Russians better ally than Americans: Turkey may quit NATO

[LegionnairE]

You are missing the point.
1. Irrespective of corrupt President or not, it was an illegal coup backed by a foreign power.
2. The people of Crimea, to whom Crimea belongs to first before Kiev or another part of Ukraine, decided against this illegal coup...
3. ... and decided to join the Russian Federation.
4. Russia accepted this.

Now has Kashmir ASKED Russia please give me away to Bharat?

Do you see the point?? The people of Crimea decided against this illegal coup and WANTED to join Russia.
Shall I repeat this?

You're ignorant of the soviet replacement with Krimeans with ethnic Russians so of course you would say this.

 

[TMA]

it's funny how you ignore that quite a many in crim boycotted the voting/referendum, and also would be considered illegal under the circumstances.

I need not even remind you of how fast Russia annexed crim.

here educate yourself. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annex..._Russian_Federation#Crimean_status_referendum

Okay. The majority of Crimeans. Isn't that what democracy is all about?

I quote from the above referenced wikipedia article:

"Crimean public opinion[edit]
A joint survey by American government agency Broadcasting Board of Governors and polling firm Gallup was taken during April 2014.[258] It polled 500 residents of Crimea. The survey found that 82.8% of those polled believed that the results of the Crimean status referendum reflected the views of most Crimeans, whereas 6.7% said that it did not. 73.9% of those polled said that they thought that the annexation would have a positive impact on their lives, whereas 5.5% said that it would not. 13.6% said that they did not know.[258]

A comprehensive poll released on 8 May 2014 by the Pew Research Centre surveyed Crimean opinions on the annexation.[259] Despite international criticism of 16 March referendum on Crimean status, 91% of those Crimeans polled thought that the vote was free and fair, and 88% said that the Ukrainian government should recognise the results.[259]"

You're ignorant of the soviet replacement with Krimeans with ethnic Russians so of course you would say this.

Yeah and I'm also ignorant of the conquest of that peninsula by Katerina back in the day. ..(!)

 

[LegionnairE]

Yeah and I'm also ignorant of the conquest of that peninsula by Katerina back in the day. ..(!)

Apparently so.

Otherwise you wouldn't call the Russian proxies "crimeans".

 

[TMA]

Apparently so.

Otherwise you wouldn't call the Russian proxies "crimeans".

The point is that the most of the people who live in Crimea wanted to join Russia.

Now as to who is a real Crimean...

Did not the Tatars conquer that peninsula going back in the day? Therefore they are not really Crimeans . . .

 

[LegionnairE]

The point is that the most of the people who live in Crimea wanted to join Russia.

Now as to who is a real Crimean...

Did not the Tatars conquer that peninsula going back in the day? Therefore they are not really Crimeans . . .

conquest isn't the same as ethnical cleansing and genocide

When tatars conquered Crimea they lived with the crimeans, they didn't send them off to siberia in chains

 

[Yatağanlı]

The point is that the most of the people who live in Crimea wanted to join Russia.

Now as to who is a real Crimean...

Did not the Tatars conquer that peninsula going back in the day? Therefore they are not really Crimeans . . .

Your arguments are hilariously irrational. Russians conquered the lands only 200 years ago. Turks had been there from 600-1800.

 

[TMA]

conquest isn't the same as ethnical cleansing and genocide

conquest isn't the same as ethnical cleansing and genocide

When tatars conquered Crimea they lived with the crimeans, they didn't send them off to siberia in chains

When tatars conquered Crimea they lived with the crimeans, they didn't send them off to siberia in chains

But that is not the issue. Irrespective of the ethnic cleansing of Tatars, Crimea had been part of the Russian Empire BEFORE, then the USSR came along and Crimea became a part of Russian Soviet Republic until the 1960's then transferred to the Ukrainian Soviet Republic.

(I am not denying that the Soviet Union committed manifest oppression against the Tatars. Indeed Christian Russia suffered at the hands of that Zionist created monstrosity.
What if Russia helped Tatars to return to Crimea? Would that make you feel better?)

Your arguments are hilariously irrational. Russians conquered the lands only 200 years ago. Turks had been there from 600-1800.

So then Crimean should be returned to an independent Turkic nation? Is that what you are saying? It should not even belong to Ukraine in any case??

Also do tell me why the Russians conquered Crimea?? (has it got anything to do with the oppression that the Tatars were committing upon Russia?)

