 |
| |
|
| |
|
|
pchang
|
 |
Cupertino?
Aug 1999
time: 05:23
|
|
By Kim Murphy, Times Staff Writer
GIZEL, Russia — Each day for 12 years, the rhythm of life in this village of scrap-metal lean-tos, plywood shacks and misery in North Ossetia has been the same.
Those who have jobs in the nearest city hike up to the main road and flag down a passing car or, with luck, catch a bus. Later in the morning, the children set out for school, walking a mile and a half along roads that are often muddy or buried in snow. At 5 p.m. sharp, the water tap in the center of town opens up for precisely three hours.
There is a reason why no bus stops at Gizel, why there is no school or running water and two outhouses must do for 300 people: Gizel is a "temporary" place, set up in this Russian republic in 1992 to accommodate some of the 100,000 refugees fleeing South Ossetia's separatist war against Georgia.
Somehow, the war never officially ended, and many of the refugees never went home. In addition, brief clashes have flared again over the last few weeks, and officials here say a revival of the fighting is their worst fear.
Across the territory of the former Soviet Union, as many as 1 million people are living in the forgotten limbos of frozen ethnic and territorial conflicts, some so obscure that most of the world isn't aware of them, and so deeply hostile that they may never be resolved.
Nowhere are these frozen conflicts as volatile as here in the North Caucasus, where ethnic battles that erupted after the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991 could ignite again at the slightest provocation.
Here in North Ossetia, the horrific hostage-taking at a provincial school in the town of Beslan resurrected in many minds another conflict from 1992, with the neighboring Russian republic of Ingushetia, that killed 200 people and displaced thousands. The Beslan hostage-takers, a combination of Chechen and other rebels, were reportedly led by a well-known Ingush militant.
No sooner had the hostages been taken than some Ossetians began pulling weapons out of their closets, determined to strike against Ingush villages in North Ossetia.
"Me and my friends had a plan. We wanted to go to an Ingush village … and we were going to capture two schools there," said one man, a veteran of the Ingush-Ossetian war. "But in the end, we realized those were such evil terrorists that even if we had their schools, we could never break them."
For those seeking to undermine what remains of the Russian empire, the North Caucasus is the chosen field of battle, thanks in part to the constant threat of instability in this highly strategic region. One of the hostage-takers captured in Beslan said that the real aim of the school seizure was not simply to free the neighboring province of Chechnya from Russian rule, but to "start war in the entire territory of the North Caucasus."
Frozen conflicts plague the region. In South Ossetia, officially part of Georgia but seeking to join Russia, periodic mortar attacks and small-arms skirmishes claimed several dozen lives over the summer as Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili moved to end the de facto autonomy there and in the Black Sea republic of Abkhazia.
The conflict over Azerbaijan's Armenian-majority enclave of Nagorno-Karabakh is no closer to resolution than it was when the heaviest fighting ended 10 years ago. And in Moldova, the self-proclaimed but otherwise unrecognized republic of Trans-Dniester has seen deliberate electricity shut-offs and a rail blockade after increased tension over language issues.
The world may tune out the conflicts in these hard-to-pronounce areas, but analysts warn that it does so at its peril: The conflict belt runs along the vital energy corridor linking Caspian Sea oil supplies with Western Europe and the United States.
Moreover, the self-declared independent zones — answering to no recognized governments — are potential breeding grounds for problems that can spill well beyond their borders, experts warn.
Abkhazia, which Saakashvili has sworn to bring back under Georgian rule, was the site of the reported disappearance of more than a pound of highly enriched uranium sometime after fighting broke out in 1992. On at least two other occasions, Georgian officials have found stolen radioactive material they believed was bound for a port in Adzharia, a third breakaway region that Georgia retook in May.
"It is widely and correctly believed that these unresolved fragments of the Soviet empire now serve as shipment points for weapons, narcotics and victims of trafficking, and as breeding grounds for transnational organized crime — and, last but not least, for terrorism," said a report produced by the German Marshall Fund and the Project on Transitional Democracies.
The recent fighting in South Ossetia appears to have been triggered by the Georgian government's attempt to crack down on the huge smugglers' market on the border with Russia. Georgia says it is determined to collect taxes on the rampant shipments of cheap vodka and other smuggled goods that routinely flow out of South Ossetia, but leaders there say the market closure was the first step in an attempted economic blockade.
"The Georgian side is not fulfilling its agreement, because it took up an obligation to invest certain means to restore the destroyed economy of South Ossetia, and it has done nothing," South Ossetian President Eduard Kokoity said in an interview.
Under the Soviets, Ossetia was split between Georgia and Russia, in large part because of geography: The north and south are divided by the high, forbidding peaks of the Caucasus range, whose passes were historically closed up to six months of winter. Today, about 95% of South Ossetians hold Russian passports, and Russian border guards and peacekeeping troops patrol the frontier.
