It is impossible that my two statements were wrong. Unlike here is why:
(A) Hawaii was settled by non-native whites. Those settlers voluntarily joined the union as I said.
(B)
I pointed exactly to your error by citing the exact text. You have not correctly pointed out a flaw in my work. I guess we can get back to the topic now.
Again as explained. I did not state that the indigenous people ‘chose’ voluntarily to become or join a US territory.
This statement is true: (All states in the US joined the union voluntarily. That was not the case for Crimea to Ukraine.)
Now you are down to one state… Hawaii. And that does not work out for you either.
Wow. That’s not quite the reality. Unlike reality, one could say.
First off I will show you that it became part of an ongoing discussion among several posters. And it was Mace, on the notion of ‘fairness’ for a localized referendum in Crimea and the Eastern Regions of Ukraine, who is the one making a comparison of what the US would do as what he thinks is ‘fair’ for anti-Maidan Ukrainians and Crimeans.
Here’s how the discussion on what is fair went:
On 05-21-2014 at 04:11 PM** Carnalk wrote **a point that I very much agree with:
But then on 05-21-2014 at 04:42 PM **Malthus responded to Carnalk **with what I strongly disagree:
So on 05-21-2014 at 05:24 PM **I replied **to Malthus with this:
Then on 05-21-2014 at 06:15 PM **John Mace tells us **his opinion that there is nothing ‘unfair’ going on in a nation where he does not live:
This of course meant to me that Mace is determining what is fair for Ukraine and Crimea etc by what is supposedly ‘fair’ in the US and other countries. So I challenged that point with several points.
On 05-21-2014 at 07:01 PM **I wrote **in response to Mace *06:15 PM Post
Then on 05-22-2014 at 09:12 AM John Mace accused me of making up BS and he posted his erroneous statement:
The rest is recent and ongoing. If I have to summarize that for you too, I will do it when I have the time.
I hit the submit replu button by mistake… A big win for you eh? ala Ibn Style.
What is your response to point A.
(A) Hawaii was settled by non-native whites. Those settlers voluntarily joined the union as I said.
Tell us if you don’t think ‘white settlers’ voluntarily voted to join Hawaii to the Union?
Remember the statement I made did not refer to indigenous peoples all across the New World and the Hawaiian Islands as having voluntarily joining to belong to US territories.
Did you read the link I posted? White business men, not what most would describe as settlers, aided by American diplomats and U.S. marines overthrew a government and installed a “join America” government. This isn’t simply not letting the natives vote. You are just frigging wrong up down and left right. This is some dumbass side point that you are clearly wrong about yet you’ll chase it down the rabbit hole this far? Bizarre.
So, what is option B?
No, that is not true. As noted, Hawaii had was not given the choice to separate, as was the situation in Crimea. Your analogy fails unless Crimea had a vote to choose only between being a region or Province of Ukraine and being a territory. That was not the case.
Your analogy is BS.
Wait. It seems John and I have different thoughts on the purpose of this comparison. I thought it had to do with how Crimea joined Ukraine not how it just joined Russia.
So it is your contention that if one and it is a big ‘if’ … one state out of fifty was ‘forced against its will’ to became a US State from a US territory… that my entire point is BS? That is weak. As weak as it can get.
I cited the vote to join the Union and gave you the numbers. Only 8000 voted against.
It started this way…
On 05-21-2014 at 04:11 PM Carnalk wrote a point that I very much agree with:
Key words to me at least was your reference to not as ‘unfair’ as we would llike to think … That’s in reference to the April PEW Poll…
Yes. Your point is BS. Even if we choose to ignore the other places that didn’t vote to become American territory, your point is still bullshit with that one exception. Now that you know, please move on.
As I explained earlier… the point is the Russians that settled into or took-over the majority in Crimea going back to the days of Catherine the Great **were not given **a chance to voluntarily ‘join themselves to Ukraine’ in 1954 or 1991 and be separated from their Russian identity when they ended up told to adhere to Ukraine’s eventually screwed up Constitution this year. The Settlers of Hawaii / white businessmen / US Marines and all who voted in the referendum in Hawaii were given a chance to vote to become a US State. They had a choice to go from US Territory to joining themselves permanently to the US Constitution.
And you continue to conflate becoming a State with becoming part of America. Alaska may have become a State by choice but it became part of America through a purchase. Puerto Rico may eventually become a State but it became part of America through the Spanish-American war. You see the distinction?
Your post makes no sense at all. I’ve never referred to how North American wilderness plus the Hawaiian Islands became American territories. That has nothing to do with my original statement that you are calling bullshit. You make no sense. I guess we will have to move on.
My three key points as to the unfairness of rejecting a local referendum for separation in Crimea are as valid now as it was the minute I wrote them:
On 05-21-2014 at 07:01 PM I wrote in response to Mace *06:15 PM Post
The Constitution that tied Crimea to the central authority of Ukraine was unfairly and undemocratically dropped when Yanukovich was violently deposed and forced to flee.
All states in the US joined the union voluntarily. That was not the case for Crimea to Ukraine.
Most well established democracies do not allow mob rule to over turn the president and government.
I bet you are in a very small minority of people who think I made no sense even among those who disagreed. Sort of sorry they’re all banned.
The statement you keep referring to as BS was not addressing how territories became part of America. I have explained that plenty of times. It was wilderness… Most indigenous peoples that were nomadic hunter gatherers were overcome by Christian Civilization whenever Europeans ‘discovered’ them centuries ago.
That has nothing to do with my statement
Perhaps this will help you…
So on 05-21-2014 at 05:24 PM I replied to Malthus with this:
It **was never fair **that the Ukraine constitution would not allow a ‘local only’ referendum.
In one of several ways it was not fair ‘because’ the ethnic Russians who settled into Crimea over the years from the days of Catherine the Great had a history and cultural identity with Russia not Ukraine. They did not voluntarily join themselves to Ukraine in any kind of democratic or elective sense. They became ‘tied’ to the constitution of a different cultural identity and different language when they were given to Ukraine in 1954. They could not know then that the Soviet Uniion would break up and they automatically became a state joined all but permanently to Ukraine. And that is because they could not have a local only referendum on their status as a state in Ukraine.
They did not submit to Ukraine’s constitution voluntarily as all fifty US States did.
I don’t accept that determination of fact is a done by majority rule alone. There needs to be some basis for it besides a popularity contest.
You make no sense with your consistent reference to how wilderness and Hawaii became territories. That is factually inconsistent with what my point about all this has been. So you have people that support you in making no sense. It means nothing.
Forbes is high-fiving with Putin bashers all over the place over the consensus that Putin ‘has lost’ the Ukrainian ‘east’.
I think they are so bullish on kicking Putin in the ass they want Ukraine to start thinking about taking Crimea back.
right here: