Putin puts troops in western Russia on alert in drill

[Stir]

Kiev was the capital of Russian Empire and then it was moved to Moscow. Even though you deny these facts, you can't deny Ukraine's historical and cultural connection with Russia.

Put yourself in the shoes of Russia. It's like Scotland would suddenly declare independence from London, and Russians will send their troops to support it. I am sure English government wouldn't be happy about it.

Yes, Kiev was once the capitol of the Russian Empire. Utrecht was once the capitol of Frisia.
Both the Frisians and the Rus were originially Scandinavian, Viking nations. Also: Times have changed. Frisia has no claim to Utrecht, or Brugge. Russia has no claim to Ukraine.

My argument is that the statement of the Ukraine being the Original Rus is invalid, since there was a people called 'Rus' way before the Russian Empire ever was a thing. Was this people (again, a viking tribe) descendent from the Scythians? Well; it's not unlikely that they were. But then: If you extrapolate that logic, you'll end up claiming Kenya for the Navajo. Because the Navajo are descendents of people who originally came from Kenya (since, you know, all humans are).

The Ukraine lies in an area that was home to all sorts of indo-germanic and baltic peoples, and quite a few celts as well. Claiming 'original Rus' here makes no sense.

[Ashnazg]

Same as Swiss, Austrians and Germans to a point. All these regions were once part of the same empire. Austria ended even up as de facto seat of the HRE through the capital Vienna. Shared history however does not have much of a say these days. It's nice for historical reasons but it doesn't give you any leverage when it comes to territorial claims today especially once a region is a recognized country by international law.

Russia was too generous with its land gifts during its Soviet times (e.g. gift of Crimea to Ukraine). I am on the fence about it - on one hand I can see why they want Crimea back (all geopolitical reasons aside even), but on the other hand - a gift's a gift.

Nevertheless, Swiss, Austrians and Germans share same ideology and political views. Russia and Ukraine shared their own political views until recently and that made Russia unhappy. If Switzerland suddenly went pro-Russian, I don't think EU would idle.

Depends on what "pro-Russian" means really. I think the biggest problem Russia has with Ukraine getting rid of Yanukovich (who Russian government doesn't even like) is not that it wants less corruption, etc but that the new guys in power are decidedly anti-Russian..they build their political platform on oppressing the Russian minority and promoting Ukrainian culture to the extreme exclusion of Russian (tearing down monuments, threatening to jail people who don't speak Ukrainian, etc).

[alkyd]

Yes, Kiev was once the capitol of the Russian Empire. Utrecht was once the capitol of Frisia.
Both the Frisians and the Rus were originially Scandinavian, Viking nations. Also: Times have changed. Frisia has no claim to Utrecht, or Brugge. Russia has no claim to Ukraine.

My argument is that the statement of the Ukraine being the Original Rus is invalid, since there was a people called 'Rus' way before the Russian Empire ever was a thing. Was this people (again, a viking tribe) descendent from the Scythians? Well; it's not unlikely that they were. But then: If you extrapolate that logic, you'll end up claiming Kenya for the Navajo. Because the Navajo are descendents of people who originally came from Kenya (since, you know, all humans are).

The Ukraine lies in an area that was home to all sorts of indo-germanic and baltic peoples, and quite a few celts as well. Claiming 'original Rus' here makes no sense.

Times have changed for your Frisia, Utrecht, Brugge, Scythia and Navajo tribe. But it hasn't for Ukraine and Russia until today, the ties are still very strong to forget them easily. A big portion of population in Ukraine support Russia because they feel that they belong with Russia culturally.

Again, you have to consider the fact that West is poking its nose at Russia's backyard. Tell me when Russia has done the same to US or EU last time?

[Thunderball]

Kiev was the capital of Russian Empire and then it was moved to Moscow. Even though you deny these facts, you can't deny Ukraine's historical and cultural connection with Russia.

Put yourself in the shoes of Russia. It's like Scotland would suddenly declare independence from London, and Russians will send their troops to support it. I am sure English government wouldn't be happy about it.

They can basically do whatever they want. What actually pissed some people off is the presence of radical nationalist people among the bunch that came to power and their rhetorics that basically alienate a huge portion of people who leave in Ukraine but still have strong ties with Russia by culture, people connections and language.

[Kalcheus]

That's all pretty... Suspect, in my opinion, seeing as the Rus were a viking nation.

