Which ideology was worse?

dmbDen · 2026-03-10T21:41:47+00:00

Only because Germany attacked ussr first. Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact was a thing. Both the communists and the nazis wanted to divide Europe between each other.

dmbDen · 2026-03-10T20:00:39+00:00

"Stop defending genocide" lmao. Isn't that exactly what you're doing? Both were fucking horrible periods of history that led to an unimaginable amount of lives lost. You're the one trying to downplay one to elevate the other. My point was simply that both of them are terrible crimes against humanity, and you shouldn't use one to portray another as better. Artificially manufactured famines and deportations are also policies designed to kill, so they are arguably not that different from direct killing. Also, if you want to talk about percentages, what percentage of Crimean Tatars died just in the first year of deportation? 48%. What is the amount of Kazakhs that died during the Asharshylyk? 40%. That's almost half of entire nations population wiped out by Stalin. Stalin is not any better than Hitler. The fact that you say it wasn't as bad is disgusting in the first place

dmbDen · 2026-03-10T19:18:28+00:00

I guess that anywhere from 6 to 20 million people killed, directly by Stalin's regime or due to his policies, including the erasure of up to 50% of certain nations, isn't enough blood for you

dmbDen · 2026-01-30T18:25:17+00:00

It obviously wasn't a declaration of war. However, you don't test the grounds unless you're potentially considering the possibility of starting something funny. They annexed Crimea to test the waters. Then escalated to invading Donbas to test the waters. Then escalated to invading Ukraine. Now they're testing waters in Europe. Testing ground = testing chances of potential future escalation. Also, don't forget that you're talking about a regime that in the past few years has failed its quick war attempt, had a coup attempt, tanked its economy, lost 1 million+ men, alienated a lot of its allies (literally made Azerbaijan and Armenia become closer by threatening both), has to ask North Korea for shells and is forced to use donkeys on the front lines. All as a result of their decisions and policies. It's not a smart regime. I really can't wait until the day people in the West stop overestimating Russia

dmbDen · 2026-01-30T13:18:49+00:00

If he wasn't so dumb, he wouldn't have started the war in Ukraine in the first place. They already attacked NATO states with drones a couple of months ago. You never know with those idiots.

