The future of Russia and the EU

[Xtoisè]

http://img.rian.ru/images/6137/97/61379789.jpg


http://en.rian.ru/analysis/20070302/61461003.html


11:39 | 02/ 03/ 2007




MOSCOW. (Sergei Karaganov for RIA Novosti)

For Russia, Europe is a centuries-long magnet, which has had a strong influence on its cultural identity to this day. For Europe, Russia has always been both a shield and a threat. Russia defended Europe from the Mongols, Turks and Nazis; it has been the most reliable among a host of almost wholly unreliable major suppliers of energy, which Europe generates on a negligible scale. But defending Europe, Russia sometimes launched an offensive and gained control over some of its parts. Moreover, following the usual European road, Russia has never been fully European, nor has it been capable of it.

The past few years have made relations between Europe and Russia even more confusing than before. The former has built a post-European civilization based on a renunciation of violence, individualism, and partly sovereignty; has built a society where all its members can coexist in comfort; and, importantly, has overcome the curse of strife and hostility. But having made these spectacular achievements, Europe has lost its strategic loadstar. Having absorbed 27 countries, Europe does not know what to do next. Nor does it have any strategy as regards Russia.

Having overcome its communist past, Russia rushed to Europe just to find that it was not very welcome. Even more importantly, it transpired that Europe had changed beyond recognition, and was very different from what we yearned for. As a result, Russia also lost its old vector.

This mutual loss has become particularly clear in the past few years. Having quickly established a close dialogue in the early 1990s, the sides discovered that they did not have much to talk about. Their rapprochement produced shallow documents about four spaces. The situation was made worse by Europe's extension, which not only consolidated the traditionally anti-Russian forces but created the impression that in its domestic, and to some extent, foreign policies Moscow was following a non-European and even an anti-European road.

In turn, we came to the conclusion that the indecisive Europe was a weakling. In line with Russia's worst political tradition, coupled with our own humiliations of the past decade, we started talking to the Europeans with arrogance, if not disdain. In the past few months - after the fantastic polonium scandal and the European criticism of Russia's decision to export gas to Belarus at higher prices, we have come to think that Russia will be censured no matter what it does. Europe's moral and political influence has diminished.

In this situation, even mild criticism of truly hideous events in Russia cannot be perceived as a desire to help.

The dialogue has been reduced to tough bargaining on energy. Pressure is becoming tougher. Europe demands that Russia give up its monopoly on oil and gas pipelines, although Norway, a de facto EU member, still has such monopoly. Although Europe insists that Russia should give foreign companies access to its resources, many countries all over the world do not do so. It is not clear whether this is good or not but Russia seems to have been chosen as a weak link. The Iranians and the Saudis will not even hear of it. It is possible to push Uzbeks, Turkmen, or Kazakhs, but the biggest part of their resources is transported through Russia.

Russia feels strong, and is not going to yield. It is not frightened by the threats to build oil and gas pipelines around it. Quite the contrary, they reinforce its resolve to build pipes to the East, thereby strengthening its grip on the market. The new Russia-EU Treaty, which should replace the 1994 partnership and cooperation agreement, is likely to become another bureaucratic sham.

We have come to what seems to be a deadlock. What can we do now? We should not be rude, but nor should we yield to pressure because concessions will only generate further demands. A strange promise by our officials at the Russia-EU summit in Lahti not to charge European airlines for transit over Siberia starting in 2007 has already led to demands for more benefits.

But the deadlock will be overcome in a couple of years when Russia gives up its patently ineffective political and economic model of the past two years, and when Europe gets its act together and adopts a clear-cut strategy for the future.

New members will melt in the pot, and will stop being a drag on Europe and playing up to its rivals.

A new generation of leaders will not care for the old socialist (albeit enlightened) model of European development. The newcomers with their renunciation of socialism could be helpful here.

Let's hope that European leaders will become younger and will move to the right. I'd like to hope for similar changes in Russia. We will then have a new round of rapprochement, which will not be based on the teacher-student model or tough rivalry. Russia cannot be pushed into playing a student's role.