To clarify: Kievan Rus was led by "Vikings", but the people were still of Slavic descent. It's equivalent to the Ptolemy/Kleopatra leadership of Egypt or George I (a German) being King of England.

[Stir]

To clarify: Kievan Rus was led by "Vikings", but the people were still of Slavic descent. It's equivalent to the Ptolemy/Kleopatra leadership of Egypt or George I (a German) being King of England.

'Viking' and 'Slavic' are not mutually exclusive per sé ('viking' is not a subrace), but okay; I'll roll with this, then.
Still doesn't make Kiev the Original Rus.

[alkyd]

'Viking' and 'Slavic' are not mutually exclusive per sé ('viking' is not a subrace), but okay; I'll roll with this, then.
Still doesn't make Kiev the Original Rus.

What's the Original Rus then?

[Stir]

What's the Original Rus then?

According to the most prominent theory, the name Rus', like the Finnish name for Sweden (Ruotsi), is derived from an Old Norse term for "the men who row" (rods-) as rowing was the main method of navigating the rivers of Eastern Europe, and that it could be linked to the Swedish coastal area of Roslagen (Rus-law) or Roden, as it was known in earlier times.[1][8][9] The name Rus' would then have the same origin as the Finnish and Estonian names for Sweden: Ruotsi and Rootsi.[1]

Another theory is that the name comes from Rüstringen in Frisia (today in Lower Saxony, Germany),[10] a land ruled by the Danish Viking Rorik of Dorestad, who some suggest is the same as Rurik of Novgorod.

Just a bitty from Wikipedia. You can look at the links there to see if they're valid; I'm too lazy at the moment, and will go by your everyday history education.
Edit: Personally, I am inclined to go with the 'rowing' theory, and I think the Frisian use of the name also derives from that.

[Thunderball]

To clarify: Kievan Rus was led by "Vikings", but the people were still of Slavic descent. It's equivalent to the Ptolemy/Kleopatra leadership of Egypt or George I (a German) being King of England.

It's a kinda debatable topic (you will see why). Basically the historic canon says that (Great) Novgorod people (the second key city for the early russian statehood, unrelated to Ukraine this time, I hope) invited the noble Viking people to rule themselves because the people decided (was a kind of an early from of democracy, called Veche) that there are no good enough people among them for the task. This is controversial because we dont like being depicted of incapable of something.

[Deleted]

I love the go-to "Would people be so dumb to go against US?".

Do people even know how much Russia have prepared for war in the last 10 years? They have Insane resources and
they will have the support of north korea AND China if they decide to give it to the good old U S of A.

[Thunderball]

What's the Original Rus then?

It's kinda the debateable topic too, most people who studied this stuff say that the people who later became known as Rus people came from central/northern portions of Europe. There is also a huge white point in historical sources from about 2nd century BC and 8th century AD, especially on Europe. Roman empire is to blame, most likely.

[Ravenblade]

Nevertheless, Swiss, Austrians and Germans share same ideology and political views. Russia and Ukraine shared their own political views until recently and that made Russia unhappy. If Switzerland suddenly went pro-Russian, I don't think EU would idle.

The ideological and political compatibility is primarily tangential and is primarily of philosophical nature. The only lasting links are cultural and some shared traditions. In reality there are some rather notable contrasts beginning with Switzerland's multilingual culture and views resulting from their century-long policies of political neutrality. Point being each country's politicial views are reflected by their own national realities. They are not entirely the same at all. Of course if Germany somehow tried and succeeded with installing puppets in Austria and Switzerland then the "miraculous" result would be in fact carbon copy policies of their own. Most likely not met with popular support though.

The former Soviet republic Ukraine became an independent country in 1991 by referendum where about 90% of the voters agreed to the Act of Independence. There was obviously a desire to separate themselves from Russia. Which isn't the first time they tried and the concept of autonomy and becoming independent isn't new either. These days with different political entities on the global map they have just become a playground between East and West, just as Germany was during the Cold War.

[Stir]

It's a kinda debatable topic (you will see why). Basically the historic canon says that (Great) Novgorod people (the second key city for the early russian statehood, unrelated to Ukraine this time, I hope) invited the noble Viking people to rule themselves because the people decided (was a kind of an early from of democracy, called Veche) that there are no good enough people among them for the task. This is controversial because we dont like being depicted of incapable of something.

