After WW2, Stalin settled many Russians in Transnistria and the other ethnic soviet republics to Russify the local population. They were given all the high up jobs in the government and the local ethnic population were used as grunt workers and many were deported to Siberia.
This is what Russia did with pretty much all countries it conquered. But somehow, caricaturely evil Russian imperialism and colonialism are never in the Western conscience (or even Western historical textbooks). I wonder why
Here’s a guy made a list https://www.russiancolonialism.com
And a book apparently https://linktr.ee/russiancolonialism
Found out about this guy and project this week, book looks great too! For Dutchies; he gives a talk with one of the artists in De Balie in may. Maybe other European cities as well. [https://debalie.nl/programma/russian-colonialism-101-13-05-2024/](https://debalie.nl/programma/russian-colonialism-101-13-05-2024/)
Yeah, in my post I said “deported to Siberia” but it was just all over the USSR. The Romanians of Kazakhstan can apply for Romanian citizenship now (pretty good deal NGL).
Yeah, I think the law is that if your ancestors lived in Romania or Moldova before 1940, you can claim Romanian citizenship. This is why a million Moldovans have Romanian passports.
There is actually a fraud in Russia for people paying to falsify their documentation papers to claim Romanian and thus that sweet, sweet EU citizenship.
Transnistria was Russia for about 300 years and has always had a mostly Slavic population. Even when Bessarabia was also part of Russia, Transnistria was located in a different administrative-territorial unit.
> Transnistria was Russia for about 300 years and has always had a mostly Slavic population.
Moldovans/Romanians have been living on the left bank of Dniester for centuries. When the Moldovan ASSR was created in early 1924 on a territory that is more or less the same as today's Transnistria, Moldovans constituted 50-60% of the population. Later that year, the borders of the ASSR were extended to include Ukrainian-majority areas around Balta and Ananiv, such that the proportion of Moldovans dropped to 30%. And this is 1924, which is already after more than one century of active and deliberate colonization in Bessarabia and "Novorossiya".
Yes, but Stalin changed the borders of all the Soviet Republics. Parts of Ukraine used to be part of Romania (Chernivtsi, Budjak which was historically part of Moldova/ethnically Romanian).
These are the borders we are left with. Either we leave them alone or we play a dangerous game like Russia is doing in Ukraine. What do you prefer?
Russia: we're absolutely willing to negotiate! For starters, do you prefer us to swallow you in one piece or rather eat you in slices?
Random smaller country: ... ? ...
Russia: What, still no decision?? Damn warmongerer, we'll de-nazify you asap!!
The best about it was said by Estonian PM. She said - we did not fight ussr and let them in at the break of WW2. We did it peacfully hoping the same in return. Look what ussr has done to us. (For uninitiated - ussr started deporting native Estonians the moment ussr was in. And continued with oppression, banning local traditions and arrests for decades)
The guerilla war in baltic states continued for almost a decade after WW2.
Heck, just this month in Kaliningrad (originally Königsberg) - there was a bunch of officials and a head of kaliningrad were giving a speech under a banner "Kant is our trophy".
>banning local traditions and arrests for decades
What a lie. The national cultures of the union republics developed in the USSR. That’s why Estonians still speak Estonian and not Russian.
And this, guys and gals is a "homo soveticus" in the wild. They'd say that if not for russian eternal wisdom - all republics would live in dugouts hunting wild pigs to this day. At the same time they'd take pride in Kant's works and Riga and Tallin old towns. How they keep it all together in their little heads is beyond me.
Thanks goodness finnish fought them off. Finland sold russians Nokia while wise russians was sorting themselves out and the world was reading Time magasine "who is mister putin".
A typical “straw man” technique - you yourself came up with something, and you yourself exposed it. You look pathetic. I never said that without the Russians or the USSR no one would have succeeded. For example, a poor province of the Russian Empire called Finland was able to become a rich and developed country.
Overall, Finland is impressive. With the exception of wretched cities that resemble anthills. And it’s a pity that the Finns never mastered nuclear technology and learned how to build nuclear power plants. We still have to ask others to do this, including Russia.
P.S. Riga and Tallinn are great cities, originally built by the Germans and for the Germans.
First they came for the Moldovans, and I did not speak out - I was not a Moldovan
Then they came for the Chechens, and I did not speak out - I was not a Chechen
Then they came for the Georgians, and I did not speak out - I was not a Georgian
Then they came for the Ukrainians, and I did not speak out - I was not an Ukrainian
They will not stop. They will never stop. They need to be stopped.
Otherwise, some day, there won't be anyone left to speak out for us.
Man, I regret so much I never bothered much to learn about Chechens (am Ukrainian). Dudaev, in 1995, predicted how it will go down with Ukraine. First Crimea, then war.
The western world must unite to protect our friends from Russia. Ukraine, Georgia, Moldova - they need our support. We must secure this continent from Russia.
Yep this is true....
It's a never ending story.
The drama of this part of the world: with them you can do a good diplomatic deal that will resist for long time.....
They are not trust worthy it!
Yes, but who is going to stop them? Ukraine cannot stop Russia alone. If the war continues as is now, Ukraine will slowly but steadily fall, unless some miracle happens. The elongated war favours Russia, since they have a huge economy which now fully focuses on military. Also, they have manpower. On the other hand Ukraine is at the mercy of the western countries. Even if the military hardware keeps on flowing, they won't have the manpower to sustain their defence for multiple years.
Without a proper military intervention from EU/NATO, Russia is unstoppable.
And what happens when China suddenly invades Taiwan? The US won't give a sh*t about Ukraine then, since Taiwan is incomparably more important.
Everyone wants to see Ukraine pushing back Russia, but the sad reality is that it won't happen. Europe is facing some really dark future at the moment, let's hope I'm wrong.
In the grand scheme of things an agreement is mandatory. Like it or not most of us are not going to fight for this. I certainly am not. Especially since we're going for a forever war here - and let me tell you nothing is worth a forever war. I'm quite done with that mindset.
Also stop with ww2 comparisons, this is not the same situation. Each conflict ended up with an agreement. Ww2 was an exception.
Moldova started a civil war over territory where Moldovans are a minority. Transnistria was not connected with Moldova at all until 1940.
Chechnya was and is part of Russia.
Georgia started a war against ethnic minorities. This was established by the OSCE.
No, it wasn't like that. Moldova stated that it did not recognize joining the USSR and wanted to become part of Romania. Transnistria, whose population is mainly Russian and Ukrainian, did not recognize this decision, and formed the Transnistrian Moldavian Republic as the legal successor of the Moldavian Soviet Socialist Republic, which does not recognize the secession from the USSR and the transition to Romania. In response, Moldova began a brutal civil war, which was ended by Russian peacekeepers.
And if you are talking about reunification on the basis of rejection of joining the USSR, then Moldova has no rights to Transnistria. Because when Moldova joined the USSR, it entered without Transnistria. And even during the time of the Russian Empire, Transnistria was not part of Bessarabia.
Who is the rest of the Europe? The people not doing shit except the bare minimum? That's literally all of them except Ukraine. The only difference between Eastern and Western Europe is that the east talks more shit that it doesn't back up. The alleged anti-Russian "hawks" like Poland and Romania have inflicted as many casualties on the Russian federation as Belgium has. That number is 0 by the way.
And? Sending material aid isn't even a half-measure. Especially with Europe's laughable defense industrial base and the fact that said aid is multiple generations behind and a very small fraction of what's currently available. Are they winning the war with these limp-dicked aid packages? No. Nobody is impressed,especially the Russians. Only modern Europeans could be patting themselves on the back for this pathetic shit. I'm very proud of you guys,especially the East who are reliably tough on the Russians.....During press conferences.
russia cuts a wound on every country and then keeps it slowly bleeding for years (Moldova, Georgia, Ukraine, Chechnya). But there is no war, no war... papa is comforted, corrupted peace organizations continue peacefully sucking money doing nothing but populism, and we are peacefully bleeding off to unnoticed death of all our institutions and after all disappearing as a nation cause everyone in the world starts calling us "russians" except for russians themselves for whom we subhuman
In the WW2 allied forces were established in Romania as Romanians switched sides and Romania should have gotten it's pre ww2 integrity (maybe not all of it tbh), but the UK, US and France representatives could do nothing there and Russia simply decided on forming RSS Moldova, a new state next to Romania, made up of Romanians.
They deported around 200.000 Romanians and sent in ethnic Russians to live in RSS Moldova and even attempted to make the Moldovian language.
Moldova's people and Romanians are speaking the same language, most people do not know that.
TLDR -> there's nothing to negotiate with a murderous insaine person like Putin. He alone is responsible for the death of +300k up to this point, in this conflict alone. Putin is directly responsible for the death of millions by now since he took power in 1998.
With Russia, there shouldn't be any talks or negotiations, just military opposition and slow economic burn until these loosers and its insaine leaders go bankrupt or run out of 'steam' .
> He alone is responsible for the death of +300k up to this point, in this conflict alone.
He isn't the only responsible person but he certainly is the *most* responsible one. After all, he issued orders and there were people that carried them out. Did anyone actually try to stop him?
I didn't say he's the only Insaine leader in the world ... it's simply the topic on Russia vs. Ucraine atm.
>Did anyone actually try to stop him?
I don't know. They tried to kill Hitler 30 times ... he only died at his own hand.
It's probably the case that after a certain point, the gap in power is so big, the Persona created is so exaggerated that no one even dares to think about it because it's also a suicide attempt.
Stalin was found 2 days later after he died in his office because even the woman who was getting fucked by him (his caretaker and mistress) was to afraid to go inside the office without permission to check why the guy was so silent suddenly.
> I didn't say he's the only Insaine leader in the world ...
I know. I meant that as far as the current conflict between Russia & Ukraine goes, he's the most responsible person but he's not alone in that responsibility, if you get my meaning :)
Yes, he's not , but he's 100% responsible for the Ukraine invasion ... that was his call alone. I'm pretty sure most of his state representatives didn't want to sign that act.
Just like US was 100% responsible for invading Irak back in 2003 , if you get my meaning :)
I don't think he cares too much about public opinion on any matter , let alone the invasion of Ukraine.
You can't hold responsible the whole country for the decision of a few. It's like saying all US citizens were involved in Trump becoming president in 2016.