 

[ptldM3]

people here are talking nonsense. The Ukrainian "uprising" was a US/European attempt to meddle in another country's affairs. Russia wire tapped US Secretary of State talking about installing a puppet government, US politicians met with opposition behind closed doors in Kiev and the US gave billions to the "revolution", much of the protesters admitted to being paid.


In regards to land and whom it belongs to, well much of present day Turkey is a result of war and conquest. Same with any other land, country or territory. Borders always change, Crimea had dozens of ancient tribal people before the Russians came, its just that the Russians conquered it.

There is no such thing as a Ukrainian, they are Russians that overtime adopted Polish and Turkic language into the vocabulary.

Almost no one in Crimea considers themselves Ukrainian or even speaks it. Crimea was part of Russia and a Ukrainian signed it off to Ukraine. After the USSR callapsed it was under Ukrainian control all because of Khrushchev signed a piece of paper decades before.

 

[Yatağanlı]

So then Crimean should be returned to an independent Turkic nation? Is that what you are saying? It should not even belong to Ukraine in any case??

Also do tell me why the Russians conquered Crimea?? (has it got anything to do with the oppression that the Tatars were committing upon Russia?)

No I am not saying that the Cimea should be an independent Turkic nation. However you act that the Turks were merely guests, while it truly belongs to the Slavs, which is bullcrap. turks have a longer history there than Slavs, this is a historical fact. And please don't talk about oppression when defending Russia.

 

[TMA]

No I am not saying that the Cimea should be an independent Turkic nation. However you act that the Turks were merely guests, while it truly belongs to the Slavs, which is bullcrap. turks have a longer history there than Slavs, this is a historical fact. And please don't talk about oppression when defending Russia.

It belongs to whomsoever lives there...

So Istanbul really belongs to the Eastern Roman Orthodox Christians because they have a longer history in that place than the Ottoman Turks????

Why do you not answer about why Russia conquered Crimea in the 18th Century? Is it because Turkic nations have had a history of committing oppression upon Russia???

 

[Dr. Fox]

Turkey kept on giving threats to Russia until Putin send his nuke sub deployed

I can't imagine the deployment of a Delta IV would be a concern to the Turks considering the submarine was tracked by the Norwegian Air Force and Navy the moment it left the Kola Bay. The Turks knew about its presence and would have been able to take the necessary precautions or preparations to meet it.

Photo from a Norwegian Air Force P-3C as the submarine, a Delta IV, travels to Syria in 2016. As per an agreement with Russia, when transiting Norwegian waters in the Barents Sea, between the Norwegian mainland and Svalbard archipelago, Russian submarines surface and open their hatches to allow their Norwegian observers to see what they're carrying.

A year after the Delta IV deployment Dimitrij Donskoj, a Typhoon class submarine was photographed near the Norwegian coast by the Norwegian Navy. We're pretty adept at following the Russians whether they're above or below the water.

Turkey would have been given access to the location of Russian submarines, above or below, by NATO command. It's not as if they'd be surprised by a Delta IV just showing up.

You get access to the best weapons etc too.

But not always on an equal level with NATO partners. Look at the Type 214 for instance. Offered to and accepted by the Turkish Navy, the Type 214 is a subperb submarine, but also a downgraded export variant of the Type 212A, which has features not found on the Type 214 like a low-magnetic hull and x-shaped stern planes.

Type 214.

Type 212.

You might say, "What's the big deal? It's an export variant, only Germany uses the Type 212." But that's not the case. Italy does and Norway has signed a contract with Germany to jointly purchase a modernized, modified version of the Type 212A to replace our Ula class submarines, themselves a upgrade over the Type 209 with features like an x-shaped stern planes which aren't found on the Type 209s. Germany will purchase several of the submarines for its own navy.

Type 209.

Type 210.

Being in NATO does allow you better gear then most nations are afforded, but it doesn't automatically mean you're going to have the best gear. Even within NATO there are export tiers.

 

[what]

I can't imagine the deployment of a Delta IV would be a concern to the Turks considering the submarine was tracked by the Norwegian Air Force and Navy the moment it left the Kola Bay. The Turks knew about its presence and would have been able to take the necessary precautions or preparations to meet it.

Photo from a Norwegian Air Force P-3C as the submarine, a Delta IV, travels to Syria in 2016. As per an agreement with Russia, when transiting Norwegian waters in the Barents Sea, between the Norwegian mainland and Svalbard archipelago, Russian submarines surface and open their hatches to allow their Norwegian observers to see what they're carrying.

