The Instigator
benko12345678
Pro (for)
Winning
7 Points
The Contender
ManOfRet
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

Should Crimea join the Russian Federation?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
benko12345678
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/29/2014 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 896 times Debate No: 53638
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (0)
Votes (2)

 

benko12345678

Pro

Firstly, I would like to point out that 97% of Crimea support joining Russia and the protests are organized by the small oppurtunistic 3%.Also, the rights of ethnic Russians had been abused by the new Ukrainian government, which as we all know is completely corrupt and racist. Please make a valid argument that I can contradict, thank you
ManOfRet

Con

Alright. I'm up for the challenge. I assume that the actual debating begins next round, and this is just an introductory round?
Debate Round No. 1
benko12345678

Pro

It is...Truth be told, I didn't even know how this website worked when I started this debate...I thought that rounds meant the pair of arguments, one from me, one from you...We could start our argument now and stretch it out? So you can make your valid argument and I will reprise it :P
ManOfRet

Con

For the record, let it be known that I have no reason to oppose the annexation of Crimea by Russia and do, in fact, support its annexation for the purposes of peace and ethnic unification. I am simply arguing for the sake of intellectual discussion.

Now that any personal feelings have been recorded to be left out of this, I do not think that Crimea should join the Russian Federation. Why? Well, because of the fact that Crimea was a willing substituent of the Ukraine for over a decade with little worldwide consequence. Crimea is also important to Ukraine, and it would deal a blow to that nation to take it away from them. Finally, Russia has plenty of land already. Anything additional would just give them a source of arrogance and unnecessary power in the world.

It seems to me that their invasion is simply a show of force, as well as to pave the way for another Eastern Bloc, a new Soviet State. It gives them a method of training for their military (somewhat), and will simply scare the other Eastern European and Caucasus nations into submission in the event of a Russian show of force. As such, if Crimea falls, it's quite likely that a new pseudo-Cold War will break out with a Domino Effect making smaller nations submit to Russia. That is, of course, an exaggeration, but a possibility nonetheless.
Debate Round No. 2
benko12345678

Pro

While I do see a valid point in your argument (extremely rare these days) I must disagree. Crimea is more than a piece of land to the russian federation, it is a strategic piece of land, neccessary for russia's economic supremacy. Even most of UKRAINE supports Crimea joining Russia. The only ones opposed are the extremist-right-winged leaders of Ukraine.
ManOfRet

Con

Another point: there have been many mass exoduses before (Europeans to America, Jews to Israel, Muslims to Pakistan and Bangladesh, Hindus to India, etc.) to deal with this same sort of ethnic conflict. If there's an overly conflicting problem with the heavily pro-Russian constituency in Crimea, then they should just leave. It is, after all, an internationally agreed-upon territory of the Ukraine.
Debate Round No. 3
benko12345678

Pro

So you're saying that in any country where there's violence against a certain culture the victims should just leave? With that logic, shouldn't all the gypsies (forgive my terms, if you find them offensive, mail me) leave the european countries? the pre-mentioned mass-exoduses of the past weren't related to non-acceptance of their belief, but rather the fact that they were FORCED to leave or they had no choice (Like the jews-slavery)... Also, what about russia's economy? The business investment environment in Russia is far superior to Ukraine so Crimea would actually benefit from joining Russia...
ManOfRet

Con

Well, there has been no violence against the Crimean Russians, so no, that's not what I'm saying. I have simply said that the Crimea is an integral part of the Ukraine and has been for some time now. If there's an issue about the ownership of that territory, then it should go to the Ukraine due to the lasting establishment of Ukrainian nationality there.

Another thing - many of those mass exoduses had nothing to do with said race being forced to leave. It's just that millions of them decided to leave all at once. Your statement is false - forced exodus has only occurred in very specific conditions on very small scales. Genocide may be what you are thinking of, but that is not the topic of discussion at this point in time.

Finally, Crimea's business sector is very weak, as it is primarily an agricultural region, so business and investment would do little to bolster the economy of the Crimea. Crimea is more valuable to Ukraine, proportionally, than it should be to Russia. However, the Russian Federation's real need for the Ukraine is to reestablish dominance over Eastern Europe and recreate a Neo-Soviet Union. This is, of course, a negative thing to occur, as Russia would gain control over many regions and influence over many more, and Soviet influence had a negative impact on most of the countries it spread to. As a result, a Neo-Soviet influence on these same areas would likely produce a similar result. And given what happened between 1945 and 1992 as a result of Soviet influence, I'm not sure that it would be entirely beneficial to Western Nation either.
Debate Round No. 4
No comments have been posted on this debate.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Seeginomikata 3 years ago
Seeginomikata
benko12345678ManOfRetTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Reasons for voting decision: Fun fact: Crimea was only a part of Ukraine because of an accident. In the mid-late 50's the Soviets reorganized some of their republics, and handed over official administration of crimea from the Russian FSSR to the Ukraine SSR. They had no way of knowing that in 1991 Ukraine would suddenly and unexpectedly declared independence, taking Crimea with it. Oops. It's pretty understandable that Russia wants its clay back.
Vote Placed by AdamKG 3 years ago
AdamKG
benko12345678ManOfRetTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: I personally believe Crimea should remain with Ukraine and I oppose Russian occupation in Ukraine. However, pro makes the better arguments for his side. I also gave grammar to pro because of con's reference to Ukraine and "the Ukraine" and Crimea as "the Crimea". There is no "the" in their names. There are no sources used on either side.