Europe will define its future model. On March 25, a historic EU summit will celebrate 50 years since the Treaty of Rome created the European Economic Community. The best brains in Europe are working on a declaration designed to give a strategic vision of the future and take the EU out of the impasse.

For all my deep respect and sympathy for these people, I'm afraid they will not produce anything meaningful. Europe should proclaim a course towards a genuine political alliance and formation of a quasi-federative state. But the Europeans will not go for this. Another option is to move backwards and accept that political unification was a mistake, that the EU should not have pursued a common foreign and defense policy. But this will not be easy to do. There is one more option - to move towards a strategic super-alliance with Russia, its territory, armed forces, and resource potential. But the Europeans are not yet ready for this move at all.

So, we will have to wait instead of bargaining over trifles; we should not give concessions and should work for rapprochement at cultural level, taking small steps and working on minor projects.

We can achieve the goal if we do not fail as a civilization, or get bogged down in the quagmire of isolation. In several years the Europeans, who will inevitably become weaker compared with other centers in the world, may still come back to my third option.

In this case, Russia and Europe will be in for a new historical rapprochement, which will benefit all Europeans - from the Atlantic to the Pacific.

Sergey Karaganov is dean of the Faculty of World Economics and Politics, Higher School of Economics.

[joka]

Europe should proclaim a course towards a genuine political alliance and formation of a quasi-federative state. I'll have one of those, thank you.

[Switek]

The future of Russia and the EU

http://img237.imageshack.us/img237/3014/sovieteuflaget0.gif

[theholeinthedonut]

I like the "Russia defended Europe against the Nazi's" part. What are you guys adding to the Wodka?

[Flamming_Python]

I like the "Russia defended Europe against the Nazi's" part. What are you guys adding to the Wodka?

If there was no Russia, there would be Nazi's all over Europe. And yes you can use all the "USSR enslaved Eastern Europe after" arguements that you want, and you'd be correct, but that still doesn't change the fact that the USSR beat the nazi's (for the most part) and spared Europe a worse fate.

[Zarathustra]

I like the "Russia defended Europe against the Nazi's" part. What are you guys adding to the Wodka?

They still did a great job on the eastern front during Barbarossa. The cold war and Stalin's excesses is another thing.

[Frutzel]

http://img237.imageshack.us/img237/3014/sovieteuflaget0.gif

Nice one Switekrofl

[Zarathustra]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v336/DonSalluzt/EUCCP.gif?t=1172937355

;)

[Switek]

If there was no Russia, there would be Nazi's all over Europe. And yes you can use all the "USSR enslaved Eastern Europe after" arguements that you want, and you'd be correct, but that still doesn't change the fact that the USSR beat the nazi's (for the most part) and spared Europe a worse fate.

No one can deny USSR contribution in defeating Nazis. True. But USSR did not bring anything particular better.

Current Russia, in turn, hasn't invented anything better that western European values. which could attract Europe. Criticism of US is no way to win European hearts

[theholeinthedonut]

If there was no Russia, there would be Nazi's all over Europe. And yes you can use all the "USSR enslaved Eastern Europe after" arguements that you want, and you'd be correct, but that still doesn't change the fact that the USSR beat the nazi's (for the most part) and spared Europe a worse fate.

What about Uncle Joe's and Adolf's pre WWII honey moon ?

[Mamont]

No one can deny USSR contribution in defeating Nazis. True. But USSR did not bring anything particular better.
How "life" sounds?



Current Russia, in turn, hasn't invented anything better that western European values. which could attract Europe. Criticism of US is no way to win European hearts
Hmm, the only western/european value is money. Nothing more. The whole life now is down to a mere counting. No big goals, no great ideas - pure consumation.

[Switek]

How "life" sounds?
:cantbeli:

Did you forget this crime (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katyn_massacre)?