Well, noble, noble...
As for the Ukrainians being incapable of something: I think these riots proved otherwise.

[alkyd]

Just a bitty from Wikipedia. You can look at the links there to see if they're valid; I'm too lazy at the moment, and will go by your everyday history education.
Edit: Personally, I am inclined to go with the 'rowing' theory, and I think the Frisian use of the name also derives from that.

Well, there is also Russian version... and in that version Russians see Kiev as the birthplace of their true nation when Kievan Rus was established, and that's why they consider Kiev as the cradle of their civilization.

[Thunderball]

Well, noble, noble...
As for the Ukrainians being incapable of something: I think these riots proved otherwise.

Well, noone can tell you how noble they were, but at least they and their descendants ruled the people for a long time, and some of them are considered among the greatest rulers too. They were great generals, too. As for the Ukrainians, I dont consider them incapable, but the only thing that this stuff proved is that they have a very short memory: they had their maidan 10 years ago, nothing changed. Now here we go again.

[Dalinda]

Depends on what "pro-Russian" means really. I think the biggest problem Russia has with Ukraine getting rid of Yanukovich (who Russian government doesn't even like) is not that it wants less corruption, etc but that the new guys in power are decidedly anti-Russian..they build their political platform on oppressing the Russian minority and promoting Ukrainian culture to the extreme exclusion of Russian (tearing down monuments, threatening to jail people who don't speak Ukrainian, etc).

This is pretty ridiculous. About Yanukovich. He was backed up by Putin, nobody knows what really was behind those $15 billion that Yanukovich brought from Moscow in December 2013. About less corruption. The opposition that came to power is as corrupt as Yanukovich and his party. They are not cute and fluffy, many people in Ukraine don't believe them and that is why Maidan remains in Kiev. Those who you call radicals (Svoboda) are indeed radical in their rhetoric but they toned down a bit. By canceling the language law (which, by the way, promoted accepting Russian as the state language in some regions and pissed off many people, caused numerous protests in the country) they (members of parliament) essentially returned the language law of 1989 (I don't remember what it's about). I think cancelling this law at the time it was cancelled was a mistake since it was not that urgent and could have waited. It didn't work anyway.
And finally, about oppressing the Russian minority and promoting the culture to the extreme exclusion of Russian. It really reeks of Russian propaganda. The monuments that were torn down were Lenin monuments. As for the extreme exclusion of Russian - don't be ridiculous. People speak Russian and Ukraininan freely, many people are bilingual. I saw a press-conference today of some officials - one of them spoke Ukrainian, another spoke Russian and nobody was bothered by it.

[Thunderball]

Well, there is also Russian version... and in that version Russians see Kiev as the birthplace of their true nation when Kievan Rus was established, and that's why they consider Kiev as the cradle of their civilization.

Kiev has nothing to do with the birthplace of nation. It's a birthplace of religilous tradition in Russia, but it's a whole different subject.

[Zstr]

All this interesting history is history, we are living now in present:
even Crimea is part of Ukraine, there are russian people live here, there russian army base, it's a strategic port in black sea, filthy US Goverment and Nato want, so they sponsoring opposition to do provocation. There enough reason Russia have rights to have their troops to DEFEND their belongs, whatever your goverment and mass media lies you by defending their `real` owner...

[Mithfin]

It's a kinda debatable topic (you will see why). Basically the historic canon says that (Great) Novgorod people (the second key city for the early russian statehood, unrelated to Ukraine this time, I hope) invited the noble Viking people to rule themselves because the people decided (was a kind of an early from of democracy, called Veche) that there are no good enough people among them for the task. This is controversial because we dont like being depicted of incapable of something.

They wanted noble rulers, but they didn't want these rulers to be tied with one of their own noble families, as that would make this family more noble.

[Stir]

Well, there is also Russian version... and in that version Russians see Kiev as the birthplace of their true nation when Kievan Rus was established, and that's why they consider Kiev as the cradle of their civilization.

So it might be the birthplace of that empire.
Still not the birthplace of the Rus.

Empires are fleeting things anyway.

You can't just claim a country because it was once the center of the empire that you still want to have. That'd be exactly like Frisia claiming Holland, Flanders, Denmark and northern Germany because it was once part of this great 'kingdom' called Frisia.