The specter of Russia looms over many of the frozen conflicts along the belt of the Black Sea and the Caucasus. All lie in Russia's "near abroad," the geopolitical zone around which Moscow has drawn a line in the sand against U.S. diplomacy.
Georgian President Saakashvili has accused Russia of supplying missiles to its peacekeepers in South Ossetia and engaging in a military buildup on its borders. But Moscow has spoken in favor of a negotiated settlement, and of maintaining Georgia's territorial integrity.
"There are no fools in the Russian leadership who want an international war on their hands right now," said Sergei Mikheyev of the Center for Political Technologies in Moscow. "Russia would be happy to mediate a settlement in which Georgia becomes a federalized country and incorporates South Ossetia and Abkhazia as autonomous units, but at this point it seems impossible to make all three sides see that this is the only nonviolent way out of the situation."
Kokoity, a former wrestling champion, said that South Ossetia had the same right of self-determination that Georgia exercised when it withdrew from the Soviet Union in 1991, taking South Ossetia with it.
During the war that broke out in South Ossetia in 1991, 1,000 people died and more than 112 Ossetian villages were destroyed.
"I had a house, a beautiful, three-story house. But it was destroyed, and I never got any compensation," said Tusya Galoyeva, a 64-year-old native of the South Ossetian village of Gory, who fled to Gizel during the war.
Before the war, Gizel was an unfinished recreational center for a collective farm; many of the rooms in its half-done concrete buildings are open to the summer air. Buckets stand on the floors to catch rain dripping through makeshift roofs, and most units have several families crowded inside, sleeping dormitory fashion and sharing kitchens.
"You have a lot of people living really in some of the worst conditions I have ever seen, certainly the worst conditions in Europe," said William Tall, head of the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees office in the North Caucasus.
"The conflict has been going on for so long, and we're not getting anything. We've been living in indignation for years," said resident Zemfira Laliyeva, whose relatives have all returned to South Ossetia. She has not, mostly because she lived in a predominantly Georgian village, and fears her neighbors.
"My husband's brother returned, and look what's happening there now," she said, referring to the clashes. "He's spending nights in the forest!
"Not only that," she added, "but our house was not rebuilt. Where can I return to?"
In settlement talks, Ossetian refugees have demanded restitution from Georgia. Now Saakashvili has been offering some benefits and the possibility that displaced South Ossetians could take over their lost homes from those living in them now.
But most here regard the idea of integrating South Ossetia into Georgia as a pipe dream; Kokoity rejects even the widely discussed proposal of offering South Ossetia broad autonomy in a Georgian state.
"This will never happen, and I can claim this with complete confidence," he said flatly. "What state do they think they are inviting us into? Georgia is a failed state. Let's operate with the facts: In Georgia, three presidents were elected…. None of the Georgian presidents finished his term in accordance with the constitution — they were all removed with coups, or 'rose revolutions,' or whatever."
Saakashvili, who was elected after longtime Georgian President Eduard A. Shevardnadze was ousted in a popular uprising, has insisted that his aim is unification of a democratic state within its internationally recognized borders. Russia's encouragement of separatists in South Ossetia and Abkhazia can lead to dangerous consequences, he warned in an interview this month with the Moscow newspaper Novaya Gazeta.
"If they denounce separatist support in Chechnya while advising it in Georgia, they simply do not understand what this war can become," he said. "It would have consequences far more serious than the conflicts of the early 1990s. The region has more weapons, the fighters can organize themselves more efficiently; they are more experienced, more disciplined. It will turn into a long-term conflict."
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Geronimo
|
|
st cloud USA
Jan 1970
time: 05:23
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Spiffor
Nah, Putin plays Civ3, and communism makes much for sense for a territory like his. |
ack, civ3 tampers with the way the different forms of government worked in civ2? If he was going to tweak that stuff I wonder why he didn't just import the system that SMAC used?
[/end off-off-topic civ3 rant]
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Dr Strangelove
|
|
It's easy to imagine that along such tumultuous borders smuggling arms would be very easy. I'll bet that the Beslan terrorists didn't have to bribe a single official.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Heresson
|
 |
of frogs
Jun 2000
time: 06:23
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Azazel
Georgia is harbouring terrorists... |
Yeah, it is Chechenia in disquise
quote:
Russia's style is blowing everything up. Not precision strikes. That's too American.
/
I still say we attack Finland and get Pekka.
|
quote:
During its own Splendid Little War, Russia utterly razed to the ground one of its own cities (Groznyi), and I've heard from DD they used the equivalent of a nuke in regular bombs.
Bush has never been guilty of such butchering.
|
Spiffor is right. But just in this thread
quote:
perhaps even a thinly veiled threat that this could occur could be useful for persuading Iran to cough up the terrorists. That is assuming there even are any terrorists receiving asylum in Iran.
|
Chances that Iran has any links to al-Qaida are very low. I'm not interested in modern terrorism, but I think it (Al-Qaida) bases of wahhabi tradition, and its views when it comes to shiites would be some trouble in cooperation.