Hmm, the only western/european value is money. Nothing more. The whole life now is down to a mere counting. No big goals, no great ideas - pure consumation.

You must feel jealous if you find only such superficial example. :roll:

[Kitsune]

What about Uncle Joe's and Adolf's pre WWII honey moon ?

Exactly. There is this thing about the rather doubtful (British understatement) role the Sovietunion played when it offered the Nazis to divide up eastern Europe and covered Adolfs ass so that he could invade Poland. Then two weeks later, Stalin invaded as well. And even later in the war, the Nazis could claim (with at least a bit of justification) that they would defend [/i]Europe from the Bolsheviks, not the other way round. The Soviets had this habit to stay in and control (some wold even use the word subjugate) those countries they had liberated, after all.

But the conveniently simplified (if not outrightly distored) version of history about the Sovietunion "liberating Europe" from the Nazis has simply become a fixed part of the Russian view if things. Their "finest hour". Some other peoples did similiar things, by the way.

Be that as it may, in this thread (forum, site) we won't solve this matter. Neither will Russians manage to convince all Unbelievers to accept their "glorious role" in WWII, nor will said group of eternal sceptics convince all Russians to abandon this view. Therefore, I hereby propose the following: Let us adjourn the discussion of this topic. Instead of turning this into another flame war about WWII, let us discuss Russias and Europe relationship over the next decades.

After all, the future is so much more interesting than the past. Don't you think?

[Mamont]

Did you forget this crime (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katyn_massacre)?
And? How many poles live today thanks to dead russians? Are you trying another "holocaust" move to milk Russia like Israel milked Germany? Or just flamebaiting as usual? Maybe i shoud point you to the numbers of those ukrainians killed by polish hands? Or how many poles and how many soviet people died battling nazis?


You must be jealous if you find only such superficial example. :roll:
Why should i? Describe your point about greateness of european values.

[Switek]

And? How many poles live today thanks to dead russians? Are you trying another "holocaust" move to milk Russia like Israel milked Germany? Or just flamebaiting as usual? Maybe i shoud point you to the numbers of those ukrainians killed by polish hands? Or how many poles and how many soviet people died battling nazis?



You must be unaware how many Polish patriots who fought against Nazists were arrested and murdered by NKVD and Polish communist security services between 1944-1952...

[Thor]

If there was no Russia, there would be Nazi's all over Europe.
And if there was no Germany, the whole of Europe would have been under communist occupation.

[Mamont]

To stop Switek's usual hijacking of every thread involving Russia.


You must be unaware how many Polish patriots who fought against Nazists were arrested and murdered by NKVD and Polish communist security services between 1944-1952...

Ok. Let's see what i got on this subject. On 26 july 1944 agreement between SU and Polish commitee of national liberation was signed, stated that polish population in war zone was under SU jurisdiction. Later that zone was defined 50-100km wide. The number of deported/interned polish residents after 1944 was 39029 people, some claimed about 48k people(based on numbers of echelons used). Most of them were members of AK. The term of detention was from one month to 5 years with first releases happened in august-october 1945. The death rate was 12-12,5%. No intentional killings were autorised or executed. The last batch of interned left for Poland in 1950. I left polish communist aside because i find preatty weird that urge to throw polish communist's deeds on soviet union.

Do you still want to talk about it? If yes - create a new topic.

Ahh - another "most brilliant" comment by Thor(c). Maybe i have to start collecting the most stupid comments about SU-Russia..

[perdurabo]

And if there was no Germany, the whole of Europe would have been under communist occupation.
BS. Vistula Battle in 1920 polish-soviet war saved europe from comunism, then it was US nukes.

If there was no Russia, there would be Nazi's all over Europe.
BS also, if there where no soviets Poland would hold Nazis much longer, did you know that when september campign ended they had ammo only for 2 weeks of fight? moust of their planes had to be repaired or build same with trucks... Soviet backstab in 17th september 1939 world war II would end in 1940.

