Was Russian annexation of Crimea legal?
Was Russian annexation of Crimea legal?
Yes
Yes.
ALLS FAIR IN LOVE AND WAR
except spam posters. They are immoral
Yes. Who cares, Ukraine is fucking garbage anyway.
No
This is what my dream woman looks like.
Ukraine isn't actually real, you fools. It doesn't exist.
Mossad allowed it in exchange to secret data.
Her sincere piety is what makes me admire her.
Yes
Crimea was an independent state that then became a part of Russia
Legality is whatever you can get away with.
>annexation
No it wasn't. It was a home welcoming
It's whatever mommy says it is.
she works for us
USA let annex happen
>Was Russian annexation of Crimea legal?
HERE IS YOUR ANSWER.
“CRIMEA” !!!
For those of you who are sincerely interested learning both sides of the story about CRIMEA and RUSSIA and PUTIN
here is a very interesting interview with PUTIN.
(click on CC in YouTube to turn On English subtitles)
Yes this is a long interview, so only serious ‘students' of political science will watch this.
ENJOY...VERY WELL PRODUCED DOCUMENTARY
"Crimea.The Way Home. Documentary by Andrey Kondrashev"
The Film was made to keep in history every significant episode that happened in Crimea in Spring 2014.
It took 8 months to finish the film and enveloped Simferopol and Kerch, Yalta and Bakhchisaray; Feodosia, Djankov, Alushta and a dozen settlements of Crimea.
youtube.com
nice cover OP. post more mummy
Yes , right of conquest
It was not "legal" or "illegal" because there are no laws at this level, only right of the strong.
Nobody gives a fuck when JewSA invades nations at the other side of the globe from it, but the moment one tries to sort out business near their own borders, kike stooges at UN screech how illegal it is.
Yes, it was the result of the people voting on a UN resolution in a way that the UN didn't like. They thought they would vote for independence, so when they didn't, then the vote didn't count. Like Brexit.
Mommy was there so that make's it legal on my eyes
Who gives a shit? Post more mummy!
who cares? remember, legality is just a bunch of hebe lawyers.
Absolutely. Ukraine isn't a real country.
I think the line of though goes "might makes right" when the greater power has nuclear weapons at their disposal and their battle doctrine calls for their tactical use in a conventional war.
Who is going to stop them? What is the ultimate thing that defines legality? Force.
Are you going to start a thermonuclear war in order to enforce the legality of the situation? I guess it's legal then.
>Was Russian annexation of Crimea legal?
It's more legal than China's annexation of the south china seas all the way down to indonesia.
anything is legal when you have right to power and enough guns
100% using the same justification NATO used to invade the former Yugoslavia. That's what makes it so funny.
Who fucking cares if a bunch of Jews approved the action? Are you some kind of faggot?
No. Russians are cancer and so is that FSB whore.
every russian annexiation of anything is legal!
Correction: the russian government is cancer.
She lost her innocence a long time ago. Why does Jow Forums venerate this whore?
Hahaha. Fuck off faggot
Doesn’t matter. All of Ukraine, Belarus, the Baltic’s, the Causcus region, the Stan’s,, and Moldova is rightfully Russian
Your wages are lower than ours and we are literally one of the poorest countries of europe.
>Praise Putin!
Russia is relevant though and Portugal isn’t.
I'd rather Russians come to my country than the 3rd world shitskins mate
That’s not even a thing kike filth
The vote legalized it as no legal government in Ukraine existed
mommy can do whatever the fuck she wants
Figures. They play some anons like puppets.
Who cares?
kırım is 100% turkish clay!
The Russians are smarter but just as niggerish. We still have to hunt down their mobsters here from time to time.
Right of conquest is the only valid way for a country to claim any territory.russian rule in Crimea is legitimate because they took it and hold it with their soldiers
not our concern, let the EUcucks deal with this shit themselves. maybe we can sell them weapons to profit off of the shitshow
stinking homo turd detected
>tzar picture
it was democratic
you have to be very stupid to name your country after some ugly bird...lol
it was legal mum said so
i don't like you!
Then why are you all so perpetually butthurt over israel removing mudslimes?
eat shit stinking smelly turk
>tf
>tp
It was on paper, therefore; LEGAL, in the strictest sense of the Word.
Wether it was a lawfully legal referendum or not is probably what you're asking to debate, I'd assume.