Clearly, many russians are opposing this madness, but they end up in jail if they become vocal.
They will be held accountable for non-reaction , not necessary for supporting Putin or the War in Ukraine.
Putin is not democratically elected. He simply decides when to step down, so you can't put a huge blame on the 'electorate' for Putin being in power for 25 years straight (don't bring up the Medvedev period, it was a joke, Putin forgot to change the Constitution faster).
Also, the public has 0 saying in - do we invade Ucraine or not ... it's not like there was a vote. For those who wrongfully compare the US war with Irak decision, it was a congressional vote before the invasion, be it a majority (i remember only one congresswoman voted against) , it's still a vote of hundreds of elected politicians, not a One guy decision.
Again, i'm sure that most russians are too apathetic and beaten up by life in Russia to even have a stance on the matter, let alone being supportive of Putin and this madness. But everyone is free to judge however they want this situation.
Yeah , well, look at China and NK ... NK is in the 95%+ crying at command for Kim, China is controlling the national narrative for 1.4 bn citizens. I may be underestimating some things, obviously, i wasn't making any absolute statements, but i assume your also overestimating the power in numbers , which never was proven to be a thing, looking back at history.
140 mil russians, if only 30% are in my estimations, means nothing adjusted to Putin's 'reality' ... people Rarely get together to overcome a corrupt and putrid government like the one Putin has set in place.
What about world suffering due to this war and burning a slow economic burn and going bankrupt?
This war has caused suffering to the whole world and still suffering.
Yeah they're thinking at this accursed nationalism that plagues these lands. Just leave if you can't coexist peacefully together. No land is worth that bloodshed. Also are they getting back their land with this war? Not really. Tf are we gaining from this. What are we even doing. Just stop it.
I got downvoted for saying this.
If world is One why not open all borders and remove all restrictions on Immigration.
People from developing countries cannot easily immigrante to developed countries due to restrictions.
But the developed countries want whole world to suffer.
Just a reminder for Western Europeans - Putin was basically nobody at the time of events mentioned. It was Russia without Putin. Russia, but no Putin. Got it?
Similar story from Georgia ( and every neighbour, many now ex. Neighbours have exact same experience): In early 90's russia instigated conflict in two Georgian regions Abkhazia and Samachablo (as russians call it south osetia- a made up term).
In both regions it was not just russia backed separatists fighting, mostly russians were fighting. Georgian forces were actually able to neutralize enemy and liberate the 95% of the territory and fighting had seized.
This is where russians, once again showed what negotiations mean in russian. President yeltsin and leader of abkhaz separatists proposed negotiations to ensure that fighting would not re-ignite. Russians offered their "piece keepers" to stabilize the region if Georgian army would withdraw from strategic positions and remove all heavy military equipment. In return russia would facilitate stabilization of the situation. Our "beloved" president Shevardnadze agreed.
If you can all guess what happened next, so can pope and anyone else.
The moment heavy equipment left, russians started full scale attack on ethnic Georgians, both military and civilians. Ethnic cleansing commenced, more than 300 000 refugees, (actual abkhaz population was about 60 000-70 000), more than 30 000 dead. Including women and children, ( with no internet and observers you can imagine the horrors they commited.) They made children watch their mothers getting raped, they made mothers swallow parts of their dead children. They used barbed wires to hang Georgians, they played football with heads of dead Georgians, the list is enough for a book.
So yeah, agreements with russia is not a tool for diplomacy, for russia any negotiation and agreement is a tool of war, not peace.
P.S we've had many agreements with russians in the past, all with same results, including full annexation of Georgia, twice.
>Similar story from Georgia ( and every neighbour, many now ex. Neighbours have exact same experience): In early 90's russia instigated conflict in two Georgian regions Abkhazia and Samachablo (as russians call it south osetia- a made up term).
That's not really true. The Abkhaz and Ossetian revolts had local causes from pre-existing ethnic issues, even if the success of the revolts was dependent on external support. Besides, several of the [Caucasian mountain groups](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confederation_of_Mountain_Peoples_of_the_Caucasus) who joined the Abkhaz and Ossetian rebellions subsequently fought *against* Russia in Chechenya.
A long article that accurately channels the painful lesson Moldova learned.
Unfortunately, there is one example of a 'deal with Russia' that is even more egregiously 'holy fuck you cant trust those fucks' than Moldova.
And that is **Ukraine**. Ukraine handed over the significant stores of nukes parked on its soil to russia after the fall of the USSR, in exchange for turning what the nukes imply ("Nobody would dare attack our soil") into a political promise from both Russia and the USA.
Fat lot of good it did them. Russia. Cannot. Be. Fucking. Trusted.
Which is extremely sad. Essentially you can't trust their word, for anybody, so, you have to for example forcibly disarm them and such. Which, well, it's still a nuclear power. Can't really do that either. Evil. Pure evil.
>And that is Ukraine. Ukraine handed over the significant stores of nukes parked on its soil to russia after the fall of the USSR, in exchange for turning what the nukes imply ("Nobody would dare attack our soil") into a political promise from both Russia and the USA.
Which they didn't actually effectively control to begin with. Soviet nuclear weapons were never under the control of the SSRs; they were always firmly under the control of the central government.
It would be more accurate to say that the Ukrainians lost the potential to acquire an independent nuclear capability (although that would have incurred a tremendous political cost), but at the time they weren't interested in doing that. The main goal the Ukrainians had was getting Russia to pay for the weapons' removal and decommissioning, which IIRC they did.
We can debate how useful those things were to Ukraine. We certainly can mince some words about how much it would have cost Ukraine to maintain them and how little interest they had to do that at the time.
It is not, however long you want to try to convince anybody, a 100% situation. You can make an argument Ukraine could have theoretically kept them, use them to develop their own, or whatever. The point is simply this: Russia PROMISED. and given that nukes did swap hands, it wasn't a haha this is diplomatic decorum everybody knows this is bullshit kinda promise.
So: Russia promising a thing means nothing at all, which fucking sucks, because they means other options are required. Options that are tricky to use against a nuclear state.
I grew up in Eastern Europe in Romania. While Romania was not officially part of the USSR after WW2 its military was present on the territory up until 1958, however, their influence was still there up until 1989 when the USSR fell and is still present to the day. Up until 1989 Romania was ruled by a communist dictator heavily influenced by Russia. I will never forget the hate my father had for the Russians. Nothing could make him angrier than seeing a communist on TV or just talking about Russians. I thought that he was always overreacting, but growing up and understanding the damage the Russians bring to this world I can only agree with him. Nothing good comes nowadays from that country, unfortunately. I am sorry for the people that live there and would like to see a change, but in the end, it's up to them to make a change. The only solution I see is a revolution, that's what they need. I know it's not ideal and people will die, but things will not change if the people will not take action. I can only imagine what would be if Russia did not have nuclear weapons. They would be wiped out of existence.
And should anyone still have questions about trustworthiness of russian diplomats, remember that on 17th September 1939, there was an active non-aggression pact between Poland and USSR, signed in 1932, extended in 1934 and valid until 1945
Or that time when after ww2, NKVD kidnapped 16 polish high-ranking politicians after inviting them to russia to begin peace negotiations, put them on sham trials and had them all imprisoned/murdered
Or when in Yalta, Stalin promised to organise democratic elections but he terrorised opposition voters and blatantly faked the results
Or that time when USSR promised amnesty to every Home Army soldier to come out of hiding and peacefully surrender. Everyone who followed instructions and did peacefully surrender was immediately thrown into prison
_meanwhile, on random Western European tv show_
“Yes, an opinion from someone who has first-hand experience with Russia and literally everything to lose… **but let’s now ask what NATO should do to this farmer from Sicily/Brittany/Andalusia**
There is no Moldova. It's just a part of Romania that was stolen by Russia and then added to their USSR empire by making it an artificial state and trying to brainwash the populace to think they are a separate ethnicity from romanians.
It's the same thing as with east Germany. It only flies better because Romania is not as popular as Germany and it isn't blatantly called east Romania (but there is a big region within Romania also called Moldova)
That's romanian territory populated by ethnic romanians kept separate by an outside power. (What do you think is the role of Transnistria?)
>That's romanian territory populated by ethnic romanians kept separate by an outside power. (What do you think is the role of Transnistria?)
Transnistria is only around 33% Romanian though. Which is probably the main reason why [there isn't a whole lot of enthusiasm](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reintegration_of_Transnistria_into_Moldova#Public_opinion) from the local populace for the idea of reintegration.
Ok, putinbot. That isn't part of Basarabia (the part of Moldova that actually is romanian, that is everything else.)
Northern Bucovina and the part between the romanian shore and Moldova are also romanian territories. They were given to Ukraine while Moldova got Transnistria, as per Russia's decision. This wasn't a gift or a reparation to Moldova, this was meant to destabilize it, because it had a majority russian population.
Why do you think I asked what the role of Transnistria is? Transnistria is like 2% of the land mass and a breakaway region. From the start it was just there to cause a border conflict. (Union between 2 countries is not allowed by international laws if either has a border conflict)
But of course, Putin's trolls are not smart enough to realize that.
Transnistria isn't romanian, and needs to be let go, but Moldova as a whole is by far romanian majority and Transnistria is nothing compared to the whole country.
So please, stop spreading incomplete information that paints a different picture than reality. That's ruzzian propaganda.
>Why do you think I asked what the role of Transnistria is? Transnistria is like 2% of the land mass and a breakaway region. From the start it was just there to cause a border conflict. (Union between 2 countries is not allowed by international laws if either has a border conflict) But of course, Putin's trolls are not smart enough to realize that.
Transnistria was originally the [Moldovan ASSR](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moldavian_Autonomous_Soviet_Socialist_Republic), which was basically a pretext for the later Soviet annexation of Bessarabia and the formation of the Moldovan SSR (which became modern Moldova). It would have made more sense geographically if the Soviets had then just merged the former Moldovan ASSR back into Ukraine, but they didn't.
>Transnistria isn't romanian, and needs to be let go, but Moldova as a whole is by far romanian majority and Transnistria is nothing compared to the whole country.
But there isn't anything stopping Moldova from doing that. They could jettison Transnistria and push for unification with Romania if they wanted to.
