I doubt anyone can show that the Islamists of Egypt are in any region of Ukraine.
But nice of you, again, to make up some ridiculous rule to support your preconceived ideas. Also nice to know that you think it’s OK to disenfranchise people as long as they are evenly dispersed throughout the country.
Silly. A survey is no more trustworthy than a news article. Less so. Manipulative surveys are used all the time. I pointed out why the authors’ trustworthiness is doubtful and not to be taken on faith. A proper response from you is not an argument from authority (“generally well-regarded”), but to show how the survey was conducted, what questions were asked, how large were the number of respondents, etc. that makes it trustworthy.
Btw. I posted a survey in this thread earlier which conducted before the crisis I consider much more trustworthy. And I do not consider the evidence inconvenient. I do not consider it evidence (a survey under the best of circumstance is just a survey, not evidence) and I do not consider it inconvenient. As I said, I think they’re mostly correct, that a majority do not want to split away from Ukraine. Or, I mean perhaps you meant inconvenient for somebody other than me. But it’s just a survey by an American think tank. It doesn’t really rise to the level of inconvenience on the world stage.
Also note that according to the same Pew survey a vast majority (91%) of Crimeans consider the referendum to have been both free and fair, and (88%) that Kiev should recognize the results. Is that inconvenient?
My mistaken then. I assumed that by “bolstered by Russian forces,” you meant military personell.
Each region ought to be able to have a referendum if they wish. There doesn’t have to be a nationwide majority. If the people of an eastern region wants to go its own way, then the people of a western region shouldn’t have a veto in that. Constitution be damned. Btw. I come from a nation which has two regions which legally speaking according to the constitution would require a referendum from the whole of the state (and a bunch of other silly stuff) for the independence they are moving towards. I still support the Greenlanders wish for independence if they so wish, and do not think it is just that people in another region of Denmark should have the power to stop them. I’d rather burn the constitution (it’s just a piece of paper) than force anybody to go where they don’t want. Anything else is bordering on something like democratic tyrany IMO and can’t imagine why anybody would oppose the principle of people’s right to decide something so fundamental as where they wish to belong.
Iceland
Pakistan
Bangladesh
German reunification
Czechoslovakia split
Yugoslavia split
Chechen
Kosovo
Bifran
South Sudan
Palestine
Tibet
Scotland
Catalonia
Greenland
Faroe Islands
Basque
I support all these people and their right to split or unite with whatever nation they wish.
If there is true oppression going on, that’s one thing. But the idea that people, any people, should be able to just up and break off from their current country is a recipe for constant war. I would have thought that Europeans, especially, would understand the value of recognizing existing borders* except in extreme circumstances.
And such a cavalier attitude toward fomenting future wars is frightening. Let’s not do WWIII, please. Or, if you must, keep your European wars within your own borders. As an American, I’m certainly not interested in getting pulled in, yet again, to another European conflict.
*How many European wars were fought over the centuries to settle on where the borders should be drawn?
No, the burden of proof is on you, having made the argument that this evidence is to be disregarded, to demonstrate why - with actual proof and not with hand-waving.
BTW, an “argument from authority” is not a fallacy, where one is quoting an actual authority on something within their expertise. In fact, it is a compelling argument. “The surgeon, who is a world-expert on cancer, has examined you carefully and says this one is inoperative” is not a fallacious argument, because the opinion of a world-expert on cancer rightly carries more weight than, say, the opinion of Joe the Janitor on cancer. That’s why when we are sick we go to doctors and not to janitors.
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/appeal-to-authority.html
Your position appears to be that actual authorities on polling, having conducted a poll, should be presumed false because of bias, in the absence of any actualm evidence of bias. Which basically makes all such evidence worthless, because no-one could ever prove to your satisfaction lack of bias.
Now, you have a good point that it would be better to actually have a copy of the survey to examine, than a newspaper article about it. Here can be found complete poll materials.
I have no idea what you mean here.
No, it appears to state that whatever flaws there may have been in the referendum process, Crimeans accept it by a large majority.
You still of the opinion that this poll was basically shit made up by Americans? Because that would be some odd shit for them to make up.
