Quote:
Originally Posted by Pointman
Crimea was bloodless.
Crimea is small.
Crimea has mostly Russian ethnic population.
Crimea is essentially Russian land that was transferred to Ukraine under dubious circumstances.
But mostly it was about being bloodless.
In other wars Russia actually never gained new lands. Chechnya is within Russian borders and it has become a terrorists cesspool. It was necessarily.
Georgia war - it was kind of madness, but not at this scale. It was fast and Russia did not gain any land. Russia achieved a quick win but I'm still not sure what was the point. Unlike Ukraine, it wasn't militaristic failure, but I don't get what Russia gained from its success.
Bombing Kyiv was on another level altogether. That would be like USA turning on Canada after successful minor wars against Serbia, Iraq and Lybia.
|
Less than 6 per cent of Crimea’s written history (from the 9th century BC to date) belongs to the Russian chapter. Before 2014, Crimea was under Russian control for a total of only 168 years.
157 In fact, Russia is just one of several powers that have aimed to dominate the peninsula. At the dawn of its history, Crimea was a Greek land. It later developed at the intersection of different civilizations and empires. Until the mid-15th century, the peninsula was a space of unique cohabitation between the Khanate of Crimea, Genoese colonies on the coast and the Principality of Theodor (Byzantium) in the southwest. Thereafter, the khanate expanded and became, for over 300 years, a dominant power as a protectorate under the Ottoman Empire. Crimea was an Orient in miniature, with a Turkic-Muslim culture.
https://www.chathamhouse.org/2021/05...always-russian