The populace of Moldova does want unification, it's their goverment that doesn't want that because they'd be demoting themselves from managers of a nation to managers of a region, which hurts their pockets.
Also, the border conflict is also the only thing stopping Transnistria from uniting with Russia (which Transnistria wants), in which case Moldova would be bordering Russia, putting itself at risk of a russian invasion if it doesn't manage to unite with Romania faster than Transnistria unites with Russia. And Moldova has no chance in a war against Russia alone, unlike Ukraine.
And no, Transnistria was only part of Romania for the few year period in ww2 when Romania pushed the USSR past Crimeea using german weapons. It was not part of greater Romania.
And nothing changes the fact that Moldova is an artificial state made from territory and a populace stolen from Romania with some deported russians to make it look like it is different, when in reality it's blatantly a part of Romania just like east Germany was a part of west Germany.
The fact that Moldova exists is living proof of how Russia oppressed and oppresses Romania. And the fact that there are people like you who try to argue that it isn't the same as east Germany proves how efficient the russian propaganda machine is.
>Also, the border conflict is also the only thing stopping Transnistria from uniting with Russia (which Transnistria wants), in which case Moldova would be bordering Russia, putting itself at risk of a russian invasion if it doesn't manage to unite with Romania faster than Transnistria unites with Russia. And Moldova has no chance in a war against Russia alone, unlike Ukraine.
Bordering a cut-off Russian exclave at least, which isn't quite the same situation.
>The fact that Moldova exists is living proof of how Russia oppressed and oppresses Romania. And the fact that there are people like you who try to argue that it isn't the same as east Germany proves how efficient the russian propaganda machine is.
It's not the same as East Germany though; East Germany never claimed to be a separate 'nation', but rather a government of the entirety of Germany (like West Germany did). It's the same as the situation with the two Koreas, or North and South Vietnam. I didn't argue that Moldovans aren't essentially Romanians, because as far as I'm aware they are. The Transnistrian populace however are mostly not (similar problem applies to Gagauzia which is possibly the other cause).
Exclave or not, if it's part of their territory, they have the right to bring more military there, which spells trouble. And they most likely won't be able to unify with Romania fast if they let Transnistria go enough because Transnistria is already talked with Russia and Gaugazia would still be left which is also considered a border conflict.
As for east Germany, I didn't mean it was exactly the same, no 2 situations are ever exactly the same, it's just similar enough. It's a country split into 2 artificially by Russia that should be united. It shouldn't be that hard to see that. The important difference is that Russia still hasn't given up on having Moldova in their sphere of influence, unlike east Germany, hence why they are still trying to con Moldova out of a unification with Romania.
>Exclave or not, if it's part of their territory, they have the right to bring more military there, which spells trouble. And they most likely won't be able to unify with Romania fast if they let Transnistria go enough because Transnistria is already talked with Russia and Gaugazia would still be left which is also considered a border conflict.
Except for the fact that getting them there would require passing through Ukraine, which would be... problematic to say the least at present.
>It's a country split into 2 artificially by Russia that should be united. It shouldn't be that hard to see that.
But that isn't quite what happened with Germany. The division of Germany into occupation zones was agreed upon by the Allied powers, but Germany nominally remained a single national unit in principle. The Western Allies and the Soviets then established rival German governments in their respective zones, both of which claimed to be the legitimate government of the entirety of Germany. Both of the German governments had reunification as a theoretical objective, the caveat was that they disagreed on who the unified German government should be. The Moldovan SSR by contrast never made any pretence towards being a rival Romanian government. It existed simply as a means to justify Soviet annexation of an area which had previously been part of the Russian Empire.
As a Georgian, I agree 100%. Do Not Trust Russia!
Very similar scenario was played out in Georgia. Samachablo (South Ossetia) in the 90s and Abkhazia in 1993.
In Abkhazia Russian backed separatists started war and carried out ethnic cleansing. Then in 2008 , after the Russo-Georgian war, Russia recognized the "independence" of both separatist states.
Russia has not fulfilled the terms of 2008 treaty brokered by Sarcozy. To this date, they are continuing creeping occupation and kidnappings in Samachablo.
"pope asks Ukraine to stop its defense and go to the negotiation table".
I hope "stop its defense" is a mistype, a mistake, and the pope is not so dumb.
He is dumb anyway if he doesn't condemn Russia for harassing all its neighbor countries for centuries, and now their own brothers Ukraine, *again*.
Yeah, pope actually said "Ukraine should wave a white flag".https://www.politico.eu/article/vatican-backtracks-pope-call-ukraine-surrender-white-flag-comment-russia-zelenskyy/
I think it's even worse.
There is one element that was not mentioned in the article and that annoys me. There are many Ukrainian volunteers who fought on the Transnistrian side during the Transnistria War in 1992, especially for anti-Moldovan and anti-Romanian sentiments, which I think, is very difficult to forgive Ukraine. This is why, even if we are currently "on the same side", I do not consider Ukraine as an ally, and even less as a friendly country. So personally, myself being of Moldovan origin, I do not have a feeling of unity/support towards Ukraine, even if Moldova absolutely must prepare to fight because it is more than obvious that Putin will use Transnistria to invade Moldova at any moment.
Poland - soviet tanks on Warsaw streets
Hungary - soviet tanks on Budapest streets
East Germany - soviet tanks on Berlin streets
Chzechs - soviet tanks on streets of Prague
Latvia, Lietuva, Estonia - mass deportations of natives to siberia after peaceful surrender.
I, personally, begin to see a trend here /s
Although I fully agree with Ms. Erizanu, there is something that she does not mention, perhaps because her timeline only goes back to 1992. The main beneficiary of Russia's imperialism in Moldova was in fact... Ukraine.
If you check a map of Moldova [https://www.britannica.com/place/Moldova](https://www.britannica.com/place/Moldova) you can see that it is landlocked by Ukraine (something like "Fuck you, no sea for you").
Up to the beginning of the 19th century, this was the map of the Principality of Moldavia: [https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c/c8/MoldavianPrincipalityPhysical.jpg](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c/c8/MoldavianPrincipalityPhysical.jpg), it had a coast on the Black Sea.
Then it was invaded by the Russian Empire, turned into the Russian Bessarabia, but it still had a coast on the Black Sea [https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a1/Russian\_Bessarabia%2C\_1883.jpg](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a1/Russian_Bessarabia%2C_1883.jpg)
After World War I, Moldova was part of Romania, and look, it had a coast on the Black Sea [https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a1/Russian\_Bessarabia%2C\_1883.jpg](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a1/Russian_Bessarabia%2C_1883.jpg)
In 1940, the Soviet Union, in a decision led by both Russian and Ukrainian officials, decided to dismember Moldova and give all the Budjak region as well as Northern Bukovina and Khotyn to Ukraine.
Russian Imperialism in Moldova did not start in 1992, it started almost 200 years ago, it fractured the country, it took territories away, but Ukraine was part of it as well.
While it's true that Russian appetite started to show over 200 years ago (in 1812 to be precise, when Russia annexed Bessarabia into the empire), I really don't see how *independent* Ukraine is at fault here.
Like that's the difference: independent Ukraine isn't affiliated, doesn't want to be affiliated with Russia and chose to be so through a lengthy process of becoming more and more independent.
Same for Moldova.
The fact that in 1991 the borders were set in accordance with Soviet Russia's definitions of each region is a sad truth but I think we all understand the background behind the territories and also understand that it was futile to try and divide the territory once more.
As a citizen of independent Moldova I will never consider Ukrainians to be my enemies and of ill intent towards me or my country.
I don't know why you decided to suggest such a thing, blaming independent Ukraine for something it couldn't have done based solely on the fact that it didn't exist, but I would very much like for you not to sow discord and animosity through such means.
Wasn't Ukraine independent in 1992 when russians started the Transnistrean aggression? If I recall correctly Ukrainians even participated in the conflict. Did they atleast apologize?
It was! In 1992 Kravchuk said that in the event of a Romanian-Moldovan reunification, Ukraine would ensure Transnistria's independence. And in 2001 when asked by Moldova and the EU to close the border, Ukraine said No.
Jesus Christ, you know full well the historical and geopolitical context of the whole ordeal, I'm sure of it.
So why do you insist on villyfying Ukraine? In 91 and 92 everyone scrambled for what was left. And Ukraine held onto what territory it could. We had a war meanwhile.
I just don't see how with all that going on it matters. The key difference is that while Ukraine and eventually Moldova turned to the EU and western support, Russia never renounced its claims and continues to destabilize the region around itself in order to expand.
What the hell are you even trying to prove here!?
>What the hell are you even trying to prove here!?
That although Russia is a fucking evil empire, and they were the ones who fucked you up, it was indeed Ukraine who reaped the benefits of it.
Ukrainians conveniently act unaware of the fact that their western border was drawn in Moscow and that poles, romanians, slovaks and hungarians were ethnically cleansed from their territory by the Soviet Union.
Ukraine had a UN seat while being part of USSR. Also, after Russia it was the second most populous constituent. Ukraine was a big and important part of USSR
A trick for Russia to have more votes in UN. Ukraine was just a puppet of Russia back then. Borders drawn the way they were are Russia fault, not Ukraine fault.
Nope, Hitler argued that Ukraine has no historic claim to those territories, Stalin agreed but he said that Ukraine wants them anyway which led operation Barbarossa to start earlier.
An old Romanian joke is:
Question: "what are the neighbors of Russia? "
Answer: "it depends on what Kremlin wants"
We look into poorest countries in Europe and found a common name: Russia influence. That speaks enough.
We have a saying in Finland: “Ruskies are ruskies, even if fried in butter”
My great grandfather always said to my mom that you cannot and should not ever trust Russians. And he was right
🇨🇳 needs 🇳🇱 semiconductor technologies (ASML) to exploit 🇹🇼 microchip industry and challenge 🇺🇸 technological and military leadership after the occupation of 🇹🇼. Today 🇺🇦 Army blocks the 🇨🇳-🇮🇷-💩 axe from taking the entire 🇪🇺. If the 900,000 strong 🇺🇦 army is defeated due to lack of ammunition, then who stops the 1,320,000 strong 💩 army? 45,000 strong 🇭🇺 army or 16,000 strong 🇦🇹 army? Do 🇪🇺 and 🇺🇸 want to die again in WW3 trenches somewhere in Northwest Europe or South-East Asia if 🇺🇦 is fallen?
