Then they would act as the true, loyal crimean army. Being proud to desert from the official ukrainian forces, vowing to defend Crimea and their home. They wouldn't mind being considered deserters in Ukraine even less so, after the voting.
In short: they wouldn't hide. Not their names, their alliances nor their face.

http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/borowitzreport/2014/03/us-freezes-putins-netflix-account.html

Mildly relevant?

I'm not the best history student, never was, never claimed to be, so I'll have to ask a couple of things:
Am I correct to assume Switzerland had no civil wars for centuries (if there were any at all, that is)?
Do you therefore happen to know what a civil war is - not from history books, but from the stories of people who got caught in it?
The thing is, when there's a "normal" war, the relatives of soldiers fighting in it are usually in the country said soldiers protect and the fact that the enemy got to them means the army didn't do its job well enough. When we deal with a civil war, families can easily be (geographically speaking) on different sides of the "frontline" and sometimes a soldier can do nothing to protect those dear to him 'cause they happened to live in a place controlled by the other side. I don't want to badmouth those who overthrew the president, but let's say not all of them are nice and kind people.
Sapienti sat.

This might be of interest to you then, if you haven't read it; Pesto's a trusted reporter. Doesn't necessarilly say it would be worse for the EU, but gives some useful figures.

It has nothing to do with forgetting, I've just seen none of those. Care to share the links?

I'm kinda sad to say it, but it has come to a point, where it's pretty much useless talking with you.
Your whole point is - there's no prove for that. Guess what? You don't have any either. No one has and those who have, can't / won't speak about it. However, the indications point in one direction only and all "maybes" and "couldn't it be" won't change that. We're living in a different, more global world. Yes the victor writes the history - but only in HIS country. Not for the rest of the world. That time, is past us.
So, believe in various local militia working on a level with their organisations, that they manage to hold down all (trained) ukrainian military bases and their fleet. Believe in local militas with heavy military equipment and a plan to place them on strategic points. I doubt the majority of the world will see it that way.

Oh and about your argument of "not all of them nice and kind people" - I'm sure those running around crimea with facecovers and guns in arms, are all just random good guys....
Sapere aude.

Sure, http://ria.ru/world/20140301/997670771.html for example.
Or https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b0Z8ymyhx8A#t=126 if you're somehow missed it.

The "men in green" behave like extremely well trained professionals. They are used to work together and the NCO's seem to know their job. Non commissionned officers are a good indicator imho. Just have a look at the Belbek Airbase event. The NCO there showed a degree of control above what you'd expect from a hastily built militia or even from reservist or regular infantry. Add to that their equipment ( some rifles I saw in their hands are only available to a very limited number of units ) , and i'd bet on FSB, VVS, naval infantry or shock units.

That's also why the murder of the tatar guy and the shooting party at simferopol look suspicious to me. It does not fit the picture given by these troops till now. I am afraid some ( on which side ? or is it on both sides ?) want to try to ignite the powder keg

I never claimed to have any proof, have I not pointed out those were mere possibilities? "Dare to know", indeed, not "dare to claim to know".
The sad thing is not that everyone writes history nowadays, there's nothing wrong with that. Now, the fact that everyone writes his own version of it - that's more troubling. In a decade or two even your and American histories will have different points of view on what's happening now.
From the very beginning of the thread I decided to take nothing as "obvious", "beyond all doubt" or whatever unless there is solid proof - "until the dust settles down". I guess I already mentioned the "obvious facts" of Aug. 2008.
Thanks for tearing that bit out of context, but it really belonged in there. It served as an indication that a soldier's first and foremost desire is protection of those dear to him, and in this case retaining anonymity might serve exactly that purpose.
No matter. It was a pleasure to have you as an opponent.
Auf Wiedersehen.

Usually I agree on relying on prove. There are cases however, where you can tell that you'll never be able to do so and you'd have to go with what you have, even though that's just signs and indications instead of hard evidence.

When the dust is settled, who's to tell the truth? Unbiased observers? Held off at the borders. The ukrainian soldiers currently hold up in their bases? How could they know, they didn't left their base. Brave citizens of Crimea that aren't pro-russian and daring to speak? Yeah, right....
When the dust is settled, the one "truth" remaining is the russian version. As unbiased, truthful and without any propaganda at all in it, as we all know it.
You're right, I'm glad we'll get a different version of history in our books.

I've seen this story pop up in a few places:
Ukraine's gold reserves transferred to the U.S

Now it could well be complete bull but it seems to be gaining momentum and credibility. To clarify, I really don't know. However, the British media have been so terribly biased, that I wouldn't put it past them to bury the story.

This headline:
Crimea crisis: Fears of war grow after killing of Ukrainian officer at military base in Simferopol

has been amended as it previously stated that: Crimea in Crises as Russian troops kill Ukrainian Officer.

All this is doing is two-fold. 1) The Brits with very short memories are in uproar over Russia muscling in on an EU country OR 2) People are coming out and sympathising with Russia due to the awfully biased media coverage and the fact that it's been peaceful considering the obvious tensions.

The US holds a lot of countries' gold, I don't think that story would be shocking or weird.

Wars and rumors of war. God help us and God help Ukraine

Funny how the simple mistake of one newswriter (he write 1,724,563, when it was said 1,524,563) get popular, even after source of calculations admited mistake. Is there atleast one news site who added that 123% was an error?