No. There was never a plan to ban russian. Just a plan to remove the possibility for regions to decide on not having ukrainian as an official language.
Ukrainian was allowed again by Lenin an then banned by Stalin.
-
Features
Sweden, Finland, and Ukraine joining NATO?
- Thread starter lpetrich
- Start date
barbos
Contributor
There WAS such a plan but it was vetoed by temporary president.
Moreover as I mentioned before there were and still are recent plans to ban literature (books) in russian, which is even more ridiculous than simply banning russian. If these idiots had any brain they would simply dropped that matter completely.
If he did (which he did not) then he did piss poor job at that.
No national language was ever banned in Soviet Union, that would be insane.
But russian was official, period.
I have known people from (Western) Ukraine who not only did not speak russian I could not even determine what the hell language they were speaking.
For fuck sake! Get your facts right! The plan was NOT to ban russian. It was to remove a law that made it possible for regions to not have ukranian as official language. That law had been introduced as a mean to sneak in russian instead of ukranian as official language.
Davka
Senior Member
How can you expect him to get his facts straight when he apparently thinks Pravda actually provides truth? Growing up in 1984 warps your ability to see clearly.
dystopian
Veteran Member
War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength.
Harry Bosch
Contributor
The Putin Fan Boys have a pattern of demanding links to support anything anti Russia, and yet they never provide support for their assertions. They have no credibility....
Davka
Senior Member
Your poorly-crafted, illiterate posts have been repaired through the magnanimous and faultless efforts of the Ministry of Truth. You're welcome.
Harry Bosch
Contributor
thanks buddy! Happy New Year.
Except staying with Kiev wasn't an option on the ballot.
Davka
Senior Member
And pro-Kiev voters were actively 'encouraged' not to vote.
ETA: And that's not even how referendums work. Californians against Democracy cannot simply declare one day that they are holding a referendum and vote to secede from the Union. There are rules about how the process is supposed to work. The rules are different in the USA than they are in Ukraine, but it doesn't make much difference, since the secessionists in Crimea simply made up their own rules as they went along.
tupac chopra
Veteran Member
The referendum happened on March 16 2014. Can you explain how you get the annexation happening 6 months earlier?
The only valid voting that took place was in september. The stunt performed in march was of no value whatsoever.
DrZoidberg
Contributor
I don't know enough about finno-russian relations to talk about it intelligently. All I know is that it's complicated. There's no love for Russia in Finland. But whether they like it or not have a highly integrated economy with Russia. They're a bit like a kid in a tiger cage and they know it. Swedish/Finnish relations are also complicated. As there is a rather large minority in Finland who fully identify with being Swedish. This causes some internal strain. Sweden loves Finland a hell of a lot more than Finland loves Sweden. Like I said, complicated.
Politically all of Scandinavia is very similar. We're all highly socio-liberal.
USA has a weird conservative/liberal dichotomy that doesn't translate well to Europe. So our left/right is different than yours. So it's better to talk specific policy than simply left/right.
tupac chopra
Veteran Member
Except that Crimea has in fact re-joined Russia, as a direct result of the March referendum.
tupac chopra
Veteran Member
What has happened is that China and Russia have deepened their ties considerably. The world's largest economy is going to support Russia.
China openly and officially backs Russia. This development is big.
Via The Vineyard Of The Saker blog
Davka
Senior Member
No, Crimea has been illegally annexed by Russia, with the illegal March referendum as crepe-thin cover. The referendum was illegitimate, and accomplished nothing on its own. It was the Little Green Men and their Russian tanks and guns that made the change, not any actual yearning on the part of the population.
tupac chopra
Veteran Member
It's always amusing when Americans point to the illegality of the actions of other countries.
In the light of the circumstances at the time Putin clearly did the right thing.
We had an American sponsored coup and regime change in Kiev. Apparently you as good American think that America has the right to sponsor "regime changes" wherever it likes. Please correct me if I'm wrong. So as with everywhere America goes we had chaos in Kiev and large areas of the Ukraine. Neo nazi elements were creating much of it too.
So Putin basically said..."not in our backyard USA". And of course (although for some reason you just don't get it), the largely Russian population sided with Russia.
And what we have is chaos in Ukraine where the USA is involved but a stable situation comparatively in Crimea.
One American author gets to the point rather well.
http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/09/05/did-putin-just-bring-peace-to-ukraine/
barbos
Contributor
If you insist on this then you should certainly insist on Crimea being illegally annexed by Ukraine in 1992 and in 1950-something.
You also should insist on current Ukrainian government being illegal.
barbos
Contributor
This Crimea annexation thing illustrates how disconnected US media and politicians are from reality.
Crimea is gone and is not going back, not only crimeans don't want back but russian opposition to Putin would not let it back. So US can work on regime change in Russia all they want, but no regime which has any chance of winning in Russia will let Crimea back. With respect to Crimea Putin and his opposition as united as Republicans and Democrats with respect to it.
You have as much luck getting Crimea back as separating Germany. In Fact, you probably have better chances at separating Germany. I heard eastern germans have some nostalgia over DDR
On a second thought, maybe US is not as clueless as they seem and crimea thing is merely a pretext for regime change.
Crimea is gone and is not going back, not only crimeans don't want back but russian opposition to Putin would not let it back. So US can work on regime change in Russia all they want, but no regime which has any chance of winning in Russia will let Crimea back. With respect to Crimea Putin and his opposition as united as Republicans and Democrats with respect to it.
You have as much luck getting Crimea back as separating Germany. In Fact, you probably have better chances at separating Germany. I heard eastern germans have some nostalgia over DDR
On a second thought, maybe US is not as clueless as they seem and crimea thing is merely a pretext for regime change.
tupac chopra
Veteran Member
Yes, the USA would have invaded Tasmania.
However the present mob are equally bad, and as short-sighted. the prblems, it seems , are far too deep to be rectified by changing from Republicans to Democrats.
Now we have an alliance between China and Russia. Good luck dealing with that one knuckleheads.
Last edited: