Ukraine - Russia Conflict

[A Person]

What is this document about?

Results from the Ukrainian independence referendum of 1991. Universal absolute majority, even in the most Russophile areas, in favor of an independent Ukraine...

One of the biggest mistakes, in hind sight seems to be that Russia decided to declare it as a special military operation. Thereby restricting its own forces and that allowed Nato+EU to provide full support to Ukraine. Had it been declared as a WAR on Ukraine, by now complete Ukraine would have been over run by Russia and any nation which provided anykind of support to Ukraine too would have automatically become an enemy and fit to be attacked and destroyed by Russian forces.

First, full support would have been actual intervention of NATO/EU troops in Ukraine, for example to establish a no-fly zone. Such a thing has absolutly not happened, so the western support to Ukraine is actually lesser than the USSR support to the Viet Minh during the Vietnam war, or to the North Koreans in the Korean War. Both instances in which the Russians sent troops as well as materiel to fight against the Americans, despite not being belligerent.

But I guess what's good for the Russian goose is not good for the American gander, or something...

Secondly, you keep overestimating the Russian forces. Isn't it blatant enough already? They don't want to fight. They are there because they're coerced to be there. They've got a hard enough time against the Ukrainians -- even before those got western supplies, just try to remember the utter failure of the Kyiv siege -- they'd piss their pants at the thought of going against real NATO forces supported by real NATO airpower.

Buddy, Kalinningrad was never part of Ukraine

Indeed! It was German. Köningsberg. So don't you think it should be given back to Germany?

What you see of Eastern Ukraine was actually a part of Russia even before WW1. Please get your facts correct first and study the history of this area first. What is now being called as Novo Rossiya is that actual territory which belonged to Tzars Russia and was made a part of Ukraine to carve out a new nation within USSR after WW2.

What's great with old maps is that you can make them say what you want. The history of Ukraine is much older than the USSR.

Look at the territories of the Cossacks as well as the Sloboda Ukraine region that, while part of the Russian Empire, was settled by Cossack immigrants.

The Crimean Khanate was a sparsely populated area -- when the Russian Empire conquered it, they resettled it pretty much like western European powers settled the New World. Hence the namee Novorossiya, which follows the exact same naming trend as New England or Nouvelle France. But these areas were not settled just by Russians. They were settled by anyone the Tzar could convince to come exploit these wild lands. And yes that included Ukrainians, but also Germans, Poles, Greeks, and whoever else could be convinced to come.

Like there's a New York in Ukraine, it was founded by German settlers whose leader had an American-born wife. We're not talking about land that had been Russian for millennia here, we're talking about largely depopulated land that was resettled by Russia in the 19th century. So it's about as Russian as America is British.

 

[Bon Plan]

Probably they won't use nukes against Russian territory but they could certainly take out the Russian navy with conventional weapons very quickly. And then it would have no use for Sevastopol.

They can built a harbour elsewhere than Sevastopol

 

[BMD]

‘It’s Not an Army Here’: Russian Soldier Warns of Battlefield Collapse

Anadolu Agency via GettyRussia is said to be canceling plans to send new troops to Ukraine as more of its service members are reportedly refusing to fight following humiliating losses on the battlefield.Ukrainian intelligence reported Wednesday that members of the 5th Separate Tank Brigade of...

www.yahoo.com

Exclusive-As war began, Putin rejected a Ukraine peace deal recommended by his aide: sources

Vladimir Putin's chief envoy on Ukraine told the Russian leader as the war began that he had struck a provisional deal with Kyiv that would satisfy Russia's demand that Ukraine stay out of NATO, but Putin rejected it and pressed ahead with his military campaign, according to three people close...

www.yahoo.com

They can built a harbour elsewhere than Sevastopol

But they'll have no ships either way if they use a nuke.

 

[A Person]

Odessa is a city created and established by Katherine the Great and she was a Russian.

Wrong!

It was created in the sixth century BCE by the Greeks. (It's thought that the mother city to this colony was Histria, now corresponding roughly to Dobruja in Romania.)

It changed hands many times through history. It was conquered by the Golden Horde, then the Italian city-state of Genoa took it in the 14th century and called it Ginestra, then in the 15th century it was taken by the Crimean Khanate and renamed Khadjibey, which ceded it to the Grand Duchy of Lithuania which transformed the Crimean name to Kotsibijiv. After that the Ottoman Empire conquered it and renamed it Yeni Dünya. A Polish magnate, Antoni Protazy Potocki, started investing in the development of what was back then mostly a fishing village with a fortress to turn it into a trade hub for the Polish Black Sea Trading Company.