Shiites are so.... christian. All this waiting for hidden imam, and mouring the death of Hussein, torturing themselves as an apology, cult of imams, their graves...
When I looked on their drawings of Hussein and company, I was amazed how similar it is to kitch-like drawings of Jesus - just Hussein is a bit more male type.
quote:
I need evidences, not tales invented by enemy's propaganda. Show me the photos of Russian soldiers tortuering their prisoners. And who told you we didn't punish our criminals? Chechnya is flooded by military police who is looking for any opportunity to throw some new soldiers and officers to jail for any crime. The main idea was to do not piss off locals this time, to make them less hostile.
|
I guess that's what Russians/Soviets always did, just nobody yet noticed
quote:
west would destroy us long time ago.
|
Beware, mother Russia! Blood-thirsty Estonians are on their way to destroy You! Run, run!
quote:
What the hell else you can do in this case.
|
Just let the foreign journalists in...
quote:
Because in the article you gave, I've found SO MANY lies, that after that I don't trust a single word coming from such sources.
|
Didn't You have an idea that perhaps it's your official propaganda that lies?
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Heresson
|
|
of frogs
Jun 2000
time: 06:23
|
|
I don't think I have personal feeling about Russia. Just when Serb claims USSR was completely right to occupy eastern Poland hand to hand with Germany and such stuff...
From what I know, Russia leads a very brutal politics in Chechenia since the beginnings of the conflict. Taking into account how Russia and USSR acted usually, I have
little doubt that at least part of this is true.
I do think many Poles have antipathy for Russia. But it's not without a reason.
The animosy dates back to late Middle Ages, when Poland joined union and took over Lithuania, that led a conflict with Moscov about the domination over entire Ruthenia. Moscow's pimary policy was to get as much as it could of Polish-Lithuanian territory: it considered itself a bearer of tradition of Kievan Ruthenia, and as such, it considered eastern Polisj/Lithuanian grounds as its property. A breakthrough in the campign was half of XVII century, when golden days of Poland ended, and after repelling Swedes, brandenburgians, Romanians, Ukrainians and Russians, Poland had to resign of eastern half of Ukraine, with Kiev. This was supposed to be only temporary, but in Poland temporary stuff last the longest. Poland sunk in anarchy, and its neighbours with Russia as the major player, torpedoes any attempts of reforms. When the pressure for them became too big, eventuallt Poland was divided between Russia, Prussia and Austria in three partages in the end of XVIII century.
After Napoleonic wars, a very small, limited kingdom of Poland was reestablished out of part of Grand Duchy of Warsaw that was given to Russia, with tzar as its king.
It was a strange union, as Russia was an autocratic state, while the Kingdom was a constitutional monarchy. Next tzar was more autocratic, kept on breaking the constitution and stuff. In the end, when He wanted to use Polish army against Belgium's fight for independance, the state revolted. After a war, the Kingdom was repressioned and lost most of its autonomy and rusification started. After another big uprising, it got even worse, and the name of Poland was replaced with "the land over Vistula" name )just like later Hitler changed the name of Major Poland province into "the land of Warta river")
All this time, Polish culture and catholic church was being persecuted, Polish properties confiscated, Polish language kept out of schools etc, and opposing were sent to Siberia and such martyrdom stuff.
Eventually, Poland regained independance after ww1 and lead a successful war against Soviets ("the way to a world revolution goes through dead body of bourgois Poland" and such stuff).
In 1939, USSR and Germany signed a pact and soon divided Poland in a half. Poles of the annected by USSR lands were being either moved somewhere into inner Russia/Kazakhstan, or, when it comes to officers and people of higher position in society, killed.
After German invasion of USSR, Poland became Soviet ally, though Soviets didn't want to resign of the lands they annected earlier.
However, Germans discovered mass graves of Polish officers killed by Soviets (Stalin claimed earlier that they escaped to Manjuria). As in similar time Germany and Poland each asked Red Cross for investigation in this matter, Stalin accused Poland of collaborating with Germany and broke the relationships, and started creating his own pet Polish gouverment after He entered Poland - allies didn't want to quarrel, so they soon deserted the legal one, and accepted Stalin's vision of eastern boarders of Poland, looking about how final Soviet - German demarcation line looked like.
Meanwhile, Polish partisants fighting against Germans after they were out were accused of... collaborating with Germans and persecuted. The leaders of the underground state were invited for diplomatic talks - and than imprisoned and sentenced.
Soviets also didn't help the uprising in Warsaw, even closed down controlled by them airports for allied airplanes with help for it.
Also, the march of Soviet army was a great show of vandalism, rapes and robbery.