A year after the Delta IV deployment Dimitrij Donskoj, a Typhoon class submarine was photographed near the Norwegian coast by the Norwegian Navy. We're pretty adept at following the Russians whether they're above or below the water.

Turkey would have been given access to the location of Russian submarines, above or below, by NATO command. It's not as if they'd be surprised by a Delta IV just showing up.



But not always on an equal level with NATO partners. Look at the Type 214 for instance. Offered to and accepted by the Turkish Navy, the Type 214 is a subperb submarine, but also a downgraded export variant of the Type 212A, which has features not found on the Type 214 like a low-magnetic hull and x-shaped stern planes.

Type 214.

Type 212.

You might say, "What's the big deal? It's an export variant, only Germany uses the Type 212." But that's not the case. Italy does and Norway has signed a contract with Germany to jointly purchase a modernized, modified version of the Type 212A to replace our Ula class submarines, themselves a upgrade over the Type 209 with features like an x-shaped stern planes which aren't found on the Type 209s. Germany will purchase several of the submarines for its own navy.

Type 209.

Type 210.

Being in NATO does allow you better gear then most nations are afforded, but it doesn't automatically mean you're going to have the best gear. Even within NATO there are export tiers.

Thank you for the response, you obviously have a lot more knowledge about this stuff then I do, but its the first time that I hear that the Turkish subs from Germany are downgraded, so do you have source or something for further reading?

 

[LegionnairE]

But that is not the issue. Irrespective of the ethnic cleansing of Tatars, Crimea had been part of the Russian Empire BEFORE, then the USSR came along and Crimea became a part of Russian Soviet Republic until the 1960's then transferred to the Ukrainian Soviet Republic.

(I am not denying that the Soviet Union committed manifest oppression against the Tatars. Indeed Christian Russia suffered at the hands of that Zionist created monstrosity.
What if Russia helped Tatars to return to Crimea? Would that make you feel better?)

an independent Crimea is the only thing that would make me feel better.

 

[ptldM3]

I can't imagine the deployment of a Delta IV would be a concern to the Turks considering the submarine was tracked by the Norwegian Air Force and Navy the moment it left the Kola Bay. The Turks knew about its presence and would have been able to take the necessary precautions or preparations to meet it.

Photo from a Norwegian Air Force P-3C as the submarine, a Delta IV, travels to Syria in 2016. As per an agreement with Russia, when transiting Norwegian waters in the Barents Sea, between the Norwegian mainland and Svalbard archipelago, Russian submarines surface and open their hatches to allow their Norwegian observers to see what they're carrying.

A year after the Delta IV deployment Dimitrij Donskoj, a Typhoon class submarine was photographed near the Norwegian coast by the Norwegian Navy. We're pretty adept at following the Russians whether they're above or below the water.

Turkey would have been given access to the location of Russian submarines, above or below, by NATO command. It's not as if they'd be surprised by a Delta IV just showing up.



But not always on an equal level with NATO partners. Look at the Type 214 for instance. Offered to and accepted by the Turkish Navy, the Type 214 is a subperb submarine, but also a downgraded export variant of the Type 212A, which has features not found on the Type 214 like a low-magnetic hull and x-shaped stern planes.

Type 214.

Type 212.

You might say, "What's the big deal? It's an export variant, only Germany uses the Type 212." But that's not the case. Italy does and Norway has signed a contract with Germany to jointly purchase a modernized, modified version of the Type 212A to replace our Ula class submarines, themselves a upgrade over the Type 209 with features like an x-shaped stern planes which aren't found on the Type 209s. Germany will purchase several of the submarines for its own navy.

Type 209.

Type 210.

Being in NATO does allow you better gear then most nations are afforded, but it doesn't automatically mean you're going to have the best gear. Even within NATO there are export tiers.

Norwegian K212s don't follow anything. Even Sweden in 2014 failed to locate a Russian submarine off its waters after weeks. Russian submarines have shadowed NATO ships during military exercises, I doubt that some cheap budget submarine would be able to locate anything.

an independent Crimea is the only thing that would make me feel better.

An independent Anatolia is the only thing that would make me feel better.

 

[LegionnairE]

An independent Anatolia is the only thing that would make me feel better.

Autistic?