That's when Queen Catherine conquered it in the 18th century. For the anecdote, the place was seized by Zaporizhian Cossacks (i.e.: Ukrainians) under the order of José de Ribas, who was an Irish-Spanish person born in Italy. The city was renamed Odessa, a name chosen in homage to the Greek colony of Odessos that was then thought to have been there historically (cf. above), though now historians tend to think the actual Odessos is modern day Varna in Bulgaria.

The modern city of Odessa, though, was created by Armand-Emmanuel de Vignerot du Plessis, duc de Richelieu, who as you can guess was a French man which Tsar Alexander 1 had appointed governor of the city. He used the services of Italian architects Francesco Carlo Boffo and Giovanni Torricelli. Because of that, Odessan architecture is distinctly Mediterranean, resembling a French or Italian city much more than a Russian one.

The city of Odessa was extremely multi-ethnic, with colonists coming from just about everywhere. Moldovan were the largest demographic group, and to this day an entire district is known as Moldavanka. But there were also Albanians, Armenians, Azeris, Bulgarians, Crimean Tatars, French, Germans, Greeks, Italians, Jews, Poles, Romanians, Russians, Turks, Ukrainians. Russian poet Pushkin, which lived there from 1823 to 1824, wrote "the air is filled with all Europe, French is spoken and there are European papers and magazines to read".

 

[BMD]

My friend, you do not even know how the world is changing. Blinken was publicly rebuked by the FM of South Africa in the joint presser wherein She said that Europe's problems cant be a problem for rest of the world and they must stop lecturing others to follow them. It is available on youtube go and watch it as to how humiliating it was for Blinken. The world is changing rapidly due to this war and the world will be very different if WW3 breaks out. You might find China, India and other 153 countries supporting Russia against 57 countries. Plus how of these 57 will actually be part of the war mongers will be seen only when the WW3 actually breaks out.
One unsolicited advice I have for you. Please build a nuke bunker with sufficient stock of food and medicines and water as Russians have openly stated that first nuke fired by them will be on London.
Do you know when did Ukraine came into existance and how? USSR was formed in 1922 after Bolsheviks had toppled most governments in the former USSR and all of them joined in a Union. After that in 1922, Russian territories were reorganised and that is how Ukraine was created. NIkita Khruschev was an Ukraininan and was made the leader of Russian Communist party in 1938. he succeded Stalin in 1953-54.
Odessa is a city created and established by Katherine the Great and she was a Russian.
regarding Kaliningrad, I want to ask you, which date in the history of mankind can be taken as the fianl date for limiting the territorial limits of any nation? The while world was reshaped after WW2 when nations all across the world got reorganised and colonial system vanished. Can we look at the world as final after the end of WW2 to decide about the boundaries of a nation?
Qouting Greeks for Crimea is fine for you which was some 2000 yrs back but I quoting Pagan worship in Russia till 989AD is bullshit for you.

Go for it. Nobody cares what kind of fruitcake organisation a couple of dictatorships are forming with the incredibly gullible.

"Europe's problems can't be a problem for the rest of the world." How come Africa's problems are never their own when it comes to aid, relief efforts and refugees. F*cking hypocrite. The real irony here - Europe's problem quite literally is their problem, they too became too reliant on Russian energy exports.

You are so incredibly naive. What would happen to democracies if Russia and China win? This is Chandra Bose Syndrome all over again, except this time it's even worse, because it's not just a matter of supporting the world's worst regimes, it's a matter that the people you're supporting them against are simply trying to help defend a sovereign democracy from takeover.

I don't live anywhere near London. And I'm sure that the first 50 nukes fired by 3 NATO countries in response to that nuke will all be at Moscow.

The Cossack Hetmanate existed before that. And it's like saying that India in its present state didn't exist until after Britain set its borders. Before that, there were various territories occupied by various empires and rulers. Poland and Lithuania have an earlier claim anyway, as do they Greeks.