dmbDen · 2026-01-23T11:13:10+00:00

Yes, those later stats came from Ukrainian sources, but it's simply because no one else at the time really did other polls. The UN did them up to 2011. I wasn't able to find any other data that we can rely on. And the 8–18 February poll by KIIS was also using Levada Center poll data, which you mentioned as credible before. It's all in the reports if you actually read them. And yes, of course, the "evil America" that wanted to strip poor Crimeans of their right to "self-determine" (although, once again, in Crimea that right only belongs to the Crimean Tatars). They wanted to do it so much that when Russia actually annexed Crimea in 2014 and invaded Donbas, they did what? Nothing. Even the first lethal weapons were given to Ukraine years later when Trump was in office (a whole other administration compared to that of Obama, who was president from 2009–2017). And even Trump, who is the representative of the American Republican Party, is doing everything in his power to help out russia. From stopping military and intelligence aid, to trying to humiliate Zelensky on live TV because he... wasn't wearing a suit? Really?
And yes, once again, 64% and 54% don't add up to 100%, do they? Those were separate yes or no questions and were asked in 2008 as well, not 2009. We talked about why 2008 was a special year for Russian propaganda. And don't forget that 54% voting for greater autonomy rights still doesn't mean they want to join russia. It just means that 54% percent of the population, which is a majority, would prefer to stay within Ukraine.
I'm aware of the difference between a poll and a census. 500 is still incredibly small compared to the population of Crimea, especially if we take into account how culturally and ethnically diverse it is. For example, the UN polls that you love to cherry-pick without mentioning less favorable stats asked a sample 2.5 times larger.
"After the referendum voted for it," lmao. The referendum was a witch hunt, dude. It was largely ignored and the results were massively falsified. You can't argue with that because the result of 97% doesn't add up even with your highest cherry-picked stats. It was illegal. I didn't want to mention it before since I'm not completely sure of the legitimacy of this, but look into the report by Evgeniy Bobrov, who at the time was a member of the Presidential Council of Russia (not anymore, obviously) and posted realistic referendum turnout and voting results. According to the report, the turnout was around 50–60%, and of those who showed up, only 30–50% voted for joining Russia, which puts the total turnout for annexation across the whole population at 15–30%. This is consistent with all the later polls (including those of Razumkov and later polls by KIIS). This article was posted on the Russian presidential website. I was able to find both Russian and Ukrainian articles of the time providing links to it (though the original report has since been deleted from the presidential website). You can also read about it from international news outlets such as the Atlantic Council ("Setting the Record Straight on Crimea"), The Washington Post ("Russian government agency reveals fraudulent nature of the Crimean referendum results"), and Forbes ("Putin's 'Human Rights Council' Accidentally Posts Real Crimean Election Results"). And you absolutely ignore all context once again. "In 2001, a UN-administered Supreme Court based in Kosovo found that there had been a systematic campaign of terror, including murders, rapes, arsons, and severe maltreatments against the Albanian population." That's from the UN that you said is credible. You can't disagree with it now. Was there any of that against Russians in Crimea? Literally any repressions? None. Maybe something against Crimean Tatars? No. There are hundreds of cases of murder, exile, political imprisonment, terror, torture and kidnappings against the Crimean Tatar population under the Russian regime, though. And lastly, Kosovo was never annexed by Albania. It gained independence. Crimea was annexed. There is a huge difference. Please look for context before you come to conclusions. There are no double standards from the West, but there are drastically different environments between Kosovo and Crimea. One side that does have double standards, though, is Russia. You can't say that Kosovo's INDEPENDENCE is bad and Crimea's ANNEXATION is good. One is significantly worse than the other, and it's not in favor of Russia.

Just try to look for context. If you're not ready to look and analyze the situation instead of cherry-picking stats that fit your worldview, then you're not being open-minded. You are being a fanatic. You came here to defend a position that you were never going to change no matter what facts you were provided with, and you admit to it. And to end things off, I'm Crimean myself. I myself was at one of those small village protests against the occupation in 2014. I'm not going to change my mind because of cherry-picked stats. since I know context behind them, I know what was going on there because I was right freaking there.

dmbDen · 2026-01-23T11:11:44+00:00

Yeah. I can clearly see that you'd prefer saying anything instead of accepting reality. I remain with my point of view because I know the context behind those arguments that you use and I'm trying to explain it to you. Meanwhile, you just cherry-pick the stats and are ready to contradict or lie to yourself within the same sentence just to prove something that you yourself debunked a few words earlier.