After the war, Soviets installed their regime that ruled up to the end of communism.
And even after the fall of it, Russia interferred in Polish matters, like it tried to stop it from joining NATO.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Ted Striker
|
 |
United States of America
Jan 1970
time: 21:23
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Heresson
I don't think I have personal feeling about Russia. Just when Serb claims USSR was completely right to occupy eastern Poland hand to hand with Germany and such stuff...
From what I know, Russia leads a very brutal politics in Chechenia since the beginnings of the conflict. Taking into account how Russia and USSR acted usually, I have
little doubt that at least part of this is true.
I do think many Poles have antipathy for Russia. But it's not without a reason.
The animosy dates back to late Middle Ages, when Poland joined union and took over Lithuania, that led a conflict with Moscov about the domination over entire Ruthenia. Moscow's pimary policy was to get as much as it could of Polish-Lithuanian territory: it considered itself a bearer of tradition of Kievan Ruthenia, and as such, it considered eastern Polisj/Lithuanian grounds as its property. A breakthrough in the campign was half of XVII century, when golden days of Poland ended, and after repelling Swedes, brandenburgians, Romanians, Ukrainians and Russians, Poland had to resign of eastern half of Ukraine, with Kiev. This was supposed to be only temporary, but in Poland temporary stuff last the longest. Poland sunk in anarchy, and its neighbours with Russia as the major player, torpedoes any attempts of reforms. When the pressure for them became too big, eventuallt Poland was divided between Russia, Prussia and Austria in three partages in the end of XVIII century.
After Napoleonic wars, a very small, limited kingdom of Poland was reestablished out of part of Grand Duchy of Warsaw that was given to Russia, with tzar as its king.
It was a strange union, as Russia was an autocratic state, while the Kingdom was a constitutional monarchy. Next tzar was more autocratic, kept on breaking the constitution and stuff. In the end, when He wanted to use Polish army against Belgium's fight for independance, the state revolted. After a war, the Kingdom was repressioned and lost most of its autonomy and rusification started. After another big uprising, it got even worse, and the name of Poland was replaced with "the land over Vistula" name )just like later Hitler changed the name of Major Poland province into "the land of Warta river")
All this time, Polish culture and catholic church was being persecuted, Polish properties confiscated, Polish language kept out of schools etc, and opposing were sent to Siberia and such martyrdom stuff.
Eventually, Poland regained independance after ww1 and lead a successful war against Soviets ("the way to a world revolution goes through dead body of bourgois Poland" and such stuff).
In 1939, USSR and Germany signed a pact and soon divided Poland in a half. Poles of the annected by USSR lands were being either moved somewhere into inner Russia/Kazakhstan, or, when it comes to officers and people of higher position in society, killed.
After German invasion of USSR, Poland became Soviet ally, though Soviets didn't want to resign of the lands they annected earlier.
However, Germans discovered mass graves of Polish officers killed by Soviets (Stalin claimed earlier that they escaped to Manjuria). As in similar time Germany and Poland each asked Red Cross for investigation in this matter, Stalin accused Poland of collaborating with Germany and broke the relationships, and started creating his own pet Polish gouverment after He entered Poland - allies didn't want to quarrel, so they soon deserted the legal one, and accepted Stalin's vision of eastern boarders of Poland, looking about how final Soviet - German demarcation line looked like.
Meanwhile, Polish partisants fighting against Germans after they were out were accused of... collaborating with Germans and persecuted. The leaders of the underground state were invited for diplomatic talks - and than imprisoned and sentenced.
Soviets also didn't help the uprising in Warsaw, even closed down controlled by them airports for allied airplanes with help for it.
Also, the march of Soviet army was a great show of vandalism, rapes and robbery.
After the war, Soviets installed their regime that ruled up to the end of communism.
And even after the fall of it, Russia interferred in Polish matters, like it tried to stop it from joining NATO. |
Well you guys got them back later by being the domino that shattered the Iron Curtain.
Happy now?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Serb
|
|
Siberia, Communist party of Apolyton
Nov 2001
time: 11:23
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Heresson
I don't think I have personal feeling about Russia. Just when Serb claims USSR was completely right to occupy eastern Poland hand to hand with Germany and such stuff...
From what I know, Russia leads a very brutal politics in Chechenia since the beginnings of the conflict. Taking into account how Russia and USSR acted usually, I have
little doubt that at least part of this is true.
I do think many Poles have antipathy for Russia. But it's not without a reason.
