[tiatia]

"The problem is, America didn't send any troops to Ukrain, Russia did" Well, this is open to debate. Russia DID sent troops to Crimea but was legally and contractual allowed to do so.

Counter question: Why are armed US soldiers flying to Ukraine? Dear Hunting?

http://www.krone.at/Oesterreich/Bewaffnete_US-Soldaten_in_Wi...

[rjbwork]

I didn't realize it was legal to send troops into non-contiguous territory with the intention of annexation. Can you cite the law or contract that allows that? I've never heard this theory proposed before.

[tiatia]

Well, Russia had all the rights to have troops in Crimea (a former part of Russia by the way) based on contractual agreements with Ukraine - they rented military bases there. So what you exactly saying?

1. Russia EXCEEDED the amount of troops that it was allowed to have there? I never heard this claim before. 2. That the presence of the Russian troops changed the referendum in any kind? I never heard this too. In fact, this it is the reason why nobody requests a second ballot - the result would be the same. 3. That it is illegal to secede. Secession have happened before (think Yugoslavia, think Czechoslovakia), they will happen in the future.

Please clarify your point and cite laws that Russia broke.

[EugeneOZ]

Are you and kidding? Soldiers occupied airports and military bases, that's how Crimea was annexed. Don't put that bullshit please.

[tiatia]

Which military bases were occupied? Seriously.

[tiatia]

Well, I assume that a downvote was the answer.

But considering your lack of an answer I assume you were just bullshitting.