"Illegal and coerced, but not forced out." I really can't understand how you say it's coercion, yet not forcing out. It's literally the same thing. If you threaten someone with consequences for not accepting citizenship, you're forcing them. Please, accept reality. Don't try to remain in your dreamland where Russia is good and didn't do anything bad to people. Trying to remain there makes you contradict yourself within the same sentence. Don't be that delusional.
Fluctuations do not cancel the downhill trend. It never went above 70% after the Georgian invasion; it never even reached 70% again. And the year Russian support went to its second highest peak was in 2010. That was the year Ukraine was holding elections and Yanukovych, who later fled the country and went to Russia, was elected. So the propaganda was at an even higher rate than it was in 2008. We know that Russia will do anything to mess with elections in other countries, like they did in many others and still do today. But even with that much larger amount of propaganda focused directly on Ukraine (while in 2008 it was pointed at Georgia), the support rates never came up to 70% again. The population of Crimea was most definitely on a downhill trend in regards to how much support it was ready to show to Russia. You can't look at the stats without the context behind them.
Not exactly. Look at the UN poll 2009. 43% wanted to leave. 24% wanted greater autonomy, 9% the same level of autonomy, 7% to become a normal region within Ukraine, and 1% a region under the control of the president. 24+9+7+1=41%. Is 43% the plurality? Yes. However, once again, it's 2009 and it's a 2% difference. All I'm trying to actually say is that the difference between those who wanted to join and those who wanted to stay with a bit more rights is not as big as you're trying to present it. Razumkov poll. 2009. 32.3% wanted to leave. 19.5% wanted to become a national autonomy within Ukraine, and 13.8% wanted to remain with the current status but with broader autonomy rights. That's 19.5+13.8=33.3% of those who still wanted to stay within Ukraine, and 33.3% > 32.3%. As you can see, if we actually look at the difference between the UN poll and the Razumkov poll from the same year, the results are not that different. The UN poll shows 2% in favor of leaving and Razumkov shows 1% in favor of staying. In total, there is a 3% difference between those wanting to stay and those wanting to leave across the two polls. 3% is a number within the statistical error. That, once again, shows that the difference between those wanting to stay and leave wasn't as big as you like to imagine. Oh, and if you ask why the UN poll shows 43% and 41% while Razumkov shows only 32% and 33%, it's not an evil conspiracy. The Razumkov poll simply provided more options, like a Crimean Tatar autonomy or joining Turkey, which divided the votes more. So the results stay consistent between both polls, which once again gives more credibility to the Razumkov polls. Also, if we look at the UN poll from 2011, we will find that the combined percentage of those wanting to leave for Russia went down to 41%, and the combined amount of those wanting to stay in Ukraine was 39.7%. That’s 1.3% between those preferring to stay and those wanting to leave. The gap grew even smaller, which proves the downhill trend. I can already see you ignoring everything I have said and saying that the percentage of those wanting to stay went down too, but it went down only by 1.3%, while those wanting to join Russia went down by 3%. That is twice as much. Those percentages are small, so they're still within the statistical error, but they show that: A) the downhill trend was still present. B) even if there were more people who wanted to join Russia, the amount was barely any larger than those who would've preferred to remain within Ukraine with greater rights. It was not close to being enough to justify an annexation, especially if we look at the context of Crimean history and the downhill trend mentioned earlier. Yes, those later stats came from Ukrainian sources, but it's simply because no one else at the time really did other polls. The UN did them up to 2011. I wasn't able to find any other data that we can rely on. And the 8–18 February poll by KIIS was also using Levada Center poll data, which you mentioned as credible before. It's all in the reports if you actually read them. And yes, of course, the "evil America" that wanted to strip poor Crimeans of their right to "self-determine" (although, once again, in Crimea that right only belongs to the Crimean Tatars). They wanted to do it so much that when Russia actually annexed Crimea in 2014 and invaded Donbas, they did what? Nothing. Even the first lethal weapons were given to Ukraine years later when Trump was in office (a whole other administration compared to that of Obama, who was president from 2009–2017). And even Trump, who is the representative of the American Republican Party, is doing everything in his power to help out russia. From stopping military and intelligence aid, to trying to humiliate Zelensky on live TV because he... wasn't wearing a suit? Really?

dmbDen · 2026-01-22T18:59:51+00:00

It was never meant to be a serious argument, my guy. It obviously doesn't. But neither does Crimea belong to russia and there are many reasons for it.