The animosy dates back to late Middle Ages, when Poland joined union and took over Lithuania, that led a conflict with Moscov about the domination over entire Ruthenia. Moscow's pimary policy was to get as much as it could of Polish-Lithuanian territory: it considered itself a bearer of tradition of Kievan Ruthenia, and as such, it considered eastern Polisj/Lithuanian grounds as its property. A breakthrough in the campign was half of XVII century, when golden days of Poland ended, and after repelling Swedes, brandenburgians, Romanians, Ukrainians and Russians, Poland had to resign of eastern half of Ukraine, with Kiev. This was supposed to be only temporary, but in Poland temporary stuff last the longest. Poland sunk in anarchy, and its neighbours with Russia as the major player, torpedoes any attempts of reforms. When the pressure for them became too big, eventuallt Poland was divided between Russia, Prussia and Austria in three partages in the end of XVIII century.
After Napoleonic wars, a very small, limited kingdom of Poland was reestablished out of part of Grand Duchy of Warsaw that was given to Russia, with tzar as its king.
It was a strange union, as Russia was an autocratic state, while the Kingdom was a constitutional monarchy. Next tzar was more autocratic, kept on breaking the constitution and stuff. In the end, when He wanted to use Polish army against Belgium's fight for independance, the state revolted. After a war, the Kingdom was repressioned and lost most of its autonomy and rusification started. After another big uprising, it got even worse, and the name of Poland was replaced with "the land over Vistula" name )just like later Hitler changed the name of Major Poland province into "the land of Warta river")
All this time, Polish culture and catholic church was being persecuted, Polish properties confiscated, Polish language kept out of schools etc, and opposing were sent to Siberia and such martyrdom stuff.
Eventually, Poland regained independance after ww1 and lead a successful war against Soviets ("the way to a world revolution goes through dead body of bourgois Poland" and such stuff).
In 1939, USSR and Germany signed a pact and soon divided Poland in a half. Poles of the annected by USSR lands were being either moved somewhere into inner Russia/Kazakhstan, or, when it comes to officers and people of higher position in society, killed.
After German invasion of USSR, Poland became Soviet ally, though Soviets didn't want to resign of the lands they annected earlier.
However, Germans discovered mass graves of Polish officers killed by Soviets (Stalin claimed earlier that they escaped to Manjuria). As in similar time Germany and Poland each asked Red Cross for investigation in this matter, Stalin accused Poland of collaborating with Germany and broke the relationships, and started creating his own pet Polish gouverment after He entered Poland - allies didn't want to quarrel, so they soon deserted the legal one, and accepted Stalin's vision of eastern boarders of Poland, looking about how final Soviet - German demarcation line looked like.
Meanwhile, Polish partisants fighting against Germans after they were out were accused of... collaborating with Germans and persecuted. The leaders of the underground state were invited for diplomatic talks - and than imprisoned and sentenced.
Soviets also didn't help the uprising in Warsaw, even closed down controlled by them airports for allied airplanes with help for it.
Also, the march of Soviet army was a great show of vandalism, rapes and robbery.
After the war, Soviets installed their regime that ruled up to the end of communism.
And even after the fall of it, Russia interferred in Polish matters, like it tried to stop it from joining NATO. |
Nice, very nice.
You forgot a couple of details.
Poland invaded Russia in 17th century, raized, pillaged and murdered Russians on their way to Moscow.
In 1920 Poland invaded young Soviet republic and in 1921 took Northern Ukrain and Northern Beylorussia.
Poland is deirectly responsible for the start of WW2.
(By its behavior which Churchill called- the greed of hyena. You need a full stroy? Does Czechoslovakia, Lithuania refusal to give right of passage to Soviet troops to defend Czechs, refusal of signing military alliance with USSR, doesn't ring the bell?).
Red Army entered Poland Sept 17. Your president fleed from Warsaw at Sept 1. Your Government fleed Warsaw Sept 5. Your government comletely left territory of Poland before Sept 17, when Soviet entered WesternUkrain and Western Beylorussia. Your chief of army feildmarshal Szru-blah..blah...blah... (you Poles have such fancy names, I can't remember) who fleed away from frot line to Brest fortress with tail between the legs, made order to do not fight Soviet troops (no, it's not becuase he though they'll help them to fight nazis), but instead to retreat to Romanian border. Only absolute stupid mofo could make such order. The lands SU took in 1939, were Western Ukraine and Western Beylorussia, you took from Soviets in 1921. As for Katyn, you invent nothing new- just repeat Guebels propaganda.
Last edited by Serb on 16-09-2004 at 07:46
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Heresson
|
|
of frogs
Jun 2000
time: 06:23
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Serb
Nice, very nice.
You forgot a couple of details.
Poland invaded Russia in 16th century, raized, pillaged and murdered Russians on their way to Moscow.
|
And vice versa: it was about why Poles dislike Russians, not the other way around.
quote:
In 1920 Poland invaded young Soviet republic and in 1921 took Northern Ukrain and Northern Beylorussia.
|
It was preemptive strike...
quote:
Poland is deirectly responsible for the start of WW2.
