Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Latest Breaking News
In reply to the discussion: Protesters march against Nato summit [View all]pampango
(24,692 posts)32. The 'election' in Crimea had zero credibility.
The United Nations General Assembly also rejected the vote and annexation, adopting a resolution affirming the "territorial integrity of Ukraine within its internationally recognized borders".
The means by which the referendum was conducted were widely criticized by foreign governments and in the Ukrainian and international press, with reports that anyone holding a Russian passport regardless of residency in Crimea was allowed to vote. However, Russia defended the integrity of the voting process, and a group of European observers, principally from right-wing and far-right political parties aligned with Putin, said the referendum was conducted in a free and fair manner
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annexation_of_Crimea_by_the_Russian_Federation
Vladimir Putins own Council on the Development of Civil Society and Human Rights has confirmed that the turnout for the so-called referendum on the Crimeas status was much lower than reported, and the results also far less overwhelmingly in favour of joining Russia. The same results have been reported from other sources, however this report can hardly be dismissed as seditious US propaganda. The confirmation that Russia used falsified figures to justify the annexation comes on the eve of other supposed referendums planned for two east Ukrainian oblasts.
The report finds that while the overwhelming majority of residents of Sevastopol voted for joining Russian (turnout of 50-80%), the turnout for all of Crimea was from 30-50% and only 50-60% of those voted for joining Russia.
Read more: http://khpg.org/index.php?id=1399238176
The report finds that while the overwhelming majority of residents of Sevastopol voted for joining Russian (turnout of 50-80%), the turnout for all of Crimea was from 30-50% and only 50-60% of those voted for joining Russia.
Read more: http://khpg.org/index.php?id=1399238176
Per Putin's own council, the turnout was low and a slight majority of those voting in favor of annexation. Why didn't Russia just go with these results? Instead they falsified the vote and claimed that there was 80% turnout and 94% in favor of joining Russia? (I wonder why the "European observers, principally from right-wing and far-right political parties aligned with Putin" did not catch this discrepancy in the manner in which the vote was conducted?)
The answer perhaps: using the actual turnout and vote would mean that about 22% (55% of a 40% turnout) of eligible voters voted in favor of union with Russia. It is much more 'convincing' to some if the favorable vote comes from 75% (94% of an 80% turnout) of eligible voters even if the latter numbers are made up.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
60 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
I hope they make a few people think about what still having NATO means . . .
another_liberal
Aug 2014
#2
you'd conveniently say its NATOs fault (or the US) that Russia has invaded Ukraine.
7962
Aug 2014
#5
Oh thats right, the Russians said the video was from a VIDEO GAME! Sounds like N Korea.
7962
Sep 2014
#25
I know more about Russia and Ukraine then most of the armchair warriors here do
newthinking
Sep 2014
#53
Russia's recent actions toward Ukraine have been peaceful and reactive . . .
another_liberal
Aug 2014
#13
Because Russia forms its policy by using force. And NATO isnt trying to surround them.
7962
Sep 2014
#52
Those are "what if plans and preparation" . We have them too and also conducted exercises where we
newthinking
Aug 2014
#19
You might want to re-read your post, certainly seems to apply to you as well
Lurks Often
Sep 2014
#38
No, you just want to make them vulnerable to "defensive" Russian invasion and dismemberment
Unvanguard
Sep 2014
#35
Hope they get even more to join them on Thurday. Good for them. Wish we were with them! n/t
Judi Lynn
Sep 2014
#54