[Thor]

BS. Vistula Battle in 1920 polish-soviet war saved europe from comunism, then it was US nukes.
Germany was the only thing between the Red Army and Europe, that's just something people will have to learn to live with.

I don't expect poles or other german-occupied nations to embrace that fact though.


Ahh - another "most brilliant" comment by Thor(c). Maybe i have to start collecting the most stupid comments about SU-Russia..
As long you don't give up collecting vodka bottles.

Go finish your writings on History Teaching within the Warzaw Pact.

[Switek]

To stop Switek's usual hijacking of every thread involving Russia.

you must be paranoid... :| and obviously you don't know more my posts and threads. The fact that some leaders of "Russia strong crew" on mp.net labelled me in obvious name proves the fact that my opinions must be inconvenient and for them.


Ok. Let's see what i got on this subject. On 26 july 1944 agreement between SU and Polish commitee of national liberation was signed, stated that polish population in war zone was under SU jurisdiction. Later that zone was defined 50-100km wide. The number of deported/interned polish residents after 1944 was 39029 people, some claimed about 48k people(based on numbers of echelons used). Most of them were members of AK. The term of detention was from one month to 5 years with first releases happened in august-october 1945. The death rate was 12-12,5%. No intentional killings were autorised or executed. The last batch of interned left for Poland in 1950. I left polish communist aside because i find preatty weird that urge to throw polish communist's deeds on soviet union.

You of course know what was and where and by whom was created Polish commitee of national liberation? Theu didn't represent Poland and Polish nation but communists and many of their actions were directed against some other Poles. Their represented Soviet interests in Poland, not our national. The results of it affected Poland till 1989...

anyway I think we should stop this discussion at this point.

[M_S]

Germany was the only thing between the Red Army and Europe, that's just something people will have to learn to live with.

I don't expect poles or other german-occupied nations to embrace that fact though.


As long you don't give up collecting vodka bottles.

Go finish your writings on History Teaching within the Warzaw Pact.

Any sources backing up your obvious bias towards nazi-germany?

Germany never had a chance from the start of barbarossa. The only thing they did was to open the gates of Europe to the communists, after they learned a couple of lessons about their imagined superiorness, the hard way.

[Snoshi]

FFS!!! Stop discussing WW2...Every Poland/Baltic/Europe-Russia threads end up in WW2 flamewar.. I think that admins need to hand out infracations for this bs.

[tsuri]

There is one more option - to move towards a strategic super-alliance with Russia, its territory, armed forces, and resource potential. But the Europeans are not yet ready for this move at all.

Of course we are not! Our interests are different, our potential is great enough to become the superpower that Russia wishes to be.

There is no future for such an alliance.

[Xtoisè]

And if there was no Germany, the whole of Europe would have been under communist occupation.

And if there was no Germany there would be no communism.

[Freibier]

I'm all for improved euro-russkie relations and close cooperation in ze future but the russians should stop dreaming

[Pvt.Anderson]

Any sources backing up your obvious bias towards nazi-germany?

Germany never had a chance from the start of barbarossa.[/I] The only thing they did was to open the gates of Europe to the communists, after they learned a couple of lessons about their imagined superiorness, the hard way.

bull-schit

[daily666]

Germany was the only thing between the Red Army and Europe, that's just something people will have to learn to live with.

I don't expect poles or other german-occupied nations to embrace that fact though.

Here you're totally wrong mate, he was talking 1920 where there was a Polish - Bolshevik war and while Germany was embraced in a terrible mess after the WWI they wouldn'd do nothing to the upcoming Red Army because many Germans were actually waiting for them. Don't make up things because it was still 20 years to Nazi occupation of Poland.