(By its behavior which Churchill called- the greed of hyena. You need a full stroy? Do Czechoslovakia, Lithuania refusal to give right of passage to Soviet troops to defend Czechs, refusal of signing military alliance with USSR, doesn't ring the bell?).
|
Are You so naive?
"They didn't want our alliance, so we had to conquer them hand to hand with our common enemy" - that's what You are saying. Soviets wanted this "alliance" to vassalise Poland, just as they did later on with Baltic Republics.
quote:
Red Army entered Poland Sept 17. Your president fleed from Warsaw at Sept 1. Your Government fleed Warsaw Sept 5. Your government comletely left territory of Poland before Sept 17
|
And what? Does lack of the head of the state means You can invade it?
quote:
make such order. The lands SU took in 1939, were Northern Ukrain and Northern Beylorussia, you took from Soviets in 1921.
|
They did not belong to Soviets then. Both Soviets and Poland were in statu nascendi, and those grounds were discussed. Poland won. You wanted your "hyena" revenge? You took it. But claiming that You did that without breaking earlier treaties, and only for the sake of fight against Hitler, and only because Poland didn't want alliance with You, it is somewhat silly, don't You think?
quote:
As for Katyn, you invent nothing new- just repeat Guebels propaganda. |
Ekhem, EVEN YOUR STATE HAS OFFICIALLY ADMITTED IT WAS SOVIETS' THING.
But of course, Serb knows better. Serb believes good uncle Joe.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Serb
|
|
Siberia, Communist party of Apolyton
Nov 2001
time: 11:23
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Heresson
And vice versa: it was about why Poles dislike Russians, not the other way around.
|
So, you've started it first.
quote:
It was preemptive strike...
|
Bullsh!t. Poland was the first violator of Versales treaty. It's started its expansion, righ after its re-creation due to Versales treaty. Poland started to grab lands of defeated in WW1 empires, to expand its borders out of limits of Versalies treaty. Such preemptive strikes always have been called agression.
quote:
Are You so naive?
"They didn't want our alliance, so we had to conquer them hand to hand with our common enemy" - that's what You are saying. Soviets wanted this "alliance" to vassalise Poland, just as they did later on with Baltic Republics. |
Ok, let's see.
Munich. It is true that main mofos there were Chemberlen and his gang. They agitated for division of Czechoslovakia. But how Poland acted? Czechs had defensive alliance with France and USSR. But France also had alliance with Poland. Poland also had defensive alliance with Romania against USSR. USSR had to defend Czechoslovakia in accordance with its obligations, IF France was also defending them. SU made clear message that he will fulfill its obligation in case of agression against Czechs. France was under Brits pressure and basically was betwen two lights- to fall into Brits demands and surrender its ally- Czechoslovakia or to fullfil its obligations and defend its ally Czechs on pair with the Soviets. And at this time great kingdom of Poland appears on the scene. Poland threaten to use situation on its own favor and attack Lithuania. Polish ambassador was called to Kremlin where uncle Joe made it clear for him that USSR will not allow this. It put France in pretty difficult situation- if they fulfill their obligation it means war with Germany over Czechoslovakia and at the same time they have to defend Poland in Polish war vs. Soviets over Lithuania. For France it means war vs. two powers instead of war with USSR, and Czechoslovakia against lone Germany. Your behaviour basically left them no choice and they surendered Sudets to Germany.
But Soviets declared they will fulfill their obligations towards Czchehoslovakia even if France would refuse to protect them. What Poland did? It refused to give right of passage for the Soviets. Why? Because it was interesed in division of Czechoslovakia. As she later proved, when she on pair with Germany, and Hungary participated in division of Czechoslovakia and grab part of it. Later, USSR made 11 propositions for creation of wide anti-German alliance with France and UK, all propositions were refused. UK, France and Poland signed non-agression pact with Germany. Hitler offered alliance to Poland to fight Soviets, but Poland refused- "but we can enter it later". In other words Poland wanted to grab more territories by other's hands. They thought that to attack USSR Hitler had only one way- through Romania (with whom Poland had alliance only vs. USSR)- good opportunity to grab some Romanian lands first, and them later to grab Ukraine, when Nazis would kick Soviet arses. Good policy my ass. USSR offered military alliance to Poland, UK and France pressed on Poland to enter this alliance and could give any guarnties to Poland, in case if Soviets do something wrong, but Poland refused. USSR had no choice but to do all other countries already done- to sign non-agression pact with Germany. Then Germany attacked Poland, and your leadership betrayed its allies and its own people once again- it simply packed their baggage and first fleed the capital (on fifth day of war) and then entierly escaped the country. While you have obligations to France, you have to fight, to let them mobilize and strike from the west. Insted your government left its army and run, and your army, without leadership became a crowd which Germans easily defeated. When Soviets entered Western Ukraine and Western Beylorussia, Polish state didn't exist already, as well as its army. Would you preffer to Germans took WesternUkraine and Beylorussia?
quote:
And what? Does lack of the head of the state means You can invade it? |
It means there is no more state. State without leadership is absurd. When Germans were several kilometers from Moscow, Soviet government didn't escape the capital. When Germans were near Paris, French government didn't escape the Paris (they capitulated, true, but capitulation is better than what your government did. Capitulation means that defeated and victorious sides sign agreement, which consist of various conditions, like exchange of pows, rights for people on occupied territories, loss of territories, reparations, etc. What your government done- was way worse. They just surrendered their own people unconditionaly, let Germany to annex Poland. It was the betrayal of their own people). Nobody run like your government. Your government run just right after Germans entered your territory. They simply run like complete cowards.