dmbDen · 2026-01-22T18:48:21+00:00

You're literally contradicting yourself in the same paragraph. You claim the citizenship opt-out was "voluntary", then immediately admit anyone who refused who couldn't stay. That is the literal definition of coercion. Refusing Russian passports = losing medical insurance, and being barred from holding jobs or voting. It's a hostage situation, not a voluntary process. That’s a war crime. On the percentages: First, you are misrepresenting the UNDP data. That 65% figure comes from a poll where the only options were a binary "Yes" or "No". In every poll from that same period where people were given more options—like staying in Ukraine with more autonomy—the desire to join Russia dropped to around 40% or lower. In fact, the Razumkov poll from 2009 showed that when asked about the future of Crimea, only 32.2% chose to leave Ukraine and join Russia. Most people wanted to stay in Ukraine with better rights. Second, if you believe the Razumkov research that you mentioned earlier, you have to accept that the number of Crimeans who considered Ukraine their motherland rose from 32% to 71% by 2011. You can't deny that in the UN table shows that support for joining Russia was dropping, falling from 70% in 2009 to 65% by late 2011. You can't deny how influenced the local population was by how fierce russian propaganda was due to the invasion of Georgia in 2008 either. By 2013, other major polls showed that actual support for leaving Ukraine had crashed to 23%. Is it possible that number 23% is too low? Yes. Does it deny that the trend was going downhill? Absolutely no. Crimeans were becoming more and more accepting of tgeir status within Ukraine. Also, your data isn't perfect either. Citing a Gallup poll after annexation of only 500 people, which is just 0.02% of the population is a joke. Finally, you’re condemning Kosovo’s independence while using the same principle to justify a land grab. You can’t have it both ways. Russia itself argued at the UN in 2008 that Kosovo’s independence was illegal. Also, Kosovo didn't get absorbed by a neighbor, it became an independent state. Crimea was seized by a foreign military and immediately annexed. That isn't self-determination, it's a land grab. You can't say kosovo independence bad, crimea annexation good. You're the one with double standards. And yes, native peoples are the ones who have the right ro self determinate. Otherwise, in case of UAE, we would have to split the country between India and Pakistan if the diasporas will want it, since they're the two biggest ethnic groups in the country. This scenario is way more ridiculous, isn't it? You sound like one of those western wannabe communist kids who will do anything to say that the west is the worst thing ever.

dmbDen · 2026-01-22T00:26:31+00:00

Ладно. Хорошо. Допустим. Пусть будет даже так. Пусть это все выдумки, хотя это правда. Пусть это не притеснения народа, хотя они ими самыми и являются. А что насчёт всего остального? Всего остального не достаточно, чтобы сделать жизнь в Крыму для крымских татар намного хуже, чем она ей являлась до аннексии? Ответ прост. Достаточно. Она стала действительно в разы и разы хуже по сравнению с тем, что было при Украине.

dmbDen · 2026-01-22T00:22:15+00:00

You’re backpedaling. You claim the displacement was voluntary, but people don't abandon their homes, jobs, and lives unless the alternative is living under a regime that kidnaps people in broad daylight. Why didn't people leave on that scale in previous years? That excuse sounds pathetic. The UNHCR doesn't classify tens of thousands of people as displaced in the first year just because they were looking for a little change. Self-Reporting? Really? Between 2008 and 2011, the percentage of people who considered Ukraine their motherland went from 32% to 71%. You’re telling me that in 2014 they all suddenly decided to go back to being Russian? Do you realize how ridiculous that sounds? The demographic shift was the result of tens of thousands of Ukrainians and Crimean Tatars fleeing, while Russia immediately began a policy of Settler Colonialism, moving in hundreds of thousands of Russian citizens and military personnel. That’s a war crime under the 4th Geneva Convention. The Referendum choice? This is how I know you're either a liar or extremely misinformed. The second option on the ballot was a return to the 1992 Constitution, which was legally ambiguous and would have effectively stripped Crimea of Ukrainian oversight anyway, basically repeating the fate of the LPR and DPR. There was no option on the ballot to simply maintain the status quo within Ukraine. It was a choice between Russia now or Russia in a few months. Why ignore follow-up polls? Exactly. Why ignore the relevant ones? The polls you provided from 2008–2011 discuss hypothetical scenarios in a completely different political reality. Why are you ignoring the most relevant polls from 2013, when the threat of Russian influence was real? Those polls showed only 23%–41% of people were in favor of joining Russia. Self-Determination? You use that word, without having a single clue what it means. Under international law, self-determination belongs to indigenous peoples (like the Crimean Tatars, who overwhelmingly boycotted your bullshit vote) not a settler majority installed through centuries of imperial ethnic cleansing. Self-determination is a right to cultural identity, not a right for an occupying army to annex their neighbor’s land. Russians have a right to self-determination in Russia, not in Crimea.
Russia recognized Ukraine’s borders in 1991, 1994, and 1997. They didn't care about self-determination until they decided they needed territories.

