[sieterayos]

[Dima]

[sieterayos]

[johnsilver]

[Stwa]

I noticed today that a large amount of Russian speaking citizens in the Ukrainian province of Kherson (adjacent to Crimea), might want a referendum of their own.

Which suggests to me, that perhaps everyone should be able to vote on who has the right to govern them.    

So, perhaps a referendum here in Arizona is not such a far fetched idea at all.  

We have a large amount of Spanish speaking citizens. There is also a large indigenous population as well. They all couldn't be as they say "full blood" natives. Even the ones in my own family are no where near full blood. So, subtacting Navajo Nation and the other tribes from my original list, and adding another state or two, maybe the AZ referendum might look as follows.

1. Join Mexico
2. Join California
3. Join Utah
...
4. Become Independant

However, I might mention that there could be immediate benefits by going "native". First and foremost, Casinos could now be constructed all over the state, not just at Salt River and Gila River. Alcoholic beverages would be banned and the prices of tobacco products would plummet and I suppose marijuana might be legalized.  

Furthermore, the idea of joining Mexico might get alot more votes than people imagine. The coorelations to Crimea are too obvious. Of course, the immediate downside would be the confiscation of all firearms, all the Arizona and Gadsen flags, and all the Indian lands within the state.  

Only the Gays within the state would vote for California, but there is a sizeable Moorman population in AZ, which would probably vote for Utah, while the remaining Protestants would vote for indepenance. The idea here is to dilute the Anglo (Gays, Moormans, Protestants) vote, because Catholics are going to vote for Mexico.  

When you consider all the Spanish speakers, and the vast number of Mexican citizens living here now, it seems like a no brainer that Mexico would win. But like in Russia, making the vote fair would be difficult. Perhaps Arizona could allow pre-referendum absentee ballots from anywhere on the planet, which is basically what they do now. This would allow residents (not just citizens) to vote more than one time.

But, it would be prudent to just create and on-line ballot that allows people to vote as often as they like, lets Google and the NSA count them, and the results could be determined in perhaps a week. Besides, no one really believes all that caca that the poor don't have access to the internet.  

And for those of you that think if Mexico wins, the cartels would take control of Arizona ... there is alot of evidence here that suggests they are already in control of the state. But don't worry, they totally favor open carry, making AZ a scary place for local police forces.

[deVastator]

Guys,

back to the topic:
in my opinion the situation is not black and white (as anything else in this world).

1. It looks like great majority of Crimea citizens prefered to be a part of Russia, than a part of Ukraine. The right of a nation to take decisions on themselves is one of the basic democratic rules. For sure it should not be done the way it has been done on Crimea, but on the political and legal way. There are more examples of such processes than Quebec: Scotland (UK), Catalunia (Spain) or casus of Kosovo (Serbija). On the other hand, the process of an authority change in democratic way should looks also differently - president having such strong protests should resign and call a new election. So this should go different way, but the final effect would be the same. Maybe there was some Russian inspiration, but does not matter too much.

2. Putin claims the above right of the nation to be important, but didn't let Chechenians to decide themselves, just bring them government on tanks.

3. Western democracies does not do anything without having some interest in it. It's visible within EU. Central (rich) countries are puzzled, as should talk same voice with whole EU, but having a lot of businesses in Russia. Southern/West countries does not give a shit about Ukraine, just want to have cheap gas from Russia and not spend any cent due to the situation. Eastern and Northern countries support Ukraine as they are close to the Russia and would like to have some buffer from Russian Federation and it's imperial aspirations. This is understable (for me) as post WP countries have experienced this imperialism many times in their history. Specialy post USSR countries, where big part of citizens are Russians, affraid that they can be the next (Baltics). If the answer from the west will be too weak, then anything can happen. 1939 is still fresh in nations memories. Later on Soviets claimed they came in to bring protection against nazi Germans (I don't think any of protected countries has been glad).

4. US is not the only good guy. They do similar things, but in white gloves.

5. I think it's true, that nationalism is quite strong in Ukraine, but don't think any of minorities have been treated badly. Why Crimean Tatars didn't vote for joining Russia if they were affraid of nationalists ? They remember who has moved most of the population from Crimea to Kazakhstan steppes... Same as Ukrainians remember Holodomor http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holodomor.

All the world powers (its list changing still) plays the game for their own winning. Maybe at some time China or Japan will claim the right to protect their community leaving in Russia close to the border... Would Russians then say it's OK ?

[Stwa]

[Stwa]

Eastern and Northern countries support Ukraine as they are close to the Russia and would like to have some buffer from Russian Federation and it's imperial aspirations. This is understable (for me) as post WP countries have experienced this imperialism many times in their history. -deVastator

Ya think.  