And who said it was an invasion or agression? Churchill perhaps? He said quite the opposite, I can find you a direct quote of Churchill, if you wish. In general, he said that Soviets acted in the most rational way, not a single word about agression.
WHO SAID IT WAS AGRESSION?
WHO RECOGNIZED ACTIONS OF USSR AS AGRESSION?
WHY UK AND FRANCE DIDN'T DECLARE WAR OVER SOVIETS FOR SOVIET ENTERANCE TO WESTERN UKRAINE AND BEYLORUSSIA, DESPITE THEY HAD MILITARY ALLIANCE?
WHY LEAGUE OF NATIONS DIDN'T RECOGNIZED SOVIET ACTIONS AS AGRESSION?
UK and France didn't want to dow Soviets, because they were already in war vs. Germany? The league of nations was too afraid of mighty Soviet empire?
BS.
When Soviets invaded Finland, UK and France planned a joint military attack against USSR, including joint fighting of their expedition forces with Finns on Leningrad's direction, submarine warfare in Black sea and bombardments of Caucasus oil fields. It was one of the reasons why Soviets and Finns signed a peace treaty. War with allies was the last thing Stalin wanted then and threat of such war was pretty real.
The league of nation condemned Soviet agression towards Finland and excluded USSR as country agressor from the league of nations.
So my questions remain.
quote:
They did not belong to Soviets then. Both Soviets and Poland were in statu nascendi, and those grounds were discussed. Poland won. You wanted your "hyena" revenge? You took it. But claiming that You did that without breaking earlier treaties, and only for the sake of fight against Hitler, and only because Poland didn't want alliance with You, it is somewhat silly, don't You think? |
BS. I suppose you think they belonged to Poland, right?
YOU HAD CLEAR BORDERS IN ACCORDANCE WITH VERSALIES TREATY. Western Ukraine and Beylorussia, didn't belong to Poland in accordance with Verslies treaty. It was Russian territory. Soviets was a new government of Russia. Change of government, recognized or not recognized by the world community, doesn't give right to Poland to capture parts of Russia.
quote:
Ekhem, EVEN YOUR STATE HAS OFFICIALLY ADMITTED IT WAS SOVIETS' THING.
But of course, Serb knows better. Serb believes good uncle Joe. |
Gorbachev, Yeltsin, Yakovlev and their team of motherf*ckers ARE NOT my government.
And yes, I preffer to trust uncle Joe and to results of international investigation, than to cheif of Hitler's propaganda- Guebels.
Last edited by Serb on 16-09-2004 at 07:54
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Heresson
|
|
of frogs
Jun 2000
time: 06:23
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Serb
So, you've started it first.
|
Why?
quote:
Bullsh!t. Poland was the first violator of Versales treaty. It's started its expansion, righ after its re-creation due to Versales treaty. Poland started to grab lands of defeated in WW1 empires, to expand its borders out of limits of Versalies treaty. Such preemptive strikes always have been called agression.
|
Are You nuts? Versailles treaty created western boarder of Poland, not the eastern one.
quote:
where uncle Joe made it clear for him that USSR will not allow this.
|
It was a bluff in order to force Lithuania to open diplomatic relationships. Have we attacked it?
quote:
with USSR, and Czechoslovakia against lone Germany. Your behaviour basically left them no choice and they surendered Sudets to Germany.
|
My God, does anyone else know about it! Poland rules the world! It is the only one who forced everyone to accept Muenchen treaty!
Is it what they learn You at school?
quote:
It refused to give right of passage for the Soviets. Why? Because it was interesed in division of Czechoslovakia.
|
First of all, it was shortly BEFORE Muenchen treaty.
Secondly, Poland only took back part of what Tchechoslovakia anected by force shortly after ww1, when Poland was fighting against Soviets and was not able to protect its backs.
Thirdly, Soviets were hostile to Poland.
Would You let Chineese armies through to Europe anyway?
quote:
offered alliance to Poland to fight Soviets, but Poland refused- "but we can enter it later".
|
Who said so? Serb... Serb... Serb...
quote:
In other words Poland wanted to grab more territories by other's hands.
|
Alliance with germany was not possible not only because Poland didn't want the war, but also because Germany wanted Gdańsk as a part of the deal.