Wiki:


In late 1919 the leader of Russia's new communist government, Vladimir Lenin, was inspired by the Red Army's civil-war victories over White Russian anti-communist forces and their western allies, and began to see the future of the revolution with greater optimism. The Bolsheviks proclaimed the need for the dictatorship of the proletariat, and agitated for a worldwide communist community. Their avowed intent was to link the revolution in Russia with an expected revolution in Germany[9] and to assist other communist movements in Western Europe; Poland was the geographical bridge that the Red Army would have to cross in order to do so.[13][9] Lenin’s aim was to restore control of the territories ceded by Russia in the Brest-Litovsk Treaty was to infiltrate the borderlands, set up soviet governments there as well as in Poland, and reach Germany where he expected a socialist revolution to break out.[9] He believed that Soviet Russia could not survive without the support of a socialist Germany.

But than, you can always say it was not Russia but the Communism, which was a German invention.

The above quote somehow disqualifies the statement in the article at the thread start stating:


But defending Europe, Russia sometimes launched an offensive and gained control over some of its parts. Moreover, following the usual European road, Russia has never been fully European, nor has it been capable of it.

Europe for some times was really afraid of Russia's ideas of defending it.

[Flamming_Python]

What about Uncle Joe's and Adolf's pre WWII honey moon ?

What about Chamberlain's and Adolf's pre WWII honey moon ?

[Flamming_Python]

BS. Vistula Battle in 1920 polish-soviet war saved europe from comunism, then it was US nukes.

BS also, if there where no soviets Poland would hold Nazis much longer, did you know that when september campign ended they had ammo only for 2 weeks of fight? moust of their planes had to be repaired or build same with trucks... Soviet backstab in 17th september 1939 world war II would end in 1940.

By the time the Soviet Union went in, the Polish government had already collapsed. Every single Country from France to Yugoslavia was taken out in 1 or 2 months. Poland simply didn't have enough land to resist blitzkrieg, and their formations were routed early on.

[Flamming_Python]

But than, you can always say it was not Russia but the Communism, which was a German invention.


That right, in fact the Communist party was very strong in post-WW1 Germany. I guess you should thank Adolf Hitler that he stopped it, eh Thor? :|

[Flamming_Python]

you must be paranoid... :| and obviously you don't know more my posts and threads. The fact that some leaders of "Russia strong crew" on mp.net labelled me in obvious name proves the fact that my opinions must be inconvenient and for them.


Switek i'm afraid that I simply can't make any sense out of your path of logic. You are saying that you are RIGHT because people disagree with you? :roll:

That doesn't make sence

[asch]

ok, to sum up the facts:
despite the propositions in article, europeans of MPnet strongly oppose whole idea of such "unity".
so, there is no alliance possible. ok for me. we don't need you other way than customers.
this is my personal opinion of course.

thanks and good day to you.


p.s. to Thor.
Boo!
p-)

[Gluten]

If there was no Russia, there would be Nazi's all over Europe. And yes you can use all the "USSR enslaved Eastern Europe after" arguements that you want, and you'd be correct, but that still doesn't change the fact that the USSR beat the nazi's (for the most part) and spared Europe a worse fate.

i think the allied forces played a little part in that too, but maybe im wrong...

[daily666]

Don't get me wrong asch but I'd like Europe to cooperate fully with Russia on equal terms, but somehow I can see some slight symptoms of overusing it's position (energy of course) on Europe. It's never been easy and won't be especially with USA around.


Please don't make this thread "who did the biggest contribution to WWII"! :|

[Switek]

Switek i'm afraid that I simply can't make any sense out of your path of logic. You are saying that you are RIGHT because people disagree with you? :roll:

That doesn't make sence


For you, I guess... :|


It was a reply to one "Russia Strong" crewman who had made absolutely unneccessary simplification and generalisation, who, accordin an obvious evidence, must have a problem with keeping a respect to others mp.net members.

I'm saying that some who disagree with me can show it in just decent way... ;)

[Flamming_Python]

For you, I guess... :|


It was a reply to one "Russia Strong" crewman who had made absolutely unneccessary simplification and generalisation, who, accordin an obvious evidence, must have a problem with keeping a respect to others mp.net members.

I'm saying that some who disagree with me can show it in just decent way... ;)

Oh ok then...