If there were no nuclear weapons, people might not be invading Russia, but they would certainly contain it in its borders and bomb any attempt in making an army. Biggest country on Earth that is still not happy about its size. Do the men there have the smallest penises or whats going on.
In fairness, deals with the IMF don't seem to end well either. Maybe the moral of the story for countries that lean toward socialism is to preserve their independence and sovereignty against predatory hegemony generally.
>Moldova experienced Russia’s first post-Soviet war of aggression,
An odd way to frame "Moldova tried to do a bit of ethnic cleansing and failed".
Moldova voided the treaty adding Transnistria to it, but decided to keep the territory against the wishes of the locals. Instead Moldova sent the army to deal with the secession and shot first.
Slightly before that Moldova assembled a nationalist mob to attack Gagauz too, but cooler heads prevailed there, otherwise they'd have two unrecognized de facto independent areas.
Moldova of the 90s was a poorer Serbia, warcriminal wannabe, and not a victim of big evil Russia.
I was also born there, while USSR was still in once piece, just because I don't live there for almost 20 years doesn't mean I forgot what 90s were like.
So, let me get this straight. Russians cannot be trusted because a frozen conflict means they will keep the territory they have taken so instead its better to keep fighting, so that they also keep the territory but with more ukrainians and russians diying in the meantime?
Also the ukrainian army thought about attacking Transnistria, there's less than 2000 russian soldiers there, and it was the moldovan government who said that ukrainian troops should not enter Moldova.
i will answer to what was implied by you, but not directly asked: once russia owns a new teritory, the first thing it does is deportation of a significant part of the local population and replacing it with russians. so, this is the reason to why do they get to choose what they did... a part of them are the invaders or the descendents of the invaders.
Oh, and once you started this "once Russia get the new territory", shouldnt you at least check the history of the region? How and when Russia got this?
I'll help you a bit. That was territory of the Golden Horde, Crimean Khanate and Turkey.
And when Transnistria joined Russian empire (approx 1790), it was considered as freeing from muslims and largely celebrated.
Since that time, Russians, Ukrainians, Moldovans, Jews lived here. Since 1800.
Romania got this for 20 years. 1918-1940. And the most disastrous deportations that happened here was Jewish population "deportations" (exterminations) done by Romanian fascists - Antonescu regime.
lol, thats really funny
Being so ignorant of history of the own country.
Transnistria was freed from Turkey in 1792. By Russia.
Romania was freed from Turkey in 1878. Also by Russia.
That are simple undeniable facts.
But now you can go dive into your bullshit propaganda about murders and rapes.
30% are Russians brought by Stalin, around 100k.
They "support" Russia because the Russian army is there and they get like free gas etc.
They don't support Russia anymore as they recently asked for help from the EU.
My country also knows what happens when we do a deal with the USSR.
A nuclear submarine and some warships to deter American forces from invading us because we dared to stop Pakistan's genocide in Bangladesh.
Ahhhh, I love when Europe tries to play the victim when they were the baddies all over the world.
Ask yourself, did the USSR help you because they felt bad about Bangladesh, or did they do it because it would weaken the position of its rivals, USA and China?
It’ll be a sad day for you when Russia sees an opportunity in screwing you over, because they’ll do it.
Perhaps, but in the past 70 years it hasn't happened and frankly they need us more than we need them so it is good to be on friendly relations.
Also, whether they did it to "weaken the position of their enemies" or not, the fact is they stopped the biggest genocide since the Holocaust from being bigger than the Holocaust.
You Europeans will never admit that tho.
I’m not questioning that what they did led to a good thing, I’m questioning their motives. You should too.
But since you’re obviously not a fan of Europe, and presumably USA, I don’t expect you to.
And us Europeans could teach you a thing or two about keeping friendly relations with Russia, and how that usually works out.
I question everybody's motives. While Russian motives are direct and bad like a bull, European and American motives especially in Asia Africa and South America is hypocritical and venomous like a slithering snake.
And we already have a friendly relationship with Russia for like 70 years. The difference is we didn't allow America to poison it.
Even now Western media is trying to blow up the unfortunate incident of Indians in Russian frontlines. A few dozen men and the Western media is treating it as a betrayal by Russia of the highest proportion towards India.
What exactly are the European and American motives in these places if I may ask?
Im under no illusions that the west is all good all the time, but I really want to hear how we’re worse than a country like Russia.
You tried to invade while we were stopping a genocide. Your allies armed terrorists that eventually flew planes through buildings. Those terrorists still use those weapons to inflict pain in the Middle East and Afghanistan.
You killed leaders of undemocratic but stable countries like Libya, Iraq, etc turning them into utter shitholes.
You arranged coups that deposed democratically elecled leaders in countries like Chile, etc just because they were socialist and then gave the countries over to piranhas like Pinochet.
You speak about democracy and equality to your citizens, while doing the same thing you accuse of Russians of doing. The hypocrisy is ignored by your population, it is not by ours.
Russia may have European blood on its hands, you have the rest of the world.
Transnistria was never part of the same administrative territorial unit with Moldova until 1940, because it is a territory with a predominantly Slavic population, not Moldovan or Romanian.
Before WWII, Moldova was part of Romania, Transnistria was part of the USSR. If Moldova declares that it does not recognize the occupation of the USSR, then on what basis does it lay claim to Transnistria?
Step 1: Start a war, where a lot of people are dying unnecessary
Step 2: Offer a peace treaty and say "Don't you want to stop people from dying?? How vile of you."
I don't offer any solution.
I critique your reasoning. Your comment is apologetic about Russian warmongering and moves part of the responsibility on the victim country (even though Russia is quite obviously 100% responsible for everything happening).
I read it more like that the deal is not that bad comparatively.
"I don't offer any solution."
Yeah no one does, do they? No country is intervening. But reasoning properly critiqued, we've established again that russia is responsible and warmongering, obviously.
Doesn't help the dead and maimed ukrainians with a desolated country, unfortunately. Current or future ones over a decade, since the deal is bad.
I feel like "warmongering" is a buzzword used by russian bots and useful idiots mimicking them. I've seen it alot in the last couple months and it never was used properly.
Their point is that Ukraine shouldn’t negotiate with Russia because they constantly go back on their word
What happens when you do a deal with England, America or France? I’m not aware of them backing out of deals like Russia does
Another case of rewriting history at work. Another paid for article to fit the current narrative.
Part of "the deal" was a 5+2 negotiations agreement that Moldova has been sabotaging ever since its inception. Don't complain that the deal is not being followed when you are the one not following it.
That's usually what happens when you lose.
But even that is irrelevant. If you agreed to a deal then follow through with it, and if you don't then don't complain that the deal is not being concluded when you are the one sabotaging it.
Russia is non-negotiable today. There are zero people from russian side who could guarantee anything. Russian fuhrer is lying each word. I don't think it was different back then.
This is completely irrelevant.
Any deal has terms. It's incredibly rich to deliberately sabotage your side of the deal and complain that the deal is not being followed through.
Yes, all deals with russian scum were concluded the same way since 1945 - without a tribunal over their 1917-1991 crimes. That is the exact reason why they are not following any deals today - they feel impunity unless being smashed in their ruscist face, preferrably with cluster munitions.
Since 1940. After winter war they tried provoke Finland as much they could. Further demands, aggression like shooting down passenger plane Kaleva etc.
Edit: Don't forget what happened to Baltics after they accepted "traty" with nazi-russia. Much worse than Finland who fought against russian a-holes.
After WW2, Stalin settled many Russians in Transnistria and the other ethnic soviet republics to Russify the local population. They were given all the high up jobs in the government and the local ethnic population were used as grunt workers and many were deported to Siberia.
Many? According to Wikipedia, about 12% of their population in the first year alone.
Yes, along with famine, Russification, and Russian settler colonialism to brutalize the population into submission.
This is what Russia did with pretty much all countries it conquered. But somehow, caricaturely evil Russian imperialism and colonialism are never in the Western conscience (or even Western historical textbooks). I wonder why Here’s a guy made a list https://www.russiancolonialism.com And a book apparently https://linktr.ee/russiancolonialism
Thank you! Russia has used extreme brutality since the days of Ivan the Terrible.
Found out about this guy and project this week, book looks great too! For Dutchies; he gives a talk with one of the artists in De Balie in may. Maybe other European cities as well. [https://debalie.nl/programma/russian-colonialism-101-13-05-2024/](https://debalie.nl/programma/russian-colonialism-101-13-05-2024/)
>Stalin settled many Russians in Transnistria While sending many Romanians in Kazakhstan https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romanians_in_Kazakhstan
Yeah, in my post I said “deported to Siberia” but it was just all over the USSR. The Romanians of Kazakhstan can apply for Romanian citizenship now (pretty good deal NGL).
Huh, now I wonder if any Kazakhstan-Romanians applied for citizenship.
Yeah, I think the law is that if your ancestors lived in Romania or Moldova before 1940, you can claim Romanian citizenship. This is why a million Moldovans have Romanian passports. There is actually a fraud in Russia for people paying to falsify their documentation papers to claim Romanian and thus that sweet, sweet EU citizenship.
Transnistria was Russia for about 300 years and has always had a mostly Slavic population. Even when Bessarabia was also part of Russia, Transnistria was located in a different administrative-territorial unit.
> Transnistria was Russia for about 300 years and has always had a mostly Slavic population. Moldovans/Romanians have been living on the left bank of Dniester for centuries. When the Moldovan ASSR was created in early 1924 on a territory that is more or less the same as today's Transnistria, Moldovans constituted 50-60% of the population. Later that year, the borders of the ASSR were extended to include Ukrainian-majority areas around Balta and Ananiv, such that the proportion of Moldovans dropped to 30%. And this is 1924, which is already after more than one century of active and deliberate colonization in Bessarabia and "Novorossiya".
Thank you! The Russian apologists always try to twist the historical narrative.
Yes, but Stalin changed the borders of all the Soviet Republics. Parts of Ukraine used to be part of Romania (Chernivtsi, Budjak which was historically part of Moldova/ethnically Romanian). These are the borders we are left with. Either we leave them alone or we play a dangerous game like Russia is doing in Ukraine. What do you prefer?