Yes referendum with zero civilian casualties or otherwise...
the preceding coupe in ukraine by the west globohomos was not "legal"
>legal
there is no legal in war user.
that said, no.
redpilled
Basically Russians did what Germany did to start ww2 but the world chipped out because Germany wanted Danzig back.
But no gives a fuck about Ukraine.
Chimped out not chipped
Legal is a term of consensus formed by those who want it and rejected by those who it doesn't benifit
Kosovo was wanted by western countries so it was legal regardless of what Serbia wanted
crimea was legal because Russia wanted it regardless of what Ukraine wanted
You see it's a matter it doesn't matter what you think
>not supporting nukes and bombers on your borders
>supporting your fellow Russians leaving an American coup owned chocolate and whore factory "country"
>hail putin
NATONpc bot brainlets
It was an act of self-determination, which is a cardinal principle in modern international law
Russian troops were permitted in Crimea according to 1997 treaties
so nothing really illegal and mum knows it
F U C K O F F K I K E
Everything written is "legal", in war or not.
Latin word Legis, Leges, Legem = law(s), Legas = read
--------------Scribo, Scriptum = write, engrave, etc
It was a paper referendum, and therefore it is Law.
That's why the Constitution of the United State is "legally binding" because it is WRITTEN.
Legislate = LAWGIVER in Latinx
you just KNOW she's naked under there
Hitler didn't stop in Danzig and captured Warsaw, Germany-Poland in WW2 was full-out war, while Crimea was reunified without a single shot fired
Me next!
milk me mummy
>Was Russian annexation of Crimea legal?
sure ok
Mummy deep fakes WHEN???
no, but in international relations 'legal' is mostly a matter of opinion
No, but who cares
Who gives a flying rats ass about crimea?
She's the only woman I would actually die for
Legit one of the only women I would approve of leading a country. I hope she runs for Russian President.
-Ukraine was going to make economic agreement with EU.
-Changes mind and decides to make with Russia instead
-United states gov and george soros give money to NGO's to agitate for a color revolution in the country.
-west pulls off successful coup and replaces government with racist neo nazi anti russian government.
-Crimea is full of Russians, and doesnt want to be ruled by anti russian government and doesnt see coup as legitimate
-Crimea holds referendum and votes something like 97% leave ukraine and be ruled by Russia instead.
-Putin annexes Crimea
Of these 4 choices ho should get to decide which government rules over crimea?
1 United states and other western powers
2 ukrainian coup government.
3 Russian Government
4 People of Crimea
In a perfect world government serves the people and gets its power from the consent of the governed. So the correct answer is the people of Crimea should get to decide and they have chosen Russia.
Its not like ukraine borders are sacred and eternal.
>crimea was legal because Russia wanted it regardless of what Ukraine wanted
>You see it's a matter it doesn't matter what you think
WRONG !!!
Educate yourself, you have no clue how and why and when Crimea was "given" by Russia to Ukraine as a "gift".
HERE:
>-Ukraine was going to make economic agreement with EU.
>-Changes mind and decides to make with Russia instead
Previous President of Ukraine, Viktor Yanukovych knew that UE can not be trusted and that the UE would eventually fuck Ukraine BIG TIME.
Here is interesting article if you are willing to read it.
One quote from it:
"Special Report: Why Ukraine spurned the EU and embraced Russia"
Others say Yanukovich’s desire to forge closer links with the EU was genuine,
but that he became dismayed when he felt the EU failed to acknowledge the scale of the financial difficulties he would face if he chose Brussels over Moscow.
Yanukovich estimated that he needed $160 billion over three years to make up for the trade Ukraine stood to lose with Russia,
and to help cushion the pain from reforms the EU was demanding.
The EU refused to give such a sum, which it said was exaggerated and unjustified.
The EU offered 610 million euros ($839 million) immediately. EU officials said increased trade, combined with various aid and financing programs,
might go some way to providing Kiev with the investment it needed.
An EU source said Ukraine could have been in line to receive at least 19 billion euros in EU loans and grants over the next seven years if it had signed a trade and cooperation agreement
and reached a deal with the IMF. But that sum was not mentioned to Ukraine officials during negotiations, said the source.
To Ukraine, there seemed little prospect of getting the EU, already struggling to help its indebted members, to offer a better deal than its original offer.
Oliynyk, who is Ukraine’s permanent representative for NATO, and others were furious. He told Reuters that when Ukraine turned to Europe’s officials for help, they “spat on us.”
Who is this cum connoisseur?
Sending a billion slavs into peacefull ukraine and getting them to vote in a dictor is a warcrime