East Ukraine

wrote in message
...

Bill wrote:

What's "legal" has no real meaning in geo-politcal matters like this.

wsnell01 wrote:

Incorrect. The civilized world sees this "referendum" as illegal
according
to the Ukrainian constitution. Therefore it is illegal.

Unfortunately for Ukraine, it did not join NATO. The Baltic States did.

The dork wrote:

No need, it's their natural right to join the Russian Federation and you
are
the idiot always ranting on about rights.

The **** wrote:
If some Russian-speaking residents of Medway held a "referendum" on whether
to join Russia, how would you react if the result were 97% in favor?
================================================== =====
The Medway is a river, but I'll take it you mean the towns of Strood,
Rochester, Chatham, Gillingham, Rainham and the outlying hamlets and
villages collectively as Medway. It may become Medway City someday,
Rochester was a city until 1998.
http://www.city-of-rochester.org.uk/...-of-rochester/
The abolition of some corporate bodies as part of successive local
government reforms, beginning with the Municipal Corporations (Ireland) Act
1840, has deprived some ancient cities of their status. However, letters
patent have been issued for most of the affected cities to ensure the
continuation or restoration of their status. At present, Rochester and Elgin
are the only former cities in the United Kingdom.
Rochester is not a city today because the ancient city is administered by
Medway Council, a unitary authority created in 1998, encompassing Rochester,
Strood, Chatham, Gillingham and Rainham as well as a number of rural
parishes.
http://www.visitmedway.org/offers-medway-city-card
I'd ask who the 3% of Russian-speaking residents of Medway who didn't want
to join Russia were, congratulate them on their wise choice, invite the 97%
of Russian-speaking residents of Medway to go to Russia to live as is their
natural right. This would have no effect on the 99.9% of Medway residents
who did not speak Russian and took no part in the referendum, they could
continue life as normal, as is their natural right. I would not object to
0.1% of Medway residents holding a referendum on any topic they choose,
although I doubt the 99.9% would bother turning out to vote on it. What's
your problem with letting people voice their own opinion in a ballot, ands
why call it "illegal"? Surely that is against your own principle of natural
rights, isn't it? Or are rights only conferred by the society in which we
live?

-- Lord Androcles, Zeroth Earl of Medway