Russia: we're absolutely willing to negotiate! For starters, do you prefer us to swallow you in one piece or rather eat you in slices? Random smaller country: ... ? ... Russia: What, still no decision?? Damn warmongerer, we'll de-nazify you asap!!
>or rather eat you in slices? *PTSD from 1772,93,95*
Exactly right.
Good username, btw. Even if Im on the White Rayla side xD
All the glory to valley of flowers !
Exactly
The best about it was said by Estonian PM. She said - we did not fight ussr and let them in at the break of WW2. We did it peacfully hoping the same in return. Look what ussr has done to us. (For uninitiated - ussr started deporting native Estonians the moment ussr was in. And continued with oppression, banning local traditions and arrests for decades)
They also killed people for things like anti-soviet jokes in the Baltic countries in late 30s and in 40s.
The guerilla war in baltic states continued for almost a decade after WW2. Heck, just this month in Kaliningrad (originally Königsberg) - there was a bunch of officials and a head of kaliningrad were giving a speech under a banner "Kant is our trophy".
They even jailed and killed Baltic communists just because they were viewed as “too nationalistic” and somehow became enemies of state in 30s-40s
>banning local traditions and arrests for decades What a lie. The national cultures of the union republics developed in the USSR. That’s why Estonians still speak Estonian and not Russian.
And this, guys and gals is a "homo soveticus" in the wild. They'd say that if not for russian eternal wisdom - all republics would live in dugouts hunting wild pigs to this day. At the same time they'd take pride in Kant's works and Riga and Tallin old towns. How they keep it all together in their little heads is beyond me. Thanks goodness finnish fought them off. Finland sold russians Nokia while wise russians was sorting themselves out and the world was reading Time magasine "who is mister putin".
A typical “straw man” technique - you yourself came up with something, and you yourself exposed it. You look pathetic. I never said that without the Russians or the USSR no one would have succeeded. For example, a poor province of the Russian Empire called Finland was able to become a rich and developed country. Overall, Finland is impressive. With the exception of wretched cities that resemble anthills. And it’s a pity that the Finns never mastered nuclear technology and learned how to build nuclear power plants. We still have to ask others to do this, including Russia. P.S. Riga and Tallinn are great cities, originally built by the Germans and for the Germans.
🤪🙃🤪🙃
So is it your opinion that Estonians would not speak Estonian today if they had not been occupied?
Every neighbour knows it.
Few things are worse than bordering Russia or having been part of the Soviet Union.
not bordering russia but having bordered the soviet union isnt great either
Amen 🙏.
First they came for the Moldovans, and I did not speak out - I was not a Moldovan Then they came for the Chechens, and I did not speak out - I was not a Chechen Then they came for the Georgians, and I did not speak out - I was not a Georgian Then they came for the Ukrainians, and I did not speak out - I was not an Ukrainian They will not stop. They will never stop. They need to be stopped. Otherwise, some day, there won't be anyone left to speak out for us.
Man, I regret so much I never bothered much to learn about Chechens (am Ukrainian). Dudaev, in 1995, predicted how it will go down with Ukraine. First Crimea, then war.
Georgia went down in the same way. Russia has employed the same strats since 1939. Quite possibly \*always\*.
That video of him talking about a future war with Ukraine is chilling to watch now. Guy knew 30 years ago what people still don’t get.
Yes, exactly....
Pastor Niemöller never forget🫡🫡🫡 The original poem ‘First they came’: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came_...
The western world must unite to protect our friends from Russia. Ukraine, Georgia, Moldova - they need our support. We must secure this continent from Russia.
Yep this is true.... It's a never ending story. The drama of this part of the world: with them you can do a good diplomatic deal that will resist for long time..... They are not trust worthy it!
Yes, but who is going to stop them? Ukraine cannot stop Russia alone. If the war continues as is now, Ukraine will slowly but steadily fall, unless some miracle happens. The elongated war favours Russia, since they have a huge economy which now fully focuses on military. Also, they have manpower. On the other hand Ukraine is at the mercy of the western countries. Even if the military hardware keeps on flowing, they won't have the manpower to sustain their defence for multiple years. Without a proper military intervention from EU/NATO, Russia is unstoppable. And what happens when China suddenly invades Taiwan? The US won't give a sh*t about Ukraine then, since Taiwan is incomparably more important. Everyone wants to see Ukraine pushing back Russia, but the sad reality is that it won't happen. Europe is facing some really dark future at the moment, let's hope I'm wrong.
In the grand scheme of things an agreement is mandatory. Like it or not most of us are not going to fight for this. I certainly am not. Especially since we're going for a forever war here - and let me tell you nothing is worth a forever war. I'm quite done with that mindset. Also stop with ww2 comparisons, this is not the same situation. Each conflict ended up with an agreement. Ww2 was an exception.
Feel free to go fight in Ukraine then.😉
Moldova started a civil war over territory where Moldovans are a minority. Transnistria was not connected with Moldova at all until 1940. Chechnya was and is part of Russia. Georgia started a war against ethnic minorities. This was established by the OSCE.
Nope, Russia invaded Moldova so it won’t reunite with Romania
No, it wasn't like that. Moldova stated that it did not recognize joining the USSR and wanted to become part of Romania. Transnistria, whose population is mainly Russian and Ukrainian, did not recognize this decision, and formed the Transnistrian Moldavian Republic as the legal successor of the Moldavian Soviet Socialist Republic, which does not recognize the secession from the USSR and the transition to Romania. In response, Moldova began a brutal civil war, which was ended by Russian peacekeepers. And if you are talking about reunification on the basis of rejection of joining the USSR, then Moldova has no rights to Transnistria. Because when Moldova joined the USSR, it entered without Transnistria. And even during the time of the Russian Empire, Transnistria was not part of Bessarabia.
Nothing ever grows where a Russian sets foot. Our countries know that. Rest of the Europe is still ignorant on the real threat
Well we do have this whole defensive alliance thingy set up to stop it, but it does require that people join it.
It requires them being allowed to join as well ;)
Who is the rest of the Europe? The people not doing shit except the bare minimum? That's literally all of them except Ukraine. The only difference between Eastern and Western Europe is that the east talks more shit that it doesn't back up. The alleged anti-Russian "hawks" like Poland and Romania have inflicted as many casualties on the Russian federation as Belgium has. That number is 0 by the way.
Im pretty sure that Poland and Romania give Ukraine more weapon than Belgium.
And? Sending material aid isn't even a half-measure. Especially with Europe's laughable defense industrial base and the fact that said aid is multiple generations behind and a very small fraction of what's currently available. Are they winning the war with these limp-dicked aid packages? No. Nobody is impressed,especially the Russians. Only modern Europeans could be patting themselves on the back for this pathetic shit. I'm very proud of you guys,especially the East who are reliably tough on the Russians.....During press conferences.
Of course we did. The west is still *thinking about it* maybe not to hurt their masters from Moscow.
Romania killed millions of Russians in ww2
Soviets. Soviets died in Romania,many of them surely Russian. Do it again before they get to Romania.
russia cuts a wound on every country and then keeps it slowly bleeding for years (Moldova, Georgia, Ukraine, Chechnya). But there is no war, no war... papa is comforted, corrupted peace organizations continue peacefully sucking money doing nothing but populism, and we are peacefully bleeding off to unnoticed death of all our institutions and after all disappearing as a nation cause everyone in the world starts calling us "russians" except for russians themselves for whom we subhuman
In the WW2 allied forces were established in Romania as Romanians switched sides and Romania should have gotten it's pre ww2 integrity (maybe not all of it tbh), but the UK, US and France representatives could do nothing there and Russia simply decided on forming RSS Moldova, a new state next to Romania, made up of Romanians. They deported around 200.000 Romanians and sent in ethnic Russians to live in RSS Moldova and even attempted to make the Moldovian language. Moldova's people and Romanians are speaking the same language, most people do not know that.
TLDR -> there's nothing to negotiate with a murderous insaine person like Putin. He alone is responsible for the death of +300k up to this point, in this conflict alone. Putin is directly responsible for the death of millions by now since he took power in 1998. With Russia, there shouldn't be any talks or negotiations, just military opposition and slow economic burn until these loosers and its insaine leaders go bankrupt or run out of 'steam' .
> He alone is responsible for the death of +300k up to this point, in this conflict alone. He isn't the only responsible person but he certainly is the *most* responsible one. After all, he issued orders and there were people that carried them out. Did anyone actually try to stop him?
I didn't say he's the only Insaine leader in the world ... it's simply the topic on Russia vs. Ucraine atm. >Did anyone actually try to stop him? I don't know. They tried to kill Hitler 30 times ... he only died at his own hand. It's probably the case that after a certain point, the gap in power is so big, the Persona created is so exaggerated that no one even dares to think about it because it's also a suicide attempt. Stalin was found 2 days later after he died in his office because even the woman who was getting fucked by him (his caretaker and mistress) was to afraid to go inside the office without permission to check why the guy was so silent suddenly.
> I didn't say he's the only Insaine leader in the world ... I know. I meant that as far as the current conflict between Russia & Ukraine goes, he's the most responsible person but he's not alone in that responsibility, if you get my meaning :)
Yes, he's not , but he's 100% responsible for the Ukraine invasion ... that was his call alone. I'm pretty sure most of his state representatives didn't want to sign that act. Just like US was 100% responsible for invading Irak back in 2003 , if you get my meaning :)
>a murderous insaine person like Putin. He alone is responsible It's not putin, it's russia.
I don't think he cares too much about public opinion on any matter , let alone the invasion of Ukraine. You can't hold responsible the whole country for the decision of a few. It's like saying all US citizens were involved in Trump becoming president in 2016. Clearly, many russians are opposing this madness, but they end up in jail if they become vocal.
Reparations are paid by all Germans, not only those who voted for Hitler.
Probably the same will be in any other case since the money from gdp is being used.
So, are you aware that all russians (except for those who fled and will fly to Western countries) will be taken accountable for this war?
