Ukraine.

I have no idea. If only there were websites dedicated to reporting news and current affairs that we could consult. Report back if you manage to find out?

Posted from TSR Mobile

Russia is exploting political instability in Ukraine in a clever way, it is claiming that the Ukranian government, the result of a violent coup d'etat represents a significant risk to the Russian population of Eastern Ukraine therefore using it as an oppurtunist way of expanding its borders, this has been supported by various groups in Russia and has kept Russias own political system fairly stable, evidence for this is the presence of Russian troops in Ukraine and the persistent reference to Ukranians as basically Russians, he (Putin) is playing on nationalist sentiment to justify expansion to resist potential European influence from the Pro EU Ukrainian government. It has slightly backfired with the shooting down of the plane by the rebels, but the realpolitik is still in play.

Most of the above is refuted here:
http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/eric-zuesse/58429/russias-leader-putin-rejects-ukrainian-separatists-aim-to-become-part-of-russia#comment-325259

Try looking around nearby and you might learn:
http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/showthread.php?t=2816427

None of what I posted was actually refuted by what you posted. I am Pro Russian and everything i've said seems completely consistent with observations and the information we have. The West exploit Russia through its support of oligarchs and Ukranian crisis was caused by a desire for EU expansion.

The first link I posted is headed "Russia's Leader Putin Rejects Ukrainian Separatists' Aim to Become Part of Russia" which hardly endorses your
" therefore using it as an oppurtunist way of expanding its borders..." and
"he (Putin) is playing on nationalist sentiment to justify expansion" ,
and flight MH17 it has not been proven " It has slightly backfired with the shooting down of the plane by the rebels" , the West seemed to have stopped pimping that.

I am not pro Russian nor pro West just interested in people knowing the truth and not being manipulated.

whats going on?

So because Putin says so it must be true. Common sense not so common.

whats going on?

Also, being part of a trade deal with EU and with Russia was never mutually exclusive, until the EU decided it had to be.

Russia never annexed Crimea. The Crimean people had a referendum and the democratic result meant it seceded from Ukraine. Much like Scotland almost did last week

A democratic vote requires a free and fair election that does not return a bizarre 97% result.

Just to point out to anyone that hasn't looked at the opposing terms of the Customs Union offer and the EU offer that beyond the loyalties he may have felt towards Russia, that Yanukovych rejected the EU agreement because he felt that politically he would not survive the outcome. The strict agreement demanded amongst other things, an end to fuel subsidies that allowed the average Ukrainian to afford heat in the brutal winter months and foreign access to its huge agricultural resources.

Also, when we constantly talk of 'Russian efforts to destabilize the country' lets not forget the 5 billion dollars 'gifted' by the US Department of State top the Ukrainian opposition as well as the appearances of Victoria Nuland and John McCain on the streets of Kiev handing out bread and encouraging the unrest.

Imagine the collective media outrage and accusations of provocation if senior Iranian politicians descended on the tense streets of Bahrain handing out bread to the repressed Shia minorities and encouraging their anger?



Maybe if you want to follow obviously erroneous reporting that painted it as such to adhere to a particular narrative of "only western endorsed elections are free and fair." But if you wanted to be an objective observer of events you might recognize the fact that the unwilling populations of Tatars and Ukrainian nationalistic minded people realized that they were in the minority and boycotted the referendum and refused to participate, thereby leaving the majority who were willing to vote by an absolute landslide.

A democratic vote requires a free and fair election that does not return a bizarre 97% result.

Could you please point to where I claimed only western elections are free and fair? Thanks.

The idea that an election of 83% of a population could return a vote in the high 90's on such an important issue is laughable. especially when there were reports of fraud and other dodgy practises. Do you have any sources showing a widespread boycott amongst those groups?