
The referendum votes are already counted are they?

yep. its 146% +

dont think russia will accept em anytime soon. ua-ru war have nothing to do with "helping "donbas people"" (lol) or "defending russian speaking whatever"
its just a play for russians inside their country plus a way to create another "zone" in case of war with ???. same as "Pridnestrovian Moldavian Republic" "Abkhazia" Chechen Republic (occupied entirely). Armenia (political "occupation"), Belarus (economical "occupation") where people will be used as meat shields

[Nevianx]

Because it's Ukrainians fighting Ukrainians

Where have you read that Ukrainians fighting Ukrainians? It's the same thing as saying that Ukrainians in Crimea voted to become a part of the Russian Federation.

[Skandulous]

nay. there is no blockade. they can easily cross the line for whatever reson as long as they are not criminals


yep. its 146% +

dont think russia will accept em anytime soon. ua-ru war have nothing to do with "helping "donbas people"" (lol) or "defending russian speaking whatever"
its just a play for russians inside their country plus a way to create another "zone" in case of war with ???. same as "Pridnestrovian Moldavian Republic" "Abkhazia" Chechen Republic (occupied entirely). Armenia (political "occupation"), Belarus (economical "occupation") where people will be used as meat shields

You must have missed the part where the illegitimate govt in Kiev labeled seven million people living in the Donetsk and Lugansk regions as 'terrorists.

Taras Shevchenko is rolling in his grave right now.

90% of people in Dontestk and 96% of the people in Lugansk voted for self rule and independence from Ukraine.

[Nevianx]

Are you trolling now?
There's a civil war in Eastern Ukraine.
It happened some time after Crimea seceded and joined Russia.

The whole civilized world doesn't recognize Russia's illegal annexation of Crimea and knows that there's an armed conflict in Donbass, fueled by Russia-supported armed groups, not a civil war... and it's me who's trolling?

Here's the UN GA Resolution https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United...olution_68/262

Your country supported the Resolution too.

[Marcellus1986]

http://www.cnn.com/2014/03/05/world/...dio-recording/

Ah yes, YouTube videos. Such well sourced and insightful explanations.

[Skandulous]

Ah yes, YouTube videos. Such well sourced and insightful explanations.

So well sourced and insightful explanations can only come from what then?

Not to mention the 2nd YouTube video is the actual phone recording were its is said the snipers who shot police and protestors were part of the maidan revolution who started the protests.

[Tijuana]

"Russia? Mitt, 1980 called, and it wants it's foreign policy back." - Barack Obama

Causational or no?

[Crispin]

So well sourced and insightful explanations can only come from what then?

Not to mention the 2nd YouTube video is the actual phone recording were its is said the snipers who shot police and protestors were part of the maidan revolution who started the protests.

Lemme up that with a video of an actual police sniper shooting at maidan protestors.

[Shalcker]

Lemme up that with a video of an actual police sniper shooting at maidan protestors.

Except this video has no snipers shooting? He only seems to be using optics to watch something.

I see exactly one shot in video and that seems to be some kind of shotgun.

[Skandulous]

Except this video has no snipers shooting? He only seems to be using optics to watch something.

I see exactly one shot in video and that seems to be some kind of shotgun.

exactly he did not shoot at all but he would be justified in doing so as they were shot at first by snipers in a building. Same thing happened in Syria peaceful protests started then outside actors wanting to overthrow the govt come in and shoot protestors and govt police inciting mass killing and blame it on the govt as violent putting down peaceful protestors.

- - - Updated - - -

So police cant defend themselves when protestors become violent and start to kill ppl and break the law?

[Skandulous]

Humor me. Can you say which side started the killing first? The police or the protesters.

From the recorded phone convo and bullets found at the scene they can tell protestors and police were shot from the same guns. All those ppl were shot in the head neck and heart and all died which proves it was trained snipers and not regular protestors or police taking up arms.

[PassingBy]

Humor me. Can you say which side started the killing first? The police or the protesters.

