this post was submitted on 11 Mar 2024
276 points (97.6% liked)

World News

39151 readers
2039 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

MOSCOW (Reuters) - Russian lawmakers have submitted a draft bill to the State Duma that would rewrite a chapter of history by nullifying the Soviet decision in 1954 to transfer Crimea from Russia to Ukraine.

The move appears aimed at establishing a legal basis for Russia to argue that Crimea, the Black Sea peninsula which it claims to have annexed from Ukraine in 2014, was never really part of Ukraine to begin with.

The draft, submitted by a lawmaker from each of Russia's two houses of parliament, describes the 1954 handover as arbitrary and illegal because no referendum was held and Soviet authorities had no right to transfer territory from one constituent republic to another without consent.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] cygnus@lemmy.ca 4 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Does any of that contradict my statement which triggered this tangent of yours? I said "The USSR’s seat was never officially given to Russia - they sort of just kept occupying it and no one told them to stop."

These snippets from your citations say the same thing practically verbatim. I'm not sure why you're so bent out of shape about this.

Members were notified that Russia claimed it was not a “successor State” but a “continuing State” with the support of the former republics of the USSR, and there was no opposition

Members said nothing at the first meetings at which “the change” was reflected.

They all knew and could see there was a change but no words were spoken on the matter.

[–] Riven@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I'm not usually one to call someone else a shill but I think the person you're replying to might be one. You're 100 percent right and they seem hell bent on trying to legitimize Russia for some reason. Even though your comment isn't even that confrontational.

[–] cygnus@lemmy.ca 2 points 8 months ago

I don't know... Usually shills won't take the time for such long-form content with citations, other than Putin himself with his "it started with the Kievan Rus" diatribe with Tucker Carlson. I'm assuming they just misunderstood what we're talking about.