Do you want to live in a world where borders keep getting redecided by force with no consequences? That would basically be a continual world war. As regards Russia, it already has more than enough territory and resources, in fact that's really the main problem here when you boil it all down. People aren't really protesting about Europe's problems becoming the world's problems, they're protesting because Russia already controls far too much of the world's resources, which allows them to make the world suffer every time they get checked for doing something ridiculous. But if unchecked what happens? Much more of the same is what, and the problem grows rather than diminishing, or at least being limited.

Your last sentence isn't even in what I would call English. "Pagan worship," what the hell are you on about?

 

[vstol Jockey]

Results from the Ukrainian independence referendum of 1991. Universal absolute majority, even in the most Russophile areas, in favor of an independent Ukraine...

Why did you not post the 2014 voting pattern and that of 2019 when Zelensky came back to power on the promise of raproachment with Russia and better deal for the eastern Ukraine?

First, full support would have been actual intervention of NATO/EU troops in Ukraine, for example to establish a no-fly zone. Such a thing has absolutly not happened, so the western support to Ukraine is actually lesser than the USSR support to the Viet Minh during the Vietnam war, or to the North Koreans in the Korean War. Both instances in which the Russians sent troops as well as materiel to fight against the Americans, despite not being belligerent.

Let me see who in the world has balls big enough to enforce a no fly zone over Ukraine. That will be the end of the world. Lavrov had very clearly stated," what is the use of the world for us if Russia is not part of it". Try and push them, London first and the biggest jokers of the world called Americans next. ASnd for all yo know, Russia might get joined by China to finish you all once and for all. WW3 will also have alliances like WW1 & WW2. Dont you agree?

Secondly, you keep overestimating the Russian forces. Isn't it blatant enough already? They don't want to fight. They are there because they're coerced to be there. They've got a hard enough time against the Ukrainians -- even before those got western supplies, just try to remember the utter failure of the Kyiv siege -- they'd piss their pants at the thought of going against real NATO forces supported by real NATO airpower.

Russia has used very limited forces of its own and not even mobilised. Please read about how Russian armed forces are organised. They can create an army of over 20million in just three months and their industrial base is far bigger than the combined strength of NATO+EU. Till now Russian forces comprised of contract soldiers with material support from Russian army that too using mostly old stock of weaponary. But once Russian army directly enters the battle, the situation will be very very different and what all Russia has kept back till now will come into full force. Fear it.

Indeed! It was German. Köningsberg. So don't you think it should be given back to Germany?

But did Germany asked for it? Or have they asked for it to be returned to them? The truth is that even they invaded it and made it a part of their country.

Look at the territories of the Cossacks as well as the Sloboda Ukraine region that, while part of the Russian Empire, was settled by Cossack immigrants.

The Crimean Khanate was a sparsely populated area -- when the Russian Empire conquered it, they resettled it pretty much like western European powers settled the New World. Hence the namee Novorossiya, which follows the exact same naming trend as New England or Nouvelle France. But these areas were not settled just by Russians. They were settled by anyone the Tzar could convince to come exploit these wild lands. And yes that included Ukrainians, but also Germans, Poles, Greeks, and whoever else could be convinced to come.

Like there's a New York in Ukraine, it was founded by German settlers whose leader had an American-born wife. We're not talking about land that had been Russian for millennia here, we're talking about largely depopulated land that was resettled by Russia in the 19th century. So it's about as Russian as America is British.

Your argument falls flat as other than mass genocide of original settlers as done by Europeans has not been done by slavic civilisations. It was and remains the hallmark of saxons, Gaulles and Anglo saxons. Who lived in USA before 1492 or say 1600s and who lived in Australia till 18th century and where are they now and how many of them are actually alive? Tell me how many such genocides were done by people of Russia in history including the time of Russian Empire?
Do you know what was Europe of medievial times? A continent of theives, looters and prostitutes. read your history and you will know.

 

[BMD]

Your argument falls flat as other than mass genocide of original settlers as done by Europeans has not been done by slavic civilisations. It was and remains the hallmark of saxons, Gaulles and Anglo saxons. Who lived in USA before 1492 or say 1600s and who lived in Australia till 18th century and where are they now and how many of them are actually alive? Tell me how many such genocides were done by people of Russia in history including the time of Russian Empire?
Do you know what was Europe of medievial times? A continent of theives, looters and prostitutes. read your history and you will know.

The largest genocides in history were all committed by either Russian, or Russian-backed/created regimes.