You know us uncivilised Russians ;)


i think the allied forces played a little part in that too, but maybe im wrong...

I would never claim otherwise :)

[Switek]

Oh ok then...

You know us uncivilised Russians ;)

In current month we are eating your babies... :)

[shadowsrider]

Thats amazing how many nations treat themselves as Shield of Civilization : I heard about Serbia and Poland but Russia as a defender of Europe that's something new to me.
But just to clarify some facts in the article: saving from Mongols and Turks.
Mongols conquered Rus' (there was no Russia at the moment) and it did not stop their conquest. Just to remind from history - Mongols bought maps of Europe from Venetians and decided to invade Hungary which was fluorishing country at the moment. Northern wing invaded Poland and defeated coalition of Polish and German knights and burned southern Poland. In Hungary it was even worse - the whole country collapsed. There was no force in Europe able to stop this horde but khan died and Mongol forces withdrew. So where were Russians saving of Europe?

Second - Turks. Turkish power was broken in battle of Vienna by Polish-German-Austrian coalition. Then it was pursuited by Austrians.
Russian-Turkish wars blew up where Turkey was already weak and Russia used it to tear some areas of ex-Turkish territory. So again: Europe had to defend by themselves here.

Third: Nazis
If Germany had not attacked Russia there would be no saving Europe: moreover - USSR was closest ally if 3rd Reich providing resources, military installations for training. Propably it is unknown in Russia but there were meetings of NKVd and Gestapo in Zakopane (tourist city in Poland) devoted how to effectively occupy new terrains and beat partisans.

So this is history but this has nothing to do with nowadays but it create false mythology.
Anyway my opinion: yes, Europe should cooperate with Russia.

[Xtoisè]

Don't get me wrong asch but I'd like Europe to cooperate fully with Russia on equal terms, but somehow I can see some slight symptoms of overusing it's position (energy of course) on Europe. It's never been easy and won't be especially with USA around.


Please don't make this thread "who did the biggest contribution to WWII"! :|

Poland is not Europe, it has a title but nothing European. Poland is an "inbetweener".

[beNder]

And if there was no Germany, the whole of Europe would have been under communist occupation.


Amen to that. Look at Russia’s expansionist history.

[daily666]

Poland is not Europe, it has a title but nothing European. Poland is an "inbetweener".

"Poland is not Europe"...:cantbeli:

I mean, what kind of crap are you smoking dude?

[Xtoisè]

"Poland is not Europe"...:cantbeli:

I mean, what kind of crap are you smoking dude?

Poland speaking on behalf of Europe is laughable.

[kosse]

I mean, what kind of crap are you smoking dude?

I don't know but I want same stuff. DAOTW in the making.. p-)

[daily666]

Poland speaking on behalf of Europe is laughable.

You are laughable with your funny posts.

Poland doesn't speak on behalf of Europe, when did you come up with this?

[RICHICOQUI]

http://blogs.salon.com/0001330/myImages/2007/03/03/sherffius21.jpg

[Xtoisè]

You are laughable with your funny posts.

Poland doesn't speak on behalf of Europe, when did you come up with this?

I didnt come up with it, you did.


Don't get me wrong asch but I'd like Europe to cooperate fully with Russia on equal terms, but somehow I can see some slight symptoms of overusing it's position (energy of course) on Europe. It's never been easy and won't be especially with USA around.


Please don't make this thread "who did the biggest contribution to WWII"! :|

[Xtoisè]

http://blogs.salon.com/0001330/myImages/2007/03/03/sherffius21.jpg

Which one fuels WW3 best? Would "super-unhinged" be a correct answer?

[daily666]

I didnt come up with it, you did.

So I'm speaking for Poland? That's interesting, I thought I usually post for myself.

rofl

[Xtoisè]

So I'm speaking for Poland? That's interesting, I thought I usually post for myself.

rofl

Then I was wrong.

