| I'm sorry, but YOU are the one who is heavily exposed to a single perspective. Keep watching your CNN. I myself am from eastern europe and have first hand witnessed russian attitude towards post soviet satellite countries. Don't teach me what I know. Literally almost everything you say is wrong. Referendum was not held at gunpoint. I've seen western sources use that phrase, so I know where you got it from. It is a valid referendum because Crimea has a weird legal status, look up Autonomous republic of Crimea. No, the protest most certainly was not organized by real everyday people. Strategically taking over buildings is not what real everyday people do. I do want to argue that the situation with snipers was not one sided. Some sources say they shot at both, rioters* and the police. Notice how I use the term rioters - that was not a protest. P.S. I have no reason to be biased since I don't generally like Russians, especially the ones that stayed in satellite countries after the fall of the Soviet union. They have a habit of not learning the language and not respecting the host country. P.S.S Learn fucking Russian, so that you can get both sides of the picture, not just biased rehashes of reuters/cnn/msnbc. |
All in all I'm quite sure I've got a pretty solid grip on the situation incorporating information from all perspectives.
As for a referendum at gunpoint; it's not really debatable as it refers to armed Russian forces having taken over Crimea during the referendum.
As for it's validity; it's not about the constitutional framework, it's about the occupation, selective media blackout, voting irregularities, lack of independent international observers etc. etc. The comparison with the internationally recognized Scottisch referendum [1] explains it well.
As for taking over buildings; I don't find it at all odd that a movement consisting mostly of the general population and also militant far-right extremists (disproportionately present due to obvious selection bias) operates strategically in a way that maximised disruption. Self-organisation is a much more likely explanation than nefarious foreign strategic advice.
As for the snipers; are you seriously arguing that the US shot these protesters as a false flag operation?
It sounds to me like, at the core, you just can't comprehend a bona-fide populist uprising lying the root of Euromaidan.
Have you considered that that might be because at some level it invalidates the learned helplessness many in post-Soviet states were raised with?
[1] https://secure.flickr.com/photos/foreignoffice/13306114335/