Comments by "Valen Ron" (@valenrn8657) on "Why Does Russia Hate the West (and NATO) - TLDR News" video.
-
34
-
10
-
6
-
@michaelmanning5379 The Crimean Tatars were formed as a people in Crimea and are descendants of various peoples who lived in Crimea in different historical eras. The main ethnic groups that inhabited the Crimea at various times and took part in the formation of the Crimean Tatar people are Tauri, Scythians, Sarmatians, Alans, Greeks, Goths, Bulgars, Khazars, Pechenegs, Italians and Circassians.
At the beginning of the 13th century, the Crimea, the majority of the population of which was already composed of a Turkic people — Cumans, became a part of the Golden Horde. The Crimean Tatars mostly adopted Islam in the 14th century and thereafter Crimea became one of the centers of Islamic civilization in Eastern Europe. In the same century, trends towards separatism appeared in the Crimean Ulus of the Golden Horde. De facto independence of the Crimea from the Golden Horde may be counted since the beginning of princess (khanum) Canike's, the daughter of the powerful Khan of the Golden Horde Tokhtamysh and the wife of the founder of the Nogai Horde Edigey, reign in the peninsula. During her reign she strongly supported Hacı Giray in the struggle for the Crimean throne until her death in 1437. Following the death of Сanike, the situation of Hacı Giray in Crimea weakened and he was forced to leave Crimea for Lithuania.
The Crimean Tatars emerged as a nation at the time of the Crimean Khanate, an Ottoman vassal state during the 16th to 18th centuries.[50] Russian historian, doctor of history, Professor of the Russian Academy of Sciences Ilya Zaytsev writes that analysis of historical data shows that the influence of Turkey on the policy of the Crimea was not as high as it was reported in old Turkish sources and Imperial Russian ones.[51] The Turkic-speaking population of Crimea had mostly adopted Islam already in the 14th century, following the conversion of Ozbeg Khan of the Golden Horde.[52] By the time of the first Russian invasion of Crimea in 1736, the Khan's archives and libraries were famous throughout the Islamic world, and under Khan Krym-Girei the city of Aqmescit was endowed with piped water, sewerage and a theatre where Molière was performed in French, while the port of Kezlev stood comparison with Rotterdam and Bakhchysarai, the capital, was described as Europe's cleanest and greenest city
5
-
4
-
4
-
3
-
3
-
@dorinpopa6962
Ukrainian's ethnic groups
Before WW2,
Census 1926
Ukrainians: 80% (23,218,860)
Russian: 9.2% (2,677,166) <------
Census 1939
Ukrainians: 76.5% (23,667,509)
Russian: 13.5% , (4,175,299). Russians flooding into Ukraine.
After WW2.
Census 1989
Ukrainians: 72.7% (37,419,053)
Russian: 22.1% (11,355,582) <------
Census 2001
Ukrainians: 77.5% (37,541,693)
Russian: 17.2% (8,334,141) <------ //Post Soveit Union, Russians heading back to Russian Federation.
Russia slicing Crimea (2.4 million population) from Ukraine has further increased Ukrainian's proportion.
The separatist movement's border is limited from Donetsk city to Debaltseve to Lukansk city line.
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@AlphaHorst Nope, the English language has a Germanic framework with many French/Latin loan words.
English's French loan words were before 1316–1328 "100-year war against France".
Most of the French vocabulary now appearing in English was imported over the centuries following the Norman Conquest of 1066, when England came under the administration of Norman-speaking peoples. William the Conqueror invaded the British Isles, distributing lands and property to Norman, Breton, Flemish, and French soldiers. As a result, Old French became the language of culture and the administration, evolving into Anglo-Norman French. The majority of the population of England continued to use their Anglo-Saxon language, but it was influenced by the language of the ruling elite, resulting in doublets.
You should read up on those things before you make such a statement.
1
-
1
-
1
-
@alexsilent5603 From the same The Guardian news article
The Russians had moved mercenaries and paramilitary forces into South Ossetia in apparent preparation for armed hostilities before Saakashvili's disastrous offensive, which triggered a Russian invasion and left his country partitioned. But the proper Russian reponse to the artillery barrage came – by land, sea and air – 12 hours after the Georgian action.
The report concluded that South Ossetian irregular forces violated the rules of war in attacks on Georgian villages and that Russian peacekeeping forces "would not or could not" control them. Russian claims of Georgian "genocide" in South Ossetia were dismissed and Russian claims that Georgians had killed 2,000 civilians were found to be wildly exaggerated. The report put the figure of civilian dead at 162 on the South Ossetian side.
The secession of South Ossetia and Abkhazia from Georgia was branded illegal and Russian recognition of the two "states" in breach of international law.The report found that Moscow had been assiduously preparing the secession by, among other things, a policy of "passportification", illegally distributing Russian passports on a mass scale among the breakaway populations
It traced the conflict back to the early 90s and the fallout from the collapse of the Soviet Union and accused the Kremlin of abusing its status as a "great power" to coerce "a small and insubordinate neighbour."