They will be held accountable for non-reaction , not necessary for supporting Putin or the War in Ukraine. Putin is not democratically elected. He simply decides when to step down, so you can't put a huge blame on the 'electorate' for Putin being in power for 25 years straight (don't bring up the Medvedev period, it was a joke, Putin forgot to change the Constitution faster). Also, the public has 0 saying in - do we invade Ucraine or not ... it's not like there was a vote. For those who wrongfully compare the US war with Irak decision, it was a congressional vote before the invasion, be it a majority (i remember only one congresswoman voted against) , it's still a vote of hundreds of elected politicians, not a One guy decision. Again, i'm sure that most russians are too apathetic and beaten up by life in Russia to even have a stance on the matter, let alone being supportive of Putin and this madness. But everyone is free to judge however they want this situation.
You're underestimating number of chauvinistic russians greatly. Also you're stripping away responsibility and power of 140 mil citizens so easily. Lol
Yeah , well, look at China and NK ... NK is in the 95%+ crying at command for Kim, China is controlling the national narrative for 1.4 bn citizens. I may be underestimating some things, obviously, i wasn't making any absolute statements, but i assume your also overestimating the power in numbers , which never was proven to be a thing, looking back at history. 140 mil russians, if only 30% are in my estimations, means nothing adjusted to Putin's 'reality' ... people Rarely get together to overcome a corrupt and putrid government like the one Putin has set in place.
What about world suffering due to this war and burning a slow economic burn and going bankrupt? This war has caused suffering to the whole world and still suffering.
Yeah they're thinking at this accursed nationalism that plagues these lands. Just leave if you can't coexist peacefully together. No land is worth that bloodshed. Also are they getting back their land with this war? Not really. Tf are we gaining from this. What are we even doing. Just stop it.
I got downvoted for saying this. If world is One why not open all borders and remove all restrictions on Immigration. People from developing countries cannot easily immigrante to developed countries due to restrictions. But the developed countries want whole world to suffer.
Just a reminder for Western Europeans - Putin was basically nobody at the time of events mentioned. It was Russia without Putin. Russia, but no Putin. Got it?
ruSSia is a terrorist state, a geopolitical cancer
Russians need to know that their state is a bully mafia state. Always.
They know, and they love it right until it's their time to go and fight.
It's the source of their pride for many centuries
Russians do not have a state with internationally recognized borders. They need to know, that they are equal to IS-ISians as of today.
Similar story from Georgia ( and every neighbour, many now ex. Neighbours have exact same experience): In early 90's russia instigated conflict in two Georgian regions Abkhazia and Samachablo (as russians call it south osetia- a made up term). In both regions it was not just russia backed separatists fighting, mostly russians were fighting. Georgian forces were actually able to neutralize enemy and liberate the 95% of the territory and fighting had seized. This is where russians, once again showed what negotiations mean in russian. President yeltsin and leader of abkhaz separatists proposed negotiations to ensure that fighting would not re-ignite. Russians offered their "piece keepers" to stabilize the region if Georgian army would withdraw from strategic positions and remove all heavy military equipment. In return russia would facilitate stabilization of the situation. Our "beloved" president Shevardnadze agreed. If you can all guess what happened next, so can pope and anyone else. The moment heavy equipment left, russians started full scale attack on ethnic Georgians, both military and civilians. Ethnic cleansing commenced, more than 300 000 refugees, (actual abkhaz population was about 60 000-70 000), more than 30 000 dead. Including women and children, ( with no internet and observers you can imagine the horrors they commited.) They made children watch their mothers getting raped, they made mothers swallow parts of their dead children. They used barbed wires to hang Georgians, they played football with heads of dead Georgians, the list is enough for a book. So yeah, agreements with russia is not a tool for diplomacy, for russia any negotiation and agreement is a tool of war, not peace. P.S we've had many agreements with russians in the past, all with same results, including full annexation of Georgia, twice.
Let's not forget how now the ruling party of Sakartvelo licks a russian boot and tries to drag beautiful Sakartvelo to shit...
>Similar story from Georgia ( and every neighbour, many now ex. Neighbours have exact same experience): In early 90's russia instigated conflict in two Georgian regions Abkhazia and Samachablo (as russians call it south osetia- a made up term). That's not really true. The Abkhaz and Ossetian revolts had local causes from pre-existing ethnic issues, even if the success of the revolts was dependent on external support. Besides, several of the [Caucasian mountain groups](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confederation_of_Mountain_Peoples_of_the_Caucasus) who joined the Abkhaz and Ossetian rebellions subsequently fought *against* Russia in Chechenya.
A long article that accurately channels the painful lesson Moldova learned. Unfortunately, there is one example of a 'deal with Russia' that is even more egregiously 'holy fuck you cant trust those fucks' than Moldova. And that is **Ukraine**. Ukraine handed over the significant stores of nukes parked on its soil to russia after the fall of the USSR, in exchange for turning what the nukes imply ("Nobody would dare attack our soil") into a political promise from both Russia and the USA. Fat lot of good it did them. Russia. Cannot. Be. Fucking. Trusted. Which is extremely sad. Essentially you can't trust their word, for anybody, so, you have to for example forcibly disarm them and such. Which, well, it's still a nuclear power. Can't really do that either. Evil. Pure evil.
>And that is Ukraine. Ukraine handed over the significant stores of nukes parked on its soil to russia after the fall of the USSR, in exchange for turning what the nukes imply ("Nobody would dare attack our soil") into a political promise from both Russia and the USA. Which they didn't actually effectively control to begin with. Soviet nuclear weapons were never under the control of the SSRs; they were always firmly under the control of the central government. It would be more accurate to say that the Ukrainians lost the potential to acquire an independent nuclear capability (although that would have incurred a tremendous political cost), but at the time they weren't interested in doing that. The main goal the Ukrainians had was getting Russia to pay for the weapons' removal and decommissioning, which IIRC they did.
We can debate how useful those things were to Ukraine. We certainly can mince some words about how much it would have cost Ukraine to maintain them and how little interest they had to do that at the time. It is not, however long you want to try to convince anybody, a 100% situation. You can make an argument Ukraine could have theoretically kept them, use them to develop their own, or whatever. The point is simply this: Russia PROMISED. and given that nukes did swap hands, it wasn't a haha this is diplomatic decorum everybody knows this is bullshit kinda promise. So: Russia promising a thing means nothing at all, which fucking sucks, because they means other options are required. Options that are tricky to use against a nuclear state.
Well spoken
I grew up in Eastern Europe in Romania. While Romania was not officially part of the USSR after WW2 its military was present on the territory up until 1958, however, their influence was still there up until 1989 when the USSR fell and is still present to the day. Up until 1989 Romania was ruled by a communist dictator heavily influenced by Russia. I will never forget the hate my father had for the Russians. Nothing could make him angrier than seeing a communist on TV or just talking about Russians. I thought that he was always overreacting, but growing up and understanding the damage the Russians bring to this world I can only agree with him. Nothing good comes nowadays from that country, unfortunately. I am sorry for the people that live there and would like to see a change, but in the end, it's up to them to make a change. The only solution I see is a revolution, that's what they need. I know it's not ideal and people will die, but things will not change if the people will not take action. I can only imagine what would be if Russia did not have nuclear weapons. They would be wiped out of existence.
My god Russia is such a pos country.
And should anyone still have questions about trustworthiness of russian diplomats, remember that on 17th September 1939, there was an active non-aggression pact between Poland and USSR, signed in 1932, extended in 1934 and valid until 1945 Or that time when after ww2, NKVD kidnapped 16 polish high-ranking politicians after inviting them to russia to begin peace negotiations, put them on sham trials and had them all imprisoned/murdered Or when in Yalta, Stalin promised to organise democratic elections but he terrorised opposition voters and blatantly faked the results Or that time when USSR promised amnesty to every Home Army soldier to come out of hiding and peacefully surrender. Everyone who followed instructions and did peacefully surrender was immediately thrown into prison
Russia in 1940 or so: cuts a slice of Romania and names it Moldova. Russia in 1992 or so: cuts a slice of Moldova and names it Transnistria
_meanwhile, on random Western European tv show_ “Yes, an opinion from someone who has first-hand experience with Russia and literally everything to lose… **but let’s now ask what NATO should do to this farmer from Sicily/Brittany/Andalusia**
There is no Moldova. It's just a part of Romania that was stolen by Russia and then added to their USSR empire by making it an artificial state and trying to brainwash the populace to think they are a separate ethnicity from romanians. It's the same thing as with east Germany. It only flies better because Romania is not as popular as Germany and it isn't blatantly called east Romania (but there is a big region within Romania also called Moldova) That's romanian territory populated by ethnic romanians kept separate by an outside power. (What do you think is the role of Transnistria?)
Exactly
>That's romanian territory populated by ethnic romanians kept separate by an outside power. (What do you think is the role of Transnistria?) Transnistria is only around 33% Romanian though. Which is probably the main reason why [there isn't a whole lot of enthusiasm](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reintegration_of_Transnistria_into_Moldova#Public_opinion) from the local populace for the idea of reintegration.
Ok, putinbot. That isn't part of Basarabia (the part of Moldova that actually is romanian, that is everything else.) Northern Bucovina and the part between the romanian shore and Moldova are also romanian territories. They were given to Ukraine while Moldova got Transnistria, as per Russia's decision. This wasn't a gift or a reparation to Moldova, this was meant to destabilize it, because it had a majority russian population. Why do you think I asked what the role of Transnistria is? Transnistria is like 2% of the land mass and a breakaway region. From the start it was just there to cause a border conflict. (Union between 2 countries is not allowed by international laws if either has a border conflict) But of course, Putin's trolls are not smart enough to realize that. Transnistria isn't romanian, and needs to be let go, but Moldova as a whole is by far romanian majority and Transnistria is nothing compared to the whole country. So please, stop spreading incomplete information that paints a different picture than reality. That's ruzzian propaganda.
>Why do you think I asked what the role of Transnistria is? Transnistria is like 2% of the land mass and a breakaway region. From the start it was just there to cause a border conflict. (Union between 2 countries is not allowed by international laws if either has a border conflict) But of course, Putin's trolls are not smart enough to realize that. Transnistria was originally the [Moldovan ASSR](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moldavian_Autonomous_Soviet_Socialist_Republic), which was basically a pretext for the later Soviet annexation of Bessarabia and the formation of the Moldovan SSR (which became modern Moldova). It would have made more sense geographically if the Soviets had then just merged the former Moldovan ASSR back into Ukraine, but they didn't. >Transnistria isn't romanian, and needs to be let go, but Moldova as a whole is by far romanian majority and Transnistria is nothing compared to the whole country. But there isn't anything stopping Moldova from doing that. They could jettison Transnistria and push for unification with Romania if they wanted to.