Oh please, and Indian rulers never took anything during their empires?

But did Germany asked for it? Or have they asked for it to be returned to them? The truth is that even they invaded it and made it a part of their country.

Why, do you think Russia would give it to them?

 

[vstol Jockey]

Wrong!

It was created in the sixth century BCE by the Greeks. (It's thought that the mother city to this colony was Histria, now corresponding roughly to Dobruja in Romania.)

It changed hands many times through history. It was conquered by the Golden Horde, then the Italian city-state of Genoa took it in the 14th century and called it Ginestra, then in the 15th century it was taken by the Crimean Khanate and renamed Khadjibey, which ceded it to the Grand Duchy of Lithuania which transformed the Crimean name to Kotsibijiv. After that the Ottoman Empire conquered it and renamed it Yeni Dünya. A Polish magnate, Antoni Protazy Potocki, started investing in the development of what was back then mostly a fishing village with a fortress to turn it into a trade hub for the Polish Black Sea Trading Company.

That's when Queen Catherine conquered it in the 18th century. For the anecdote, the place was seized by Zaporizhian Cossacks (i.e.: Ukrainians) under the order of José de Ribas, who was an Irish-Spanish person born in Italy. The city was renamed Odessa, a name chosen in homage to the Greek colony of Odessos that was then thought to have been there historically (cf. above), though now historians tend to think the actual Odessos is modern day Varna in Bulgaria.

The modern city of Odessa, though, was created by Armand-Emmanuel de Vignerot du Plessis, duc de Richelieu, who as you can guess was a French man which Tsar Alexander 1 had appointed governor of the city. He used the services of Italian architects Francesco Carlo Boffo and Giovanni Torricelli. Because of that, Odessan architecture is distinctly Mediterranean, resembling a French or Italian city much more than a Russian one.

The city of Odessa was extremely multi-ethnic, with colonists coming from just about everywhere. Moldovan were the largest demographic group, and to this day an entire district is known as Moldavanka. But there were also Albanians, Armenians, Azeris, Bulgarians, Crimean Tatars, French, Germans, Greeks, Italians, Jews, Poles, Romanians, Russians, Turks, Ukrainians. Russian poet Pushkin, which lived there from 1823 to 1824, wrote "the air is filled with all Europe, French is spoken and there are European papers and magazines to read".

I ask you the same question which I asked @BMD, what date will you call final for deciding the present and future of the world.

 

[vstol Jockey]

Your last sentence isn't even in what I would call English. "Pagan worship," what the hell are you on about?

Till AD 989, Russia followed non abrahmic religion which was called pagan by the Abrahmics. For support in a war the Byzantines offered their princess to the king of Russia provided he converted to Christianity. he agreed and with him all his population converted to Christianity in AD 989. It was repeated by many including Arabs/Muslims. It happened in India when a King of Malabar coast became muslim in 8th century and later by so called love Jihad when Mahajhapit Hindu king of Indonesia/Malaysia was made to convert to islam to marry a muslim girl who was supposed to be pregnant with his child when his four wives could not bear him a child. That Extremely beautiful Arab Muslim girl was gifted to him as a concubine by the Arab traders and she became pregnant from him. But the truth was that someone else made her pregnant. So when Hindu King Mahajhapit wanted to marry her, he was told that he needs to convert to Islam to be able to do so and and only after that the child born of that girl could be called his child. That is how entire Hindu south east asia became muslim as the population also converted to islam alongwith the king just like the Russian King of AD 989.
For your information, every royal Kingdom of SE Asia traces their lineage to Cholas of India from Tamilnadu. Even the richest man on earth, The King of Brunie, is a descendent of Cholas. Cholas ruled for over 2300 years unbroken and they took sanatan Dharm as far as Japan and Phillipines and established Hindu kingdoms in those areas by 8th century AD. They had one of the largest and biggest flotilla of wooden warships and trade ships not known to people till date. They used to take their war elephants in those ships to conquer new territories and kingdoms.

 

[A Person]

Your argument falls flat as other than mass genocide of original settlers as done by Europeans has not been done by slavic civilisations.

You are either incredibly ignorant or incredibly deluded. Either way, that makes you incredibly wrong. The only peculiarity of Russian colonialism is that it was mostly land-based, while western European nations, being all at the same level of development, had to go overseas to find people who could easily be conquered just with some guns and horses. Here, read this, before you make more of a fool of yourself.