[M_S]

bull-schit

Were is Lokos when you need him, lol.

[Herrmannek]

we don't need you other way than customers.
this is my personal opinion of course.

Don't want to nitpick but you give us your oil and we give you green or pinko-commie bills in exchange... rofl

[MZKT]

No one can deny USSR contribution in defeating Nazis. True. But USSR did not bring anything particular better.

Not better? What was the Nazi-Throughput in Poland again? Wasn't it 1/20th of population per year. Indeed if Poles really think life in communism being not better then a death in nazism, soviets should have really canceled the advance on germany, and let germans satisfy polish "better dead then red"-dreams.

[Switek]

Not better? What was the Nazi-Throughput in Poland again? Wasn't it 1/20th of population per year. Indeed if Poles really think life in communism being not better then a death in nazism, soviets should have really canceled the advance on germany, and let germans satisfy polish "better dead then red"-dreams.

So tell my why Red Army liberated Poland why the hell they didn't stop at Bug river?

Dou you really believe that the fact that one gang saved your life from another one justify further your home robbery and raping members of your family?

[CPL Trevoga]

So tell my why Red Army liberated Poland why the hell they didn't stop at Bug river?

Dou you really believe that the fact that one gang saved your life from another one justify further your home robbery and raping members of your family?

Sweet Jesus! Are you saying that Soviet and Wojsko Polskoe soldiers that liberated Poland are rapists and robers?


So tell my why Red Army liberated Poland why the hell they didn't stop at Bug river?


That's the where real murderers, rapists and robbers were. Let's not act dumb.

[Herrmannek]

Sweet Jesus! Are you saying that Soviet and Wojsko Polskie soldiers that liberated Poland are rapists and robers?

This is very touchy topic and yes part of so called polish forces supported by soviets, were rapists, robbers and murderers that were raping, robbing and murdering fellow citizens... You better don't pull this loose....

[daily666]

This is very touchy topic and yes part of so called polish forces supported by soviets, were rapists, robbers and murderers that were raping, robbing and murdering fellow citizens... You better don't pull this loose....

Now, what the fvck are you talking about. WP in the east were rapists robbers and muderers? Any examples?

[Smersh]

Another ridicilous Russian themed threads. This has to be one of the worst. Bordering on being pro-Nazi Germany.


Hey Lets all thank the Nazis for stopping Communism and Soviet (Russian) aggression, and thus saving the world from evil bolshevism. Hurrahh Hitler!
^
sounds like Nazi propaganda.

[Herrmannek]

Now, what the fvck are you talking about. WP in the east were rapists robbers and muderers? Any examples?
Since when we talk only about WP, what about soviet sponsored partisans?

[Switek]

Some people here must be sick and paranoid... :| I put gang methapor as an example what was obvious exaggeration :lol:

anyway reflects feelings and experiences of many Poles but fellows damn! don't be so stiff...

[Switek]

Now, what the fvck are you talking about. WP in the east were rapists robbers and muderers? Any examples?

Unfortunatelly some were esp those from KBW and UB (internal troops and security service), sad truth...

[daily666]

Unfortunatelly some were esp those from KBW and UB (internal troops and security service), sad truth...

As usuall, but you cannot generalise, most of them were simple soldiers. Herrman said about the polish army in general.

Guys stop the offtopic btw.

[Kilgor]

Another ridicilous Russian themed threads. This has to be one of the worst. Bordering on being pro-Nazi Germany.


Hey Lets all thank the Nazis for stopping Communism and Soviet (Russian) aggression, and thus saving the world from evil bolshevism. Hurrahh Hitler!
^
sounds like Nazi propaganda.

When will you learn that anti communism / soviet union is not automatically pro nazi ?

[CPL Trevoga]

This is very touchy topic and yes part of so called polish forces supported by soviets, were rapists, robbers and murderers that were raping, robbing and murdering fellow citizens... You better don't pull this loose....

Damn, that what they teach you in Poland right now, spit on the graves of Polish patriots