 |
| |
|
|
DanS
|
 |
Kickball Capital of the World
Jan 1970
time: 00:19
|
|
This is a really odd argument we're having with Russia. Apparently, there is a wave of soviet nostalgia going on in Russia, which nobody else wants a part of, least of all the Baltics.
I would have thought that 65 years on, Russia would look upon the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact as a grave mistake and leave aside dickering about the legal definition of occupation (Bush may have used the wrong word on this, but not so far from the correct one).
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...5050501684.html
quote:
Russia Rebukes Bush on Remark
By Peter Baker
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, May 6, 2005; Page A14
Russia issued a testy rebuke of President Bush yesterday on the eve of his departure for Europe, denying that Moscow had forcibly occupied the Baltic states of Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia in 1940. This restatement of a Soviet view of history provoked a new round of controversy over modern Russia's intentions toward the now-independent states.
The statement came in response to a letter that Bush sent to the leader of Latvia. In it, the president acknowledged that the upcoming 60th anniversary of the end of World War II marked a tragic moment for the three tiny nations because during the conflict they were "occupied" by Soviet troops and absorbed into the Soviet Union against their will.
Bush leaves this morning for Riga, the Latvian capital, before heading to Moscow for the anniversary festivities.
Sergei Yastrzhembsky, the Russian ambassador to the European Union, convened a news conference in Moscow to insist that Soviet forces were invited into the Baltic states by their governments, an assertion that was the official Soviet line for half a century.
"One cannot use the term 'occupation' to describe those historical events," Yastrzhembsky said, according to news accounts. "At that time, the troop deployment took place on an agreed basis and with the clearly expressed agreement of the existing authorities in the Baltic republics."
A statement on the Russian Foreign Ministry Web site elaborated on that view, contending that under international law there was no occupation "because there was no state of war between the USSR and the Baltic states and no military actions were being conducted and the troops were introduced on the basis of an agreement."
In what was known as the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact, the Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin sealed a secret agreement with Adolf Hitler of Germany in 1939 to divide Poland and guarantee control over Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia. Soviet troops moved into the Baltic states the next year, on the pretense of responding to invitations. The states regained their independence in 1991.
In protest of the long Soviet rule, the leaders of Lithuania and Estonia are boycotting the anniversary celebration in Moscow on Monday, while President Vaira Vike-Freiberga of Latvia agreed to go only following Bush's visit. U.S. officials have said that they privately tried to persuade Russian President Vladimir Putin to use the anniversary to renounce the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact but that he refused.
Kaspars Ozolins, counselor at the Latvian Embassy in Washington, said he was not surprised that Russia would deny an occupation. "But what is surprising and regretful is they're using more of this aggressive, nationalistic rhetoric and they're moving away from what other democratic and free countries are thinking about the past," he said.
In several interviews with Baltic journalists yesterday, Bush did not use the word "occupation," instead referring to "the form of government imposed upon Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia."
But he said he discussed the matter with Putin during a February meeting in Slovakia and would repeat the message in Moscow on Sunday. "Yes, of course I'll remind him of that," Bush said. "I told him in Slovakia that I felt it was important for him to understand that my friends, the leaders of the Baltics, are upset; in other words, they don't view the end of World War II as a great moment of celebration. And there's a reason why." |
Last edited by DanS on 06-05-2005 at 20:46
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Pekka
|
 |
em seu burro dos pais!
Feb 2002
time: 07:19
|
|
DanS, yes, as you might have guessed, we have been following the recent steps closely and continue to do so. We have been blamed for things we never even did, backing up the old propaganda that has been proven false ages ago and admitted by both sides, and in one single second it was all taken back and let the old good times roll again.
This, in itself, is not dangerous this statement, because baltic countries won't retaliate, but this is a dangerous indicator how current leadership sees the situation, this reveals the direction they are going into, and make no mistake, this is not your friend. It's the same old ****, but in a nicer package than before.
What Solver says is correct. It's imperialistic thinking where others are pawns that can be used. Their politics doesn't even consider us small negihbours humans. The only play I'm interested in is how the folks in russia take these comments. Are they like some of the believers we have on the internet 'I KNEW IT! I KNEW IT waS ONLY WESTERN PROPAGANDA ALL THIS TIME!'. You just need to feed one thing and they're back to the old thinking patterns. But in all honesty, I don't think they really care about what leadership says or what the relations to other countries are, they would be more interested in how things in their own country are going, how they can improve standards of living and all that kind of stuff so I don't think the majority is even that interested or taking notes or listening.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Serb
|
|
Siberia, Communist party of Apolyton
Nov 2001
time: 11:19
|
|
One more thing,
current regimes of Baltic States are Nazi regimes.
Have a nice night.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Serb
|
|
Siberia, Communist party of Apolyton
Nov 2001
time: 11:19
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by JohnT
Because it's their dead institution, Dan. |
Exactly.
DanS,
US of A is hated all over the world, so do world a favor - kill yourselves.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Pekka
|
|
em seu burro dos pais!
Feb 2002
time: 07:19
|
|
Serb, well here's a hint. You prolly have 'evidence' showing maps and plans of greater finland, that had a purpose to take lands from SU. There were also LOTS of nazi symphatizers who were eager to jump on Hitler's board, and they finally saw the opportunity to try and implement that plan. SU never had as much troops in Karelian Isthmus and other positions as claimed by 'western propaganda', and that the sole purpose of the first invasi... sorry liberation part was to protect SU's own lands, knowing the plans of evil nazi finns, for greater finland.
The attack was merely defensive one, that had to be done because Finns started shelling the borders in the infamous Mainila shots case. SU troops were there in massive force ONLY because their intel and recon showed, that we were massing our troops there first.
What can I say. I mean, why not?!!!
And of course, molotov-ribbentrop, where SU and nazis made a deal to split up Europe was OK, because it was a security measure to be taken and even though they were fascists, that was the reality of the situation, in order to protect the areas, right? And in fact it was even before the first clashes started, but who cares about that little detail, at the end, there were germans in here helping us fight soviets, so **** they were right AFTER ALL!
You can believe that if you really want to. It doesn't matter what I say or show, it's just western propaganda to you.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Pekka
|
|
em seu burro dos pais!
Feb 2002
time: 07:19
|
|
And the natural continuance to that is, and WWII, that for security measures (once again, even thought peace had arrived), it was a necessary evil to .. grab some lands. AND in fact it was for their own good. Before, they couldn't defend themselves against nazis and whatnot, now they woudl have SU troops there, who would defend the lands. Not to mention the great expansion now offered new deals to be made, new manufacturing could start in baltic countries etc. IN FACT baltic folks didn't really HATE the sitaution so bad, they just were crying little girlies, because they had been humiliated and someone had to save them. And when things started going little bad, they didn't pull their part like everyone else, but wanted to gain independence, which really wasn't what they wanted, they just wanted to jump on USA's penis, and that was a contributon why SU falled. When it wasn't the biggest reason, it certainly did contribute, so in fact they just took the benefits of a superpower and once it was their turn to do something in return, they just went for another big one, lke the whores they are.
For some people, this is the reality. Sad.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:19.
Apolyton Time is 00:19. |
top of page
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
06-05-2005 20:40
. Russians have this imprialistic thinking that they haven't yet even started to overcome, so they can not admit the mistakes of their past. Maybe another 60 years later when two more generations have changed.
Attachment: 
|