In the US the police would've opened fire days before it happenned in Ukraine.
Probably at the point where boulders started being thrown at them (like in Israel where it is a legitimate reason to kill a palestinian).
Or at the point where people would drag policmen into the crowd and beat them with chains.
Or at the point where people started throwing molotov cocktails at the police.

Ironically enough the bloody tyrant Yanukovich was too afraid of what the west might say.
He actually thought that the agreement that he had reached with the EU representatives will stand, that is why at some point police even had orders to not retaliate.
However surprisingly just as the deal was reached and the protests were supposed to end, as well as new president elections were supposed to be fixed these mysterious killings occured, and people then rushed to storm the government and tried capturing the president, ultimately leading to him fleeing into Russia.

There were several reasons for all those people dying on that square:
- Yanukovich being a pussy and not using force to finish the riots, jail the people that started them;
- Nazi organizations bearing firearms in the heart of the "protest";
- European and US politicians pouring gas into the fire in order to pursue their agenda.

There is no clear winner in that situation, since many sides got something from it.
US got a puppet regime in Kiev that can't hold on it's own without US support, and thus will do anything they say.
EU got a source of cheap labor, wood, and very cheap whores.
Russia got Crimea and an effective immunization against all those "arabian springs" and "orange revolutions" after seeing what has become of Ukraine, alongside with a surge of Putin's popularity and patriotism.
People in the current government of Ukraine got into power, got rich, and keep robbing the country, while slowly running out of things to steal.

But there is a clear loser in the situation and it is the Ukranian nation. That was fooled into believing a stupid fairy tale about their "European" future and choice, brainwashed into overthrowing their government and actually starting a civil war, killing tens of thousands of regular ukranians. Ukranian people got several times increased utility bills, three times drop of their currency, salary level of an african country and a new government that kills them by thousands and laughs at them using one scary story about evil Putin that will come and take their country away, while ripping that country apart to fill their pockets.

[caervek]

Mhh, why should I google "homes destroyed ukraine" if everyone knows that homes are indeed being destroyed in Ukraine?

Because apparently you don't, so I told you how to find the information you were asking me about.

The only problem here is that you have Russian or pro-Russian media-resources saying it's Ukraine bombing its own people, and then you have all other media-resources saying it's Russia-backed armed groups shelling Ukrainian people.

Maybe *shock* there both right and there's two sides fighting each other in the war.

[Nevianx]

Because apparently you don't, so I told you how to find the information you were asking me about.


Maybe *shock* there both right and there's two sides fighting each other in the war.

There's one side defending and one side attacking. You can use common sense and make a wild guess that the side which annexed a part of a sovereign territory of the other is most likely the aggressor.

[Deleted]

There's one side defending and one side attacking. You can use common sense and make a wild guess that the side which annexed a part of a sovereign territory of the other is most likely the aggressor.

Or maybe, just maybe, its the side that started illegal military coup, then when eastern regions didn't agree with coup, they sent military to calm those regions down, effectively starting war, while having no authority (other than given by himself) to do so? Annexation didn't happen out of nowhere. People bringing up annexation always forget what started all that mess.

Poroshenko is the one that started war. If you think otherwise, you must be one of idiots that has been zombified by western media and need to learn history. That stuff happened BEFORE all Crimea stuff.

[Adolecent]

Correct me if I'm reading this wrong, but. Due to the blockade in place by Kiev people from the east are unable to travel to the west to renew their passports, as such the eastern regions have started issuing their own passports, which Russia has decided to recognise in order to let them visit Russia.

No. The problem is Russia started a war on Ukraine territory, already stole big pieces of land from Ukraine recently (Crimea) and is now making another step further into annexation of the Donbass area too. All in the name of humanitarian aid, lol. Ain't fake news sweet.

Don't forget this war on Ukranian soil started when the former Russian supported dictator was democratically overthrown. Russia is the agressor there and Russia is actively building a rebel structure and responsible for the thousends of deaths. Ukraine is defending its rightfull territory.

[Elim Garak]

dictator was democratically overthrown.

Which brand of cool aid is that?