That was a typo. I’ll correct it so you can concentrate on disavowing my point:
If you can show that the Islamists in Egypt were located in a separate region of Egypt and spoke a different language and had separate cultural ties from the rest of Egypt - you might have a point. But you can’t.
You can’t argue against the facts, can you?
Your idiotic and arbitrary opinion is not a fact, and it was already addressed in the post you quoted.
You aren’t talking about the anti-Maidan folks in eastern Ukraine are you? In February through no participation of their own they had their entire economic and cultural future disturbed by by the other end of the country that obviously has no respect or concern for them but want the tax revenue that their industrial and mining region generates. The IMF wants that industry too we must presume.
You are correct for once. I am not talking about them, because they haven’t been oppressed.
But seemingly you can’t prove that if Egyptians lived in the Ukraine that they would still build pyramids, can you??? Thus, Q.E.D., the situations are both similar and dis-similar, and therefore Putin is right and the US and EU are clearly wrong. Because you would never have poisoned the wine in your own cup, and clearly you wouldn’t have poisoned the wine in mine either, so…
…
…
Never bet against a NFBW when pedantry is on the line!!
No. The fact that there are tons of significant differences between the Muslim Brotherhood and the Russian speaking population in Ukraine. Those differences are facts that cannot be denied. My views on both nations are supported by the facts.
Yes, there are tons of differences. But none that matter when it comes to disenfranchisement. That was the topic of discussion.
Still waiting on how you apply your views to states like Texas, New Mexico and CA. Should they be allowed to secede and join Mexico if enough residences decide to do so? We know how things went the last time that was tried in the US.
Yes of course. Why would you want to force states to be members of a union against their will? Isn’t free participation what separates a union from an empire? If you worry about war, then the best course of action would be not to start one and let them go peacefully on their way.
Because if you don’t, the country will cease to exist very soon. If there is no barrier to leaving the union, then people will join up when it profits them, and leave when they have to pay back to the group. By your reasoning, why can’t I secede from the U.S., Texas, and Fort Worth, and start the principality of Scabpickeristan?
I don’t like your reasoning, because it really doesn’t make a bit of sense.
Except history tells us that people don’t go peacefully on their way. I’m talking about how things actually work in the real world, not how you imagine things to happen.
You gotta love the incessant parroting of this particular piece of doublespeak, just from the last two pages:
Plenty of Russian speaking Ukrainians are either pro-Maidan or at least pro-unity, but you’ve got to admit, that phrase has better “optics” than the much more precise (and of course, less numerous) groupings of, “People Who Really Should Just Consider Moving to Russia” or “Russian-felating Ukrainians”. 
I call for a referendum in southern Texas. Those Spanish-speaking Americans are being oppresed!
US States. We’re talking about clearly defined geographic, political and historic entities. Things get a bit more murky when the regions are not as clearly defined, but in general it’s possible to find a clearly defined entity to work with.
I call for a reuniting of Czechoslovakia, the Soviet Union, Yugoslavia, all European colonial empires including the British American overseas possessions, and the return of the kingdom of Jerusalem to its rightful ownership. States are inviolable. All that once was shall remain so for eternity.
In recent times we’ve had these break ups from my list:
Peaceful: Iceland, Germany, Czechoslovakia, the Soviet Union (mostly peaceful) + Scotland, Greenland, and the Faroe Islands which definitely are going to be peaceful if they happen +
Catalonia, and Basque nationality which are probably going to be peaceful if they happen. And we can add Crimea because as things go it was more peaceful than an average football match.
With conflict: Pakistan, Bangladesh, Yugoslavia, Kosovo, South Sudan + various European colonial empires.
Failed, after conflict: Tibet, Palestine, Bifran, Chechen.
I don’t see a clear pattern either way. The only repeating element is that war happens when the state tries to hold its arbitrary borders together against the will of its people. And then, more often than not the break-up happens anyway and the violence was for nought. Peaceful transitions happens when the state does not try to force its will on an unwilling people. Ergo, we should work towards enabling states to let go of territory in an ordered and peaceful manner. And no, I do not think the aspirations towards freedom and self-determination of any people should be curbed because other people want to hold them in bondage. This has a name: tyranny.