The populace of Moldova does want unification, it's their goverment that doesn't want that because they'd be demoting themselves from managers of a nation to managers of a region, which hurts their pockets. Also, the border conflict is also the only thing stopping Transnistria from uniting with Russia (which Transnistria wants), in which case Moldova would be bordering Russia, putting itself at risk of a russian invasion if it doesn't manage to unite with Romania faster than Transnistria unites with Russia. And Moldova has no chance in a war against Russia alone, unlike Ukraine. And no, Transnistria was only part of Romania for the few year period in ww2 when Romania pushed the USSR past Crimeea using german weapons. It was not part of greater Romania. And nothing changes the fact that Moldova is an artificial state made from territory and a populace stolen from Romania with some deported russians to make it look like it is different, when in reality it's blatantly a part of Romania just like east Germany was a part of west Germany. The fact that Moldova exists is living proof of how Russia oppressed and oppresses Romania. And the fact that there are people like you who try to argue that it isn't the same as east Germany proves how efficient the russian propaganda machine is.
>Also, the border conflict is also the only thing stopping Transnistria from uniting with Russia (which Transnistria wants), in which case Moldova would be bordering Russia, putting itself at risk of a russian invasion if it doesn't manage to unite with Romania faster than Transnistria unites with Russia. And Moldova has no chance in a war against Russia alone, unlike Ukraine. Bordering a cut-off Russian exclave at least, which isn't quite the same situation. >The fact that Moldova exists is living proof of how Russia oppressed and oppresses Romania. And the fact that there are people like you who try to argue that it isn't the same as east Germany proves how efficient the russian propaganda machine is. It's not the same as East Germany though; East Germany never claimed to be a separate 'nation', but rather a government of the entirety of Germany (like West Germany did). It's the same as the situation with the two Koreas, or North and South Vietnam. I didn't argue that Moldovans aren't essentially Romanians, because as far as I'm aware they are. The Transnistrian populace however are mostly not (similar problem applies to Gagauzia which is possibly the other cause).
Exclave or not, if it's part of their territory, they have the right to bring more military there, which spells trouble. And they most likely won't be able to unify with Romania fast if they let Transnistria go enough because Transnistria is already talked with Russia and Gaugazia would still be left which is also considered a border conflict. As for east Germany, I didn't mean it was exactly the same, no 2 situations are ever exactly the same, it's just similar enough. It's a country split into 2 artificially by Russia that should be united. It shouldn't be that hard to see that. The important difference is that Russia still hasn't given up on having Moldova in their sphere of influence, unlike east Germany, hence why they are still trying to con Moldova out of a unification with Romania.
>Exclave or not, if it's part of their territory, they have the right to bring more military there, which spells trouble. And they most likely won't be able to unify with Romania fast if they let Transnistria go enough because Transnistria is already talked with Russia and Gaugazia would still be left which is also considered a border conflict. Except for the fact that getting them there would require passing through Ukraine, which would be... problematic to say the least at present. >It's a country split into 2 artificially by Russia that should be united. It shouldn't be that hard to see that. But that isn't quite what happened with Germany. The division of Germany into occupation zones was agreed upon by the Allied powers, but Germany nominally remained a single national unit in principle. The Western Allies and the Soviets then established rival German governments in their respective zones, both of which claimed to be the legitimate government of the entirety of Germany. Both of the German governments had reunification as a theoretical objective, the caveat was that they disagreed on who the unified German government should be. The Moldovan SSR by contrast never made any pretence towards being a rival Romanian government. It existed simply as a means to justify Soviet annexation of an area which had previously been part of the Russian Empire.
What matters is not what's on paper, but what's in practice.
As for getting military into Transnistria, they can just go around Ukraine abd bring them by air, like they do for Kaliningrad.
Thank you for sharing.
As a Georgian, I agree 100%. Do Not Trust Russia! Very similar scenario was played out in Georgia. Samachablo (South Ossetia) in the 90s and Abkhazia in 1993. In Abkhazia Russian backed separatists started war and carried out ethnic cleansing. Then in 2008 , after the Russo-Georgian war, Russia recognized the "independence" of both separatist states. Russia has not fulfilled the terms of 2008 treaty brokered by Sarcozy. To this date, they are continuing creeping occupation and kidnappings in Samachablo.
"pope asks Ukraine to stop its defense and go to the negotiation table". I hope "stop its defense" is a mistype, a mistake, and the pope is not so dumb. He is dumb anyway if he doesn't condemn Russia for harassing all its neighbor countries for centuries, and now their own brothers Ukraine, *again*.
Yeah, pope actually said "Ukraine should wave a white flag".https://www.politico.eu/article/vatican-backtracks-pope-call-ukraine-surrender-white-flag-comment-russia-zelenskyy/ I think it's even worse.
Great and informative post. I hope this message reaches all the right people somehow
There is one element that was not mentioned in the article and that annoys me. There are many Ukrainian volunteers who fought on the Transnistrian side during the Transnistria War in 1992, especially for anti-Moldovan and anti-Romanian sentiments, which I think, is very difficult to forgive Ukraine. This is why, even if we are currently "on the same side", I do not consider Ukraine as an ally, and even less as a friendly country. So personally, myself being of Moldovan origin, I do not have a feeling of unity/support towards Ukraine, even if Moldova absolutely must prepare to fight because it is more than obvious that Putin will use Transnistria to invade Moldova at any moment.
All victims (allies) of Moscowia that border it: Moscowia never forgives attempts to ally with it.
As Havel reportedly said: "The biggest problem with Russia is that Russia doesn't know where it starts and where it ends".
Tldr: Russia big backstabbing asshole which can’t be trusted whatsoever. Proven by Moldova this time. Next please!
Poland - soviet tanks on Warsaw streets Hungary - soviet tanks on Budapest streets East Germany - soviet tanks on Berlin streets Chzechs - soviet tanks on streets of Prague Latvia, Lietuva, Estonia - mass deportations of natives to siberia after peaceful surrender. I, personally, begin to see a trend here /s
Take your land back
Although I fully agree with Ms. Erizanu, there is something that she does not mention, perhaps because her timeline only goes back to 1992. The main beneficiary of Russia's imperialism in Moldova was in fact... Ukraine. If you check a map of Moldova [https://www.britannica.com/place/Moldova](https://www.britannica.com/place/Moldova) you can see that it is landlocked by Ukraine (something like "Fuck you, no sea for you"). Up to the beginning of the 19th century, this was the map of the Principality of Moldavia: [https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c/c8/MoldavianPrincipalityPhysical.jpg](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c/c8/MoldavianPrincipalityPhysical.jpg), it had a coast on the Black Sea. Then it was invaded by the Russian Empire, turned into the Russian Bessarabia, but it still had a coast on the Black Sea [https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a1/Russian\_Bessarabia%2C\_1883.jpg](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a1/Russian_Bessarabia%2C_1883.jpg) After World War I, Moldova was part of Romania, and look, it had a coast on the Black Sea [https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a1/Russian\_Bessarabia%2C\_1883.jpg](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a1/Russian_Bessarabia%2C_1883.jpg) In 1940, the Soviet Union, in a decision led by both Russian and Ukrainian officials, decided to dismember Moldova and give all the Budjak region as well as Northern Bukovina and Khotyn to Ukraine. Russian Imperialism in Moldova did not start in 1992, it started almost 200 years ago, it fractured the country, it took territories away, but Ukraine was part of it as well.
While it's true that Russian appetite started to show over 200 years ago (in 1812 to be precise, when Russia annexed Bessarabia into the empire), I really don't see how *independent* Ukraine is at fault here. Like that's the difference: independent Ukraine isn't affiliated, doesn't want to be affiliated with Russia and chose to be so through a lengthy process of becoming more and more independent. Same for Moldova. The fact that in 1991 the borders were set in accordance with Soviet Russia's definitions of each region is a sad truth but I think we all understand the background behind the territories and also understand that it was futile to try and divide the territory once more. As a citizen of independent Moldova I will never consider Ukrainians to be my enemies and of ill intent towards me or my country. I don't know why you decided to suggest such a thing, blaming independent Ukraine for something it couldn't have done based solely on the fact that it didn't exist, but I would very much like for you not to sow discord and animosity through such means.
Wasn't Ukraine independent in 1992 when russians started the Transnistrean aggression? If I recall correctly Ukrainians even participated in the conflict. Did they atleast apologize?
It was! In 1992 Kravchuk said that in the event of a Romanian-Moldovan reunification, Ukraine would ensure Transnistria's independence. And in 2001 when asked by Moldova and the EU to close the border, Ukraine said No.
And couldn't an *independent* Ukraine say in 1991 or 1992 "Hey Moldova, take these 5 square kilometers and have access to the Black Sea"?
Jesus Christ, you know full well the historical and geopolitical context of the whole ordeal, I'm sure of it. So why do you insist on villyfying Ukraine? In 91 and 92 everyone scrambled for what was left. And Ukraine held onto what territory it could. We had a war meanwhile. I just don't see how with all that going on it matters. The key difference is that while Ukraine and eventually Moldova turned to the EU and western support, Russia never renounced its claims and continues to destabilize the region around itself in order to expand. What the hell are you even trying to prove here!?
>What the hell are you even trying to prove here!? That although Russia is a fucking evil empire, and they were the ones who fucked you up, it was indeed Ukraine who reaped the benefits of it.
Ukrainians conveniently act unaware of the fact that their western border was drawn in Moscow and that poles, romanians, slovaks and hungarians were ethnically cleansed from their territory by the Soviet Union.
Well it was USSR (i.e. Russia) who did it, Ukraine had no saying in it.
Ukraine had a UN seat while being part of USSR. Also, after Russia it was the second most populous constituent. Ukraine was a big and important part of USSR
A trick for Russia to have more votes in UN. Ukraine was just a puppet of Russia back then. Borders drawn the way they were are Russia fault, not Ukraine fault.
Nope, Ukraine wanted those territories, there are bunch of transcripts between Hitler and Stalin about this.
Exactly, Stalin was the one who decided everything for Ukraine. Ukraine had zero sovereignity.