Smallpox first reached western Siberia in 1630. In the 1650s, it moved east of the Yenisey, where it carried away up to 80 percent of the Tungus and Yakut populations. In the 1690s, smallpox epidemics reduced Yukagir numbers by an estimated 44 percent. The disease moved rapidly from group to group across Siberia. Death rates in epidemics reached 50 percent of the population. The scourge returned at twenty- to thirty-year intervals, with dreadful results among the young.

Russian commander Major Pavlutskiy was responsible for the Russian war against the Chukchi and the mass slaughters and enslavement of Chukchi women and children in 1730–31, but his cruelty only made the Chukchis fight more fiercely.[14] Cleansing of the Chukchis and Koraks was ordered by Empress Elizabeth in 1742 to totally expel them from their native lands and erase their culture through war. The command was that the natives be "totally extirpated" with Pavlutskiy leading again in this war from 1744–47 in which he led to the Cossacks "with the help of Almighty God and to the good fortune of Her Imperial Highness", to slaughter the Chukchi men and enslave their women and children as booty.

Kamchatka today is European in demographics and culture with only 2.5% of it being native, around 10,000 from a previous number of 150,000, due to the mass slaughters by the Cossacks after its annexation in 1697 of the Itelmen and Koryaks throughout the first decades of Russian rule.

90% of the Kamchadals and half of the Vogules were killed from the eighteenth to nineteenth centuries and the rapid slaughter of the indigenous population led to entire ethnic groups being entirely wiped out, with around 12 exterminated groups which could be named by Nikolai Yadrintsev as of 1882.

The Slavic Russians outnumber all of the native peoples in Siberia and its cities except in the Republic of Tuva, with the Slavic Russians making up the majority in the Buriat Republic, and Altai Republics, outnumbering the Buriat, and Altai natives. The Buriat make up only 29,51% of their own Republic, and the Altai only one-third; the Chukchi, Evenk, Khanti, Mansi, and Nenets are outnumbered by non-natives by 90% of the population. The natives were targeted by the tsars and Soviet policies to change their way of life, and ethnic Russians were given the natives' reindeer herds and wild game which were confiscated by the tsars and Soviets. The reindeer herds have been mismanaged to the point of extinction.

And that's not even talking about all the stuff that the Soviets would do in their time, with entire populations deported to other lands, and the weaponization of famine to quell uprisings.

Besides the argument does not fall flat -- I showed you a map of territories controlled by culturally Ukrainian populations that was older than the one that you had shown. The fact that Russia conquered stuff doesn't mean that the stuff they conquered had always been Russian.

I ask you the same question which I asked @BMD, what date will you call final for deciding the present and future of the world.

That's a stupid question, there is no date that can be the final call for deciding the future. Well, unless you do decide a global nuclear holocaust that will eradicate all human life on Earth. That would indeed decide the future forever.

But you missed the point, once again. Odessa was never Russian, culturally speaking. It belonged to the Russian empire after they conquered it, sure, but that's not the same thing as being culturally Russian, now is it?

 

[vstol Jockey]

You are either incredibly ignorant or incredibly deluded. Either way, that makes you incredibly wrong. The only peculiarity of Russian colonialism is that it was mostly land-based, while western European nations, being all at the same level of development, had to go overseas to find people who could easily be conquered just with some guns and horses. Here, read this, before you make more of a fool of yourself.





And that's not even talking about all the stuff that the Soviets would do in their time, with entire populations deported to other lands, and the weaponization of famine to quell uprisings.

Besides the argument does not fall flat -- I showed you a map of territories controlled by culturally Ukrainian populations that was older than the one that you had shown. The fact that Russia conquered stuff doesn't mean that the stuff they conquered had always been Russian.

That's a stupid question, there is no date that can be the final call for deciding the future. Well, unless you do decide a global nuclear holocaust that will eradicate all human life on Earth. That would indeed decide the future forever.

But you missed the point, once again. Odessa was never Russian, culturally speaking. It belonged to the Russian empire after they conquered it, sure, but that's not the same thing as being culturally Russian, now is it?