And if Poland wanted more lands, it would have taken them in Riga 1921. It took much less than Soviets offered it.
quote:
Romania (with whom Poland had alliance only vs. USSR)
|
Defensive alliance only
quote:
- good opportunity to grab some Romanian lands first, and them later to grab Ukraine, when Nazis would kick Soviet arses.
|
Are You saying Poland wanted to get some Romanian land? Serb, this is absurd. Romania was our ally.
quote:
USSR offered military alliance to Poland, UK and France pressed on Poland to enter this alliance and could give any guarnties to Poland, in case if Soviets do something wrong, but Poland refused.
|
What do you expect? Poland always had more sobre attitude towards Soviets than Britain and France. Soviets wanted to grab Polish territory (and did it fas and nefas). Guaranties? We've seen how much they were worth after the defeat of Germany. Poland would have ended under Soviet occupation, and I doubt France or Britain would do anything about it.
quote:
USSR had no choice but to do all other countries already done- to sign non-agression pact with Germany.
|
All is so nice in your picture, but why did this non-agression pact contain clausures about division of Poland?
And what could USSR be afraid of? Without territory of Poland, germany could not effectively fight Soviets
quote:
Then Germany attacked Poland, and your leadership betrayed its allies and its own people once again- it simply packed their baggage and first fleed the capital (on fifth day of war) and then entierly escaped the country.
|
If You don't know, Polish gouverment was supposed to be moved, and was moved first to Paris, later to London, and took part in later part of the war. Your words is silly SOviet propaganda, Serb.
quote:
While you have obligations to France, you have to fight, to let them mobilize and strike from the west.
|
Did they strike?
quote:
When Soviets entered Northern Ukraine and Northern Beylorussia, Polish state didn't exist already, as well as its army. Would you preffer to Germans took Northern Ukraine and Beylorussia?
|
It is disgusting Soviet propaganda, Serb. Be ashamed of it. First of all, the division of Poland was foreseen by Ribbentrop-Molotov pact already.
Secondly, that a gouverment leaves a territory of the state, it doesn't mean that the state ceases to exist.
It is a blantant excuse for an unprovoked attack.
Imagine a house whose owner is forced out of it by a burglar. And then the neighbour comes and, stating that he must not let the burglar get the stuff, he begins robbing himself; that's the situation.
quote:
Soviet government didn't escape the capital.
|
It planned to move to Swierdlowsk
quote:
They just left their own people unconditionaly, let Germany to annex Poland. It was the btrayal of their own people).
|
Propaganda, Serb. If the gouverment stayed, it'd have been killed by Germans.
It didn't "escape" just to save their lives.
They "escaped" to continue the fight in the west, which Poles did.
quote:
he said that Soviets acted in the most rational way, not a single word about agression.
|
Churchill is no moral authority.
And, yes, this agression was rational. Rational and planned, Serb.
quote:
WHO RECOGNIZED ACTIONS OF USSR AS AGRESSION?
|
If You kill a person and no-one will dare to admit it, You still have killed a person.
You entered a territory of a foreign state, and started brutal occupation of it. It's an agression.
quote:
WHY UK AND FRANCE DIDN'T DECLARE WAR OVER SOVIETS FOR SOVIET ENTERANCE TO NORTHERN UKRAINE AND BEYLORUSSIA?
|
Because their alliance with Poland was only directed against Germany, and anyway, they didn't want to risk conflict with USSR
quote:
When Soviets invaded Finland, UK and France planned a joint military attack against USSR, including joint fighting of their expedition forces with Finns on Leningrad's direction, submarine warfare in Black sea and bombardments of Caucasus oil fields. It was one of the reasons why Soviets and Finns signed a peace treaty.
|
Don't You forget that in 1939 Britain and France had to fight against Germany as well?
quote:
BS. I suppose you think they belonged to Poland, right?
YOU HAD CLEAR BORDERS IN ACCORDANCE WITH VERSALIES TREATY. North Ukraine and Beylorussia, didn't belong to Poland in accordance with Verslies treaty.
|
Poland was a new state, that had to fight for its independance also against Soviets.
The treaty of Versailes didn't fix eastern boarders of Poland. Soviet gouverment was illegal, and Soviet state was not a successor of state of tzars. I think Lenin would've been offended by such insinuation.
Anyway, You annexed those lands from Poland. Poland ruled thse grounds before Russia did.
quote:
Gorbachev, Yeltsin, Yakovlev and their team of motherf*ckers ARE NOT my government.
And yes, I preffer to trust uncle Joe and to results of international investigation, than to cheif of Hitler's propaganda- Guebels. |
Sorry, but Putin recognises Katyń as Soviet murder as well...
Serb, You live in a world of ilusions.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:23.
Apolyton Time is 00:23. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
13-09-2004 21:35
|