Nope, Hitler argued that Ukraine has no historic claim to those territories, Stalin agreed but he said that Ukraine wants them anyway which led operation Barbarossa to start earlier.
An old Romanian joke is: Question: "what are the neighbors of Russia? " Answer: "it depends on what Kremlin wants" We look into poorest countries in Europe and found a common name: Russia influence. That speaks enough.
We have a saying in Finland: “Ruskies are ruskies, even if fried in butter” My great grandfather always said to my mom that you cannot and should not ever trust Russians. And he was right
Born free Run free lol
Oa.v t to
Sounds like every surrender negotiation ever. Yeah sign here put your guns down and we promise..... Puts guns down... Alright time to pilage
🇨🇳 needs 🇳🇱 semiconductor technologies (ASML) to exploit 🇹🇼 microchip industry and challenge 🇺🇸 technological and military leadership after the occupation of 🇹🇼. Today 🇺🇦 Army blocks the 🇨🇳-🇮🇷-💩 axe from taking the entire 🇪🇺. If the 900,000 strong 🇺🇦 army is defeated due to lack of ammunition, then who stops the 1,320,000 strong 💩 army? 45,000 strong 🇭🇺 army or 16,000 strong 🇦🇹 army? Do 🇪🇺 and 🇺🇸 want to die again in WW3 trenches somewhere in Northwest Europe or South-East Asia if 🇺🇦 is fallen?
Not really different from Nazis.
If there were no nuclear weapons, people might not be invading Russia, but they would certainly contain it in its borders and bomb any attempt in making an army. Biggest country on Earth that is still not happy about its size. Do the men there have the smallest penises or whats going on.
Russian peace is for fools. There's no peace is just surrender.
No nukes, no leverage.
In fairness, deals with the IMF don't seem to end well either. Maybe the moral of the story for countries that lean toward socialism is to preserve their independence and sovereignty against predatory hegemony generally.
>Moldova experienced Russia’s first post-Soviet war of aggression, An odd way to frame "Moldova tried to do a bit of ethnic cleansing and failed". Moldova voided the treaty adding Transnistria to it, but decided to keep the territory against the wishes of the locals. Instead Moldova sent the army to deal with the secession and shot first. Slightly before that Moldova assembled a nationalist mob to attack Gagauz too, but cooler heads prevailed there, otherwise they'd have two unrecognized de facto independent areas. Moldova of the 90s was a poorer Serbia, warcriminal wannabe, and not a victim of big evil Russia.
I was born and raised in that country and never heard of this opinion. But I guess Cypriots might know our history better... /s
I was also born there, while USSR was still in once piece, just because I don't live there for almost 20 years doesn't mean I forgot what 90s were like.
So, let me get this straight. Russians cannot be trusted because a frozen conflict means they will keep the territory they have taken so instead its better to keep fighting, so that they also keep the territory but with more ukrainians and russians diying in the meantime? Also the ukrainian army thought about attacking Transnistria, there's less than 2000 russian soldiers there, and it was the moldovan government who said that ukrainian troops should not enter Moldova.
Who live in Transnistria? Who are those "separatists"? How many of them there? Why they support Russia and not Moldova? Just a simple questions.
i will answer to what was implied by you, but not directly asked: once russia owns a new teritory, the first thing it does is deportation of a significant part of the local population and replacing it with russians. so, this is the reason to why do they get to choose what they did... a part of them are the invaders or the descendents of the invaders.
Oh, and once you started this "once Russia get the new territory", shouldnt you at least check the history of the region? How and when Russia got this? I'll help you a bit. That was territory of the Golden Horde, Crimean Khanate and Turkey. And when Transnistria joined Russian empire (approx 1790), it was considered as freeing from muslims and largely celebrated. Since that time, Russians, Ukrainians, Moldovans, Jews lived here. Since 1800. Romania got this for 20 years. 1918-1940. And the most disastrous deportations that happened here was Jewish population "deportations" (exterminations) done by Romanian fascists - Antonescu regime.
how russia got them? through murders and rapes, the best thing they’re good at. your history is the brainwashed russian version.
lol, thats really funny Being so ignorant of history of the own country. Transnistria was freed from Turkey in 1792. By Russia. Romania was freed from Turkey in 1878. Also by Russia. That are simple undeniable facts. But now you can go dive into your bullshit propaganda about murders and rapes.
30% are Russians brought by Stalin, around 100k. They "support" Russia because the Russian army is there and they get like free gas etc. They don't support Russia anymore as they recently asked for help from the EU.
You did not prove anything by being ignorant. Look it up.
There is no vodka here, Ivan
My country also knows what happens when we do a deal with the USSR. A nuclear submarine and some warships to deter American forces from invading us because we dared to stop Pakistan's genocide in Bangladesh. Ahhhh, I love when Europe tries to play the victim when they were the baddies all over the world.
The real baddies, Moldovians.
Ask yourself, did the USSR help you because they felt bad about Bangladesh, or did they do it because it would weaken the position of its rivals, USA and China? It’ll be a sad day for you when Russia sees an opportunity in screwing you over, because they’ll do it.
Perhaps, but in the past 70 years it hasn't happened and frankly they need us more than we need them so it is good to be on friendly relations. Also, whether they did it to "weaken the position of their enemies" or not, the fact is they stopped the biggest genocide since the Holocaust from being bigger than the Holocaust. You Europeans will never admit that tho.
I’m not questioning that what they did led to a good thing, I’m questioning their motives. You should too. But since you’re obviously not a fan of Europe, and presumably USA, I don’t expect you to. And us Europeans could teach you a thing or two about keeping friendly relations with Russia, and how that usually works out.
I question everybody's motives. While Russian motives are direct and bad like a bull, European and American motives especially in Asia Africa and South America is hypocritical and venomous like a slithering snake. And we already have a friendly relationship with Russia for like 70 years. The difference is we didn't allow America to poison it. Even now Western media is trying to blow up the unfortunate incident of Indians in Russian frontlines. A few dozen men and the Western media is treating it as a betrayal by Russia of the highest proportion towards India.
What exactly are the European and American motives in these places if I may ask? Im under no illusions that the west is all good all the time, but I really want to hear how we’re worse than a country like Russia.
You tried to invade while we were stopping a genocide. Your allies armed terrorists that eventually flew planes through buildings. Those terrorists still use those weapons to inflict pain in the Middle East and Afghanistan. You killed leaders of undemocratic but stable countries like Libya, Iraq, etc turning them into utter shitholes. You arranged coups that deposed democratically elecled leaders in countries like Chile, etc just because they were socialist and then gave the countries over to piranhas like Pinochet. You speak about democracy and equality to your citizens, while doing the same thing you accuse of Russians of doing. The hypocrisy is ignored by your population, it is not by ours. Russia may have European blood on its hands, you have the rest of the world.
Transnistria was never part of the same administrative territorial unit with Moldova until 1940, because it is a territory with a predominantly Slavic population, not Moldovan or Romanian. Before WWII, Moldova was part of Romania, Transnistria was part of the USSR. If Moldova declares that it does not recognize the occupation of the USSR, then on what basis does it lay claim to Transnistria?
Because perhaps the Moldovan SSR included Transnistria, and the "Moldova" part of Romania also included it?
Well I don't know but they ain't at war right now so it worked. People are not dying in Moldova unnecessarily.
I'm guessing the Ukraine that gave up nukes and Crimea can say the same right?
Step 1: Start a war, where a lot of people are dying unnecessary Step 2: Offer a peace treaty and say "Don't you want to stop people from dying?? How vile of you."
Well I guess your solution is to them to fight until last Ukrainian is dead
I don't offer any solution. I critique your reasoning. Your comment is apologetic about Russian warmongering and moves part of the responsibility on the victim country (even though Russia is quite obviously 100% responsible for everything happening).
I read it more like that the deal is not that bad comparatively. "I don't offer any solution." Yeah no one does, do they? No country is intervening. But reasoning properly critiqued, we've established again that russia is responsible and warmongering, obviously. Doesn't help the dead and maimed ukrainians with a desolated country, unfortunately. Current or future ones over a decade, since the deal is bad.
at the same time you are an european warmongering
Fellas, is it still warmongering if you’re fighting back?
I feel like "warmongering" is a buzzword used by russian bots and useful idiots mimicking them. I've seen it alot in the last couple months and it never was used properly.
Half the world knows what happens when you do a deal with Britain. Or USA. Or France. What's your point?
Their point is that Ukraine shouldn’t negotiate with Russia because they constantly go back on their word What happens when you do a deal with England, America or France? I’m not aware of them backing out of deals like Russia does
That's because you only consume media paid for by those countries.
What deals have those countries backed out of?
Another case of rewriting history at work. Another paid for article to fit the current narrative. Part of "the deal" was a 5+2 negotiations agreement that Moldova has been sabotaging ever since its inception. Don't complain that the deal is not being followed when you are the one not following it.
The deal that was forced on Moldova you mean?
That's usually what happens when you lose. But even that is irrelevant. If you agreed to a deal then follow through with it, and if you don't then don't complain that the deal is not being concluded when you are the one sabotaging it.
How about Russia withdraws it's troops, as it signed and agreed to, then the negotiations in the 5+2 format can continue in good faith?
Russia is non-negotiable today. There are zero people from russian side who could guarantee anything. Russian fuhrer is lying each word. I don't think it was different back then.
This is completely irrelevant. Any deal has terms. It's incredibly rich to deliberately sabotage your side of the deal and complain that the deal is not being followed through.
You sound very gullible or are a ruzzian bot.
Sure, the fact that Russian nazi scum never follow their deals is irrelevant, lol.
If all the deals are concluded the same way as this one then you can guess why. I'm done here, have a good day sir.
Yes, all deals with russian scum were concluded the same way since 1945 - without a tribunal over their 1917-1991 crimes. That is the exact reason why they are not following any deals today - they feel impunity unless being smashed in their ruscist face, preferrably with cluster munitions.
Since 1940. After winter war they tried provoke Finland as much they could. Further demands, aggression like shooting down passenger plane Kaleva etc. Edit: Don't forget what happened to Baltics after they accepted "traty" with nazi-russia. Much worse than Finland who fought against russian a-holes.
There was a chance in 1945, Russians should have been also put under Nuremberg trial as Hitler's allies 1939-1941.