Wars with neighbouring countries have happened even in a times before the written history of the world. It was as old as the days when men lived in caves and fought for women. So please keep your words to yourself. Ethnic cleansing has been part of invaders, I dont deny it but it became the norm with Europeans. Do you know who started civilizational wars in the world? Have you ever read about the history of Crusades and how your Pope used to enforce it?

But you missed the point, once again. Odessa was never Russian, culturally speaking. It belonged to the Russian empire after they conquered it, sure, but that's not the same thing as being culturally Russian, now is it?

once again, what will you agree to be historically correct date to settle the issue?

 

[Hydra]

My friend, you do not even know how the world is changing. Blinken was publicly rebuked by the FM of South Africa in the joint presser wherein She said that Europe's problems cant be a problem for rest of the world and they must stop lecturing others to follow them. It is available on youtube go and watch it as to how humiliating it was for Blinken. The world is changing rapidly due to this war and the world will be very different if WW3 breaks out. You might find China, India and other 153 countries supporting Russia against 57 countries. Plus how of these 57 will actually be part of the war mongers will be seen only when the WW3 actually breaks out.
One unsolicited advice I have for you. Please build a nuke bunker with sufficient stock of food and medicines and water as Russians have openly stated that first nuke fired by them will be on London.
Do you know when did Ukraine came into existance and how? USSR was formed in 1922 after Bolsheviks had toppled most governments in the former USSR and all of them joined in a Union. After that in 1922, Russian territories were reorganised and that is how Ukraine was created. NIkita Khruschev was an Ukraininan and was made the leader of Russian Communist party in 1938. he succeded Stalin in 1953-54.
Odessa is a city created and established by Katherine the Great and she was a Russian.
regarding Kaliningrad, I want to ask you, which date in the history of mankind can be taken as the fianl date for limiting the territorial limits of any nation? The while world was reshaped after WW2 when nations all across the world got reorganised and colonial system vanished. Can we look at the world as final after the end of WW2 to decide about the boundaries of a nation?
Qouting Greeks for Crimea is fine for you which was some 2000 yrs back but I quoting Pagan worship in Russia till 989AD is bullshit for you.

Indi will never support Russia or NATO in the event of WW3, we always ran away from taking bold decision in international politics.

 

[A Person]

Wars with neighbouring countries have happened even in a times before the written history of the world. It was as old as the days when men lived in caves and fought for women. So please keep your words to yourself. Ethnic cleansing has been part of invaders, I dont deny it but it became the norm with Europeans. Do you know who started civilizational wars in the world? Have you ever read about the history of Crusades and how your Pope used to enforce it?

Ah, so genocide is only wrong if your army had to travel by boat.

And lol, citing the Crusades as the first civilizational war. Yeah, sure, there was no civilization-ending conflicts before 1096 CE. People in Asia were eradicating entire civilizations long before the Europeans learned to write. But I suppose that was okay, they mostly didn't need to use boats.

Hey, do you know why the Crusades happened in the first place? Super quick history lesson: Early Christianity was spread between five patriarchs, in the sees of Jerusalem, Antioch, Alexandria, Constantinople, and Rome. The Muslims invaded and overran all but Constantinople and Rome. They practiced forced conversions (as you know they are wont to do) and slaughtered Christian pilgrims that wanted to go to Jerusalem (again, as they are wont to do). The first Crusade (1096-1099) was decided to free Jerusalem from the Muslims so that Christians would be free to go on safe pilgrimage. The execution was bungled, but make no mistake -- it was not an unilateral action of Europe going "hey, let's be evil", it was a reaction to relentless Muslim aggression.

once again, what will you agree to be historically correct date to settle the issue?

How about 1991? That's the date with the internationally-recognized borders.

 

[BMD]

Till AD 989, Russia followed non abrahmic religion which was called pagan by the Abrahmics. For support in a war the Byzantines offered their princess to the king of Russia provided he converted to Christianity. he agreed and with him all his population converted to Christianity in AD 989. It was repeated by many including Arabs/Muslims. It happened in India when a King of Malabar coast became muslim in 8th century and later by so called love Jihad when Mahajhapit Hindu king of Indonesia/Malaysia was made to convert to islam to marry a muslim girl who was supposed to be pregnant with his child when his four wives could not bear him a child. That Extremely beautiful Arab Muslim girl was gifted to him as a concubine by the Arab traders and she became pregnant from him. But the truth was that someone else made her pregnant. So when Hindu King Mahajhapit wanted to marry her, he was told that he needs to convert to Islam to be able to do so and and only after that the child born of that girl could be called his child. That is how entire Hindu south east asia became muslim as the population also converted to islam alongwith the king just like the Russian King of AD 989.
For your information, every royal Kingdom of SE Asia traces their lineage to Cholas of India from Tamilnadu. Even the richest man on earth, The King of Brunie, is a descendent of Cholas. Cholas ruled for over 2300 years unbroken and they took sanatan Dharm as far as Japan and Phillipines and established Hindu kingdoms in those areas by 8th century AD. They had one of the largest and biggest flotilla of wooden warships and trade ships not known to people till date. They used to take their war elephants in those ships to conquer new territories and kingdoms.

