Because otherwise he might have found NATO ships in Sevastopol if NATO had done a quick deal with the provisional government in Kiev.

What I don't understand is why he used so much force if the Crimeans were supposedly on his side anyway.  I guess to show off what he could get away with.

What I don't understand is why he used so much force if the Crimeans were supposedly on his side anyway.  I guess to show off what he could get away with.

That's not using force. He is merely protecting the Russian people and Russia from the U.S/NATO-backed puppet government that was installed after overthrowing a legitimate president of Ukraine, who voted not to be part of the EU, and rather sided with Russia. Crimea was part of Russia longer than America has been a nation. Russia has a treaty to have 25,000 troops in Crimea until 2042 with a 5 year extension option, and to have their Black Sea naval fleet there. They are naturally going to protect their port from Western imperialism. The Western shill media saying Putin is being "aggressive" is like saying a man freely walking around in his own backyard - his own property - is being "aggressive". By the way, you should look up the Kiev snipers who were recruited by the U.S./NATO to stir things up. HERE

Also, HERE is a good perspective from former U.S. Intelligence Linguist regarding the U.S. orchestrating the overthrow of the Ukrainian government

If the Crimea (which was only made part of the Ukraine in 1954) is mostly pro-Russian, why did Putin send in the military and stage a referendum that offered only 2 choices: join Russia now, or join Russia later?  Because he could?  To taunt NATO?  I know it's complicated, and that there isn't really a good guy in this conflict.

Maybe he wanted to get the answer he wanted.

Thanks for the links.  I appreciate them.

Does anyone know what the questions were on the referendum?  I've read that there was no option other than joining Russia.  

Maybe it was something like a man proposing to a woman he knows will not refuse:  He gives the lady the 'choice' of marrying him now, or later, as he flexes his biceps, assuring her of his baby- and grocery-carrying abilities.  Maybe that's a cultural thing. Nothing wrong with that, except you wouldn't want it to be done publicly, unless you were ... Putin.

I am told that there was a choice;
Join Russia now or Join Russia later.

The vast majority voted to join Russia so the other choices are immaterial because the will of the overwhelming majority has been measured.  The turnout was 80 percent and 95% of them voted the same way.  So that is more than 2/3rds of the population.

Various international observers were there and said the referendum was conducted fairly.

The second choice was not to join Russia later, but rather to declare Crimea independent so it could make an alliance or union with any state it chose.

If you are going to bicker about the legality of it then you might as well start unstitching borders and unions all over the world.  It is certainly not as unjust as the countries of Europe surrendering their power and central banks to the EU superstate.

you might as well start unstitching borders and unions all over the world.  It is certainly not as unjust as the countries of Europe surrendering their power and central banks to the EU superstate.

Yes, Ukraine could have done exactly what the Russians did in Crimea, but she didn't. I honestly see the fairness of that.

I know that Ukraine is not much less corrupt than Russia, and that the EU and US forces are responsible for the unrest in Maidan.

My Estonian father is freaking out, that's why I'm particularly interested in this. I'd like to console him, if I can, by convincing him that his homeland is relatively safe. He's quite shell-shocked, so it might not be possible. Also, he remembers that Russia first had to convince the countries that would become her allies in WWII that she would defend religious liberty. So, he sees any signs of Christianity in Putin as a facade.

I pointed out to him that Putin doesn't care who's on his side, except the Russian people, and how reasonable that is. If he was nothing more than a facade he would never have imprisoned some punks who desecrated a Cathedral. If only my father wasn't basically a feminist!