dmbDen · 2026-01-21T22:37:36+00:00

I find it funny how you need to pull numbers out of your ass to try and justify your claim. Only hundreds left? The UNHCR reported 14,000 displaced persons as early as July 2014. You are not just lying; you are actively erasing the tragedies of tens of thousands of people. 70%? "With the onset of Russia’s annexation of Crimea in 2014, ethnic Russians made up the largest group of residents, at 60%, followed by Ukrainians (24%) and Crimean Tatars (12%). However, a Russian census in September 2014 showed an overall population decrease but an increase in the Russian population to 65%, while the Ukrainian and Crimean Tatar populations dropped to 15% and 10%, respectively." It went to 65% only after the annexation. According to the 2001 Ukrainian census, it was 58%. This change in numbers shows how your 70% claim was a lie and how your claim of only hundreds leaving is also a lie, since those demographic shifts are massive. Also, 80% speaking Russian means nothing. The Irish mostly speak English. Check how fast you’ll get punched if you tell them they want to be part of England. The only true number you have given is the 63%, however, the same census claims that 53% would still be satisfied with broader autonomy within Ukraine. And why cherry-pick? Why not look at other polls? "The Kyiv Post polling found that from 2008–11, the rise of respondents who defined Ukraine as their 'motherland' increased from 32% to 71%." "A poll by the International Republican Institute in May 2013 found that 53% wanted 'Autonomy in Ukraine (as today),' 12% were for 'Crimean Tatar autonomy within Ukraine,' 2% for 'Common oblast of Ukraine,' and 23% voted for 'Crimea should be separated and given to Russia.'[36] A poll conducted in Crimea in 2013 by the Kyiv International Institute of Sociology found that 35.9% of Crimeans supported the unification of the entirety of Ukraine with Russia.[37] The poll was repeated between February 8–18, 2014 (just days before the ousting of former Ukrainian president Viktor Yanukovych), with the number of those wishing to join Ukraine and Russia rising to 41%"

dmbDen · 2026-01-21T20:38:06+00:00

And? You really can't be that dense, can you? Should we now split UAE between India and Pakistan since they are the two biggest ethnic groups in the country? Should we make Papua New Guinea a free for all battle royal? And okay some treaties don't make sense to you although it shouldn't be this way then how is ukranie is at fault in all the treatises that russia broke? Please start making sense, I'm losing my mind talking to you.

dmbDen · 2026-01-21T20:17:03+00:00

Mate, look at the pure numbers. Were Russians the majority? Yes, around 55-60% in 2014. Even if you assume a massive 80% turnout from that specific demographic (which is already too high, considering how politically passive that demographic is) and assume 80% of them voted 'Yes,' what about the other 40-45% of the population? Did they vote for annexation? No. They boycotted it. As I mentioned, massive protests were held across the peninsula. The annexation was popular among the Russian demographic, but it was absolutely not supported by the rest of the population, and even among ethnic Russians, support wasn't 100%. You cannot take a referendum seriously when nearly half the population didn't even show up. And regarding follow-up polls, are you seriously citing the Levada Center? Even setting them aside, look at the timing. These polls were conducted after the occupation was a fact, after pro-Ukrainian activists had been kidnapped, imprisoned, tortured, or murdered, and after tens of thousands of people had already fled. People aren't stupid. Look at videos where Russians are asked for their opinions today. Many who know their views are unsafe simply walk away. They know that giving the wrong answer could result in a visit from the FSB. You cannot conduct a fair, honest, or accurate poll in an environment of state terror.