Russia didn't even exist in 989 AD. Kievan 'Rus isn't really associated with Russia either. It's first king - Rurik - was a Swedish Viking. Most of its first rulers are more Norse than Russian in fact. You are making up false history.

Russia - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Rurik - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

According to the Primary Chronicle, Rurik was one of the Rus', a Varangian tribe, likened by the chronicler to Swedes and Gotlanders. The scholarly consensus[3] is that the Rus' people originated in what is currently coastal eastern Sweden around the eighth century

So Indians were conquerors once too, that's what I've been saying all along.

I ask you the same question which I asked @BMD, what date will you call final for deciding the present and future of the world.

How about what's currently internationally recognised. Because otherwise it will just be endless warfare, like what Russia has signed up for in Ukraine.

 

[BMD]

Wars with neighbouring countries have happened even in a times before the written history of the world. It was as old as the days when men lived in caves and fought for women. So please keep your words to yourself. Ethnic cleansing has been part of invaders, I dont deny it but it became the norm with Europeans. Do you know who started civilizational wars in the world? Have you ever read about the history of Crusades and how your Pope used to enforce it?

once again, what will you agree to be historically correct date to settle the issue?

So you think civilisational wars only began with the crusades? WTF!?

How about letting the people of Ukraine decide their future without messing with borders and annexation.

 

[vstol Jockey]

Russia didn't even exist in 989 AD. Kievan 'Rus isn't really associated with Russia either. It's first king - Rurik - was a Swedish Viking. Most of its first rulers are more Norse than Russian in fact. You are making up false history.

Russia - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Rurik - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

So Indians were conquerors once too, that's what I've been saying all along.

How about what's currently internationally recognised. Because otherwise it will just be endless warfare, like what Russia has signed up for in Ukraine.

I can post you stuff from Rig Veda which you guys will again call stupid but it has the exact sun coordinates about a place in Russia from which Vedic Indians expanded outwards to create what you call slavic nations today. I will do it tomorrow with evidence.

 

[vstol Jockey]

So you think civilisational wars only began with the crusades? WTF!?

How about letting the people of Ukraine decide their future without messing with borders and annexation.

You got butcherd in the third Crusade by your own Abhrahimics like Sallahuddin so you are talking stupid things. Chirischianity and Islam has more things to fight about among themselves than so called Pagans.

 

[BMD]

I can post you stuff from Rig Veda which you guys will again call stupid but it has the exact sun coordinates about a place in Russia from which Vedic Indians expanded outwards to create what you call slavic nations today. I will do it tomorrow with evidence.

It's called mythology that most historians reject. Are you implying that people existed only in one place on the entire continent and spread outwards from there?

 

[vstol Jockey]

So you think civilisational wars only began with the crusades? WTF!?

How about letting the people of Ukraine decide their future without messing with borders and annexation.

Who are raping white women all across Europe today? Are they Pagans or abhrahmics? This is your future. Raped to become slaves of the rapists like Pakistan and Bangladesh. We Hindus will resist it and I as a Brahmin will never accept such third rate religion as mine.

 

[BMD]

You got butcherd in the third Crusade by your own Abhrahimics like Sallahuddin so you are talking stupid things. Chirischianity and Islam has more things to fight about among themselves than so called Pagans.

You are not even following a coherent argument or discussion here. You are entering _Anonymous_ territory.

Who are raping white women all across Europe today? Are they Pagans or abhrahmics? This is your future. Raped to become slaves of the rapists like Pakistan and Bangladesh. We Hindus will resist it and I as a Brahmin will never accept such third rate religion as mine.

So there are no rapes in India by Hindus?