The Russian forces in South Ossetia failed to stop irregulars conduct a campaign of ethnic cleansing against Georgian villages, entailing looting, rape, hostage-taking, and arbitrary arrest.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@СергейКорепин-к1о
1918,
1. Allied intervention in the Russian Civil War consisted of a series of multi-national military expeditions which began in 1918. The Allies first had the goal of helping the Czechoslovak Legion in securing supplies of munitions and armaments in Russian ports. At times between 1918 and 1920 the Czechoslovak Legion controlled the entire Trans-Siberian Railway and several major cities in Siberia. By 1919 the goal was to help the White forces in the Russian Civil War .
2. The goals of these small-scale interventions were partly to stop Germany from exploiting Russian resources , to defeat the Central Powers, and to support some of the Allied forces that had become trapped within Russia after the Bolshevik revolution. Allied troops also landed in Arkhangelsk and in Vladivostok as part of the North Russia intervention and Siberian intervention.
The Czechoslovak Legion was at times in control of most of the Trans-Siberian railway and all major cities in Siberia. Austro-Hungarian prisoners were of a number of various nationalities; some Czechoslovak POWs deserted to the Russian Army. Czechoslovaks had long desired to create their own independent state, and the Russians aided in establishing special Czechoslovak units (the Czechoslovak Legions) to fight the Central Powers.
The signing of the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk ensured that prisoners-of-war (POW) would be repatriated. In 1917, the Bolsheviks stated that if the Czechoslovak Legions remained neutral and agreed to leave Russia, they would be granted safe passage through Siberia en route to France via Vladivostok to fight with the Allied forces on the Western Front. The Czechoslovak Legions travelled via the Trans-Siberian Railway to Vladivostok. However, fighting between the Legions and the Bolsheviks erupted in May 1918.
Allied concerns
The Allied Powers became concerned at the collapse of the Eastern Front and the loss of their Tsarist ally to communism, and there was also the question of the large quantities of supplies and equipment in Russian ports, which the Allied Powers feared might be seized by the Germans. Also worrisome to the Allied Powers was the April 1918 landing of a division of German troops in Finland, increasing speculation they might attempt to capture the Murmansk-Petrograd railway, and subsequently the strategic port of Murmansk and possibly Arkhangelsk.
Other concerns regarded the potential destruction of the Czechoslovak Legions and the threat of Bolshevism, the nature of which worried many Allied governments. Meanwhile, Allied materiel in transit quickly accumulated in the warehouses in Arkhangelsk and Murmansk. Estonia had established a national army with the support of Finnish volunteers and were defending against the 7th Red Army's attack
Faced with these events, the British and French governments decided upon an Allied military intervention in Russia. Ironically, however, the first British landing in Russia came at the request of a local (Bolshevik) Soviet council. Fearing a German attack on the town, the Murmansk Soviet requested that the Allies landed troops for protection. British troops arrived on 4 March 1918, the day after the signing of the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk between Germany and the Bolshevik government.
(Bolshevik) Soviet council requested aid from the British against the Germans. LOL
1
-
@СергейКорепин-к1о The Russian Revolution has gone down in history as the victory of the workers and peasants over the Czarist rulers. Few people realize the German Kaiser was also involved: He gave aid to the Bolsheviks in 1917.
Be careful to not choke on your aspirations.
In the end, Russia itself terminated USSR.
The Russian borders established by the Treaty_of_Brest-Litovsk bear an almost exact similarity to the post-1991 borders established after the fall of the Soviet Union.
The Treaty of Brest-Litovsk meant that Russia now was helping Germany win the war by freeing up a million German soldiers for the Western Front and by "relinquishing much of Russia's food supply, industrial base, fuel supplies, and communications with Western Europe". According to historian Spencer Tucker, the Allied Powers felt that "The treaty was the ultimate betrayal of the Allied cause and sowed the seeds for the Cold War. With Brest-Litovsk, the spectre of German domination in Eastern Europe threatened to become reality, and the Allies now began to think seriously about military intervention [in Russia]."
For the Western Allied Powers, the terms that Germany had imposed on Russia were interpreted as a warning of what to expect if the Central Powers won the war. Between Brest-Litovsk and the point when the situation in the Western Front became dire, some officials in the German government and the high command began to favor offering more lenient terms to the Allied Powers in exchange for their recognition of German gains in the east.
The treaty marked a significant contraction of the territory controlled by the Bolsheviks or that they could lay claim to as effective successors of the Russian Empire. While the independence of Poland was already accepted by them in principle, and Lenin had signed a document accepting the Finnish independence, the loss of Ukraine and the Baltics created, from the Bolshevik perspective, dangerous bases of anti-Bolshevik military activity in the subsequent Russian Civil War (1918–1922).
However, Bolshevik control of Ukraine and Transcaucasia was at the time fragile or non-existent.[43] Many Russian nationalists and some revolutionaries were furious at the Bolsheviks' acceptance of the treaty and joined forces to fight them. Non-Russians who inhabited the lands lost by Bolshevik Russia in the treaty saw the changes as an opportunity to set up independent states.
1
-
1
-
1