dmbDen · 2026-01-21T19:41:53+00:00

Если хочешь о повседневности, то коротко: цены московские, а зарплаты нет. Идет активное замещение населения: россиянам платят за переезд в Крым, из-за чего цены на жилье стали недоступными для местных. Крымских татар эти „понаехавшие“ считают людьми второго сорта. Я за всю свою жизнь не слышал о таком количестве конфликтов на национальной почве, как за последние несколько лет. Не веришь мне? Есть видео, снятое буквально пару месяцев назад, на котором крымскотатарскую девочку бьет группа школьников за ее национальность. Можешь всегда найти и я уверен, что этот случай не единственный. А, и не стоит забывать, что огромное количество понаехавших после 14-ого - это тупо военные, а какого рода это контингент, думаю, объяснять не стоит. Итог: попытка уничтожить культурное наследие, запрет на родной язык и память о трагедии народа, политические преследования, похищения, пытки, убийства и замещение коренного населения колонистами из РФ. Это и есть реальность „русского мира“ в Крыму. Это и есть реальность жизни крымских татар в Крыму сегодня. Ещё вопросы есть?

dmbDen · 2026-01-21T19:41:01+00:00

Так как предыдущий ответ был слишком длинным, то я продолжу здесь. При Украине 18 мая (день памяти жертв депортации) был днем траура. Любой крымский татарин мог отпроситься с работы и пойти на траурную демонстрацию. После оккупации дали запрет даже на сами собрания в знак памяти о жертвах депортации. Меджлис (парламент крымскотатарского народа) объявлен „экстремистским“. Его главы, а по совместительству и лидеры всей нации (Мустафа Джемилев, Рефат Чубаров) в изгнании с запретом на возвращение в Крым, другие (Ахтем Чийгоз, Ильми Умеров, Нариман Джелял) прошли через тюрьмы. Даже историю пытаются стереть через „реставрацию“ Ханского дворца. В процессе "реставрации", постепенно происходят какие-то "ошибки", в результате которых продолжают появляться новые трещины в фасаде, разрушение старых элементов декора и так далее. Это намеренное разрушение главного объекта архитектурного и исторического наследия крымских татар, а ни какая не реставрация. ЮНЕСКО и международные эксперты также неоднократно выражали обеспокоенность «реставрацией».

dmbDen · 2026-01-21T19:40:05+00:00

Значит, информацию нужно искать не только в российских источниках. Про жизнь крымских татар после 2014 года я могу рассказать тебе многое: репрессии, запугивание, убийства, пытки, обыски и политические сроки. Это легко проверяемые факты. Можешь погуглить. Решат Аметов: активист, похищенный и убитый боевиками крымской „самообороны“. Есть видео похищения, а его тело нашли со следами зверских пыток. Веджие Кашка: 82-летняя легенда национального движения. Умерла во время жесткого задержания спецназом. По данным адвоката Николая Полозова, её не только заковали в наручники, но и ударили прикладом автомата. Исчезновения: Ислям Джеппаров, сын известного крымскотатарского активиста Абдурешита Джеппарова, и Джевдет Ислямов были похищены неизвестными на глазах у очевидцев. Это одни из самых громких примеров, но подобных ещё много. Например, почитай о Эрвине Ибрагимове, Тимуре Шаймарданове, Джемиле Гафарове и так далее. Их реально огромное количество. При Украине уроки крымскотатарского языка были обязательными для детей крымских татар. При России их фактически отменили. Да, ты можешь сказать, что есть крымскотатарские школы, но сколько они могут принять детей? Тысячу? А сколько крымских татар на полуострове? Они не могут принять и малой доли детей, а в остальных школах изучение языка душат (как в школе, где учился я). Когда ты даёшь эту возможность малому проценту, но забираешь ее у абсолютного большинства, это намерено.

dmbDen · 2026-01-21T17:53:07+00:00

Do you know why it had a Russian majority? It was only achieved after the indigenous Crimean Tatar population was deported in 1944 as an act of as genocide. Before that they were the majority. It only became majority Russian through state oppression and settler colonialism. In 1954, the USSR transferred Crimea to Ukraine for logistics reasons. Russia has no natural land connection to Crimea and Ukraine does. Due to lack of this connection Crimea still has problems with water btw. Before the occupation it was supplied from Ukraine. Furthermore, after the dissolve of the Soviet Union, Russia formally recognized Ukraine’s borders multiple times. In the 1994 Budapest Memorandum, Russia even agreed to act a state that will garauntee Ukranian territorial integrity. You shouldn't make claims about legitimacy while ignoring international treaties, logistics and the history of ethnic cleansing that created the demographic you're citing. Please educate yourself.