It wasn't that long ago that the Soviet Union was considered just one beeg fucking concentration camp. Note: feel free to apply the pre or post 1933 definition that you feel is appropriate. Of course part of the terminology defined some of the spaces as "Closed Cities". That would be an understatement, IMHO.

The internees (all of its "citizens") were resticted from leaving the camp, except for those belonging to the military or the hockey team (really just part of the military),  but only when they needed to steamroll or engulf another adjacent country in war or hockey.

[Dima]

[Stwa]

that's a myth invented to feed the Ukranian nationalism. I mean that Holodomor was aimed on Ukranians as it affected the whole European population of USSR. in the Empire times starvations were not seldom as well. -Dima

Holodomor was a famine in Ukraine caused by the government of Joseph Stalin, a part of Soviet famine of 1932–1933. Holodomor is claimed by contemporary Ukrainian government to be a genocide of the Ukrainians. As of March 2008, Ukraine and nineteen other governments have recognized the actions of the Soviet government as an act of genocide. The joint statement at the United Nations in 2003 has defined the famine as the result of cruel actions and policies of the totalitarian regime that caused the deaths of millions of Ukrainians, Russians, Kazakhs and other nationalities in the USSR. On 23 October 2008 the European Parliament adopted a resolution that recognized the Holodomor as a crime against humanity. -wiki

List of Genocides

But perhaps even in the current RF, if you speak out against the government, you get hauled off the the Gulag, just like in the old days.  

[Dima]

[Stwa]

RGR,

I changed it in the original response.

[Dima]

[Stwa]

Right,  

So, I am cathing on to your argument. Since there is always famine in Russia, no matter what the epoch, this is pure empircal evedence that these events are NOT genocide.  

The United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (CPPCG) defines genocide in part as "acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group". Determining what historical events constitute a genocide and which are merely criminal or inhuman behavior is not a clear-cut matter. In nearly every case where accusations of genocide have circulated, partisans of various sides have disputed the interpretation and details of the event, often to the point of promoting different versions of the facts. An accusation of genocide will almost always be controversial. Determining the number of persons killed in each genocide can be just as difficult, with political, religious and ethnic biases or prejudices often leading to downplayed or exaggerated figures.

Some of accounts below may include ancillary causes of death such as malnutrition and disease, which may or may not have been intentionally inflicted. -wiki

List of Genocides

See, the wiki might agree with you. So can the same be attributed to the alleged genoicde of Native Americans. I am interested in those that lived within the modern borders of the USA.  

[Dima]

One more thing about that, USSR started to buy bread from Canada in spring 1932 to compensate bad crop yield of 1931/32 due to weather and in 1932/33 a crop yield was even worse (55% of 1931/32) and that led to a starvation in 1933 on all the territory of USSR.

[Drizzt]

to devastator: we (Italy) have yet the nine GDP (nominal) in the world after 10 years of economical crysis due in part to a currency (euro) too strong and good only for Germany and that year after year, day after day, it begins to create problems also in northern europe. You can call us poor, if you are in the first eight positions. Of course some european neo-liberism treaties have also a great part in this crisis. Neo-liberism propaganda about debt (about high debt see Japan and USA) for sure will destroy us: the European Union I dream it's a community of peoples, not this rule of bankers and technocrats.
We don't need russian gas in the way you think: gas supply sources are many, one of them becomes important only when rulers decide in this way.
Ukraine? A government elected by nobody: inside it there is a good quantity of right-extremists. Support what? A Government in Rome, Berlin, Paris etc. etc. can be changed with a simple revolt? It's normal in democracy? A government can be dethroned only if it destroy its own democratic constitution.
This is my opinion, but many italian politicians (both right and left traditional parties) love new ukranian government, they love it because European Union (Merkel) love it, and because USA love it.

Drizzt

[Stwa]

One more thing about that, USSR started to buy bread from Canada in spring 1932 to compensate bad crop yield of 1931/32 due to weather and in 1932/33 a crop yield was even worse (55% of 1931/32) and that led to a starvation in 1933 on all the territory of USSR. -Dima

Right  

And how did the Canadians ship the BREAD to Russia. Did they [air]ship it overnigt by Federal Express, or did they [sea]ship it on a long trans-atlantic route. The guys that made this video suggest grain was taken from the citizens and exported to the West. Maybe to make bread and return ship that to Ukraine. BTW, is it possible for you to translate the subtitles in the video for us.  

At this point I DEEM DIMA out of control.


Link

[Dima]

well, Stwa, looks like you really into it...

[Stwa]

No need to be so modest, the US ruling class and its stooges took gold again. -sieterayov

RGR That  


Link

[Stwa]

thing is that f.e. in 2012 the death rate per 1.000 in Ukraine was same as during so-called Holodomor. -Dima

Jeez Dima, there is NO EXCUSE for that.  

OMG! Please note the reference to "Brain Injuries".


Link



Link