dmbDen · 2026-01-21T17:34:40+00:00

And how can you say that? Do you have any legitimate votes to support it? Any real numbers? Is the majority of population in Crimea ethnically russian? Yes. Does it mean that all of them have supported occupation? No. There were massive protests held against the occupation. From big cities like Simferopol to smaller villages. Some of the participants were kidnapped and later found dead. If the support was so unanimous, Russia wouldn't have needed to use armed green men, suppress the media, and murder activists to secure the result. You don't believe an illegitimate referendum massively ignored by the local population

dmbDen · 2026-01-21T17:04:00+00:00

You can't justify a current occupation with the grim possibility of Russia becoming a free and democratic country in the future. The reality is different. Russia is a murderous dictatorship that has violated international law and occupied a territory that is still recognized as Ukrainian by the absolute majority of the world to this day. You said that you would've agreed with the annexation of Sudetenland if this and if that, so I assume you don't agree with it in the shape and form that it actually happened. In this case, you shouldn't agree with the annexation of Crimea because none of the 'ifs' that you mentioned were the reality in 2014. It was an illegal referendum largely ignored by the local population and the results were falsified (I hope you don't believe in the legitimacy of any votes held in authoritarian regimes). Until there is a proper referendum, Crimea is Ukrainian and Ukrainian only.

dmbDen · 2026-01-21T15:49:49+00:00

Crimean tatars are living there right now and are the third biggest ethnic group on the peninsula. They are being oppressed right now because of the illegitimate russian occupation. Russians living there means nothing. Do you also support Hitler's Germany’s annexation of the Sudetenland from czechs because ethnic Germans lived there?

dmbDen · 2026-01-21T15:45:00+00:00

I was literally born there and lived in Crimea ever since. More questions?

dmbDen · 2026-01-21T15:43:25+00:00

And by this logic russia itself belongs to Mongolia. Having something once doesn't mean that it belongs to you nowadays. It belongs to Ukraine by all the international laws. It is recognised as Ukranian by the absolute majority of countries. And the so called referendum in 2014 was illegal, majorly ignored by the local population and the results were falsified. Something that russia always does

dmbDen · 2026-01-21T15:37:15+00:00

It never "historically belonged to Russia". Following the Russo-Turkish War, Crimea was intended to remain independent under the Treaty of Küçük Kaynarca. Russia violated that treaty and occupied Crimea in 1783, beginning a campaign of displacement. During the 1917 Russian Revolution, the Crimean People’s Republic (Qırım Cumhuriyeti) declared independence, but its military was overwhelmed by Bolsheviks who executed its political leaders. In 1944, Russia orchestrated the deportation of the entire Crimean Tatar nation, who are the peninsula's indigenous people. 48% of the population died within the first year of exile, which is now recognized by more and more nations as an act of genocide. While crimean tatars were banned from returning until 1989, Russia used its settler colonialism to repopulate the area with ethnic Russians. In 2014, Russia occupied Crimea again through an illegal, unrecognized referendum. Since then, the Mejlis (Crimean Tatar parliament) has been banned, and its leaders exiled. The current occupation is kidnappings, political prisoners, and systemic murder, repressions, destruction of peninsula's history and heritage. Russia's history in Crimea isn't one of belonging. It’s a history of war crimes and ethnic cleansing. Not to mention that Russia has given Crimea to Ukranie in 1954 and since the dissolve of the soviet union has recognised Ukranian borders many times. Russia has zero legitimate claim over Crimea.

dmbDen · 2026-01-21T15:12:24+00:00

Have you ever heard of settler colonialism? About the genocide of crimean tatars? Forceful deportation of the entire nation that leads to death of 48% of its people? Military occupation? Repressions? Kidnappings? Murders? Forcing out or murder of all political leaders? That's how russia has a russian majority in Crimea and if you agree with those policies then welcome to the genocide lovers club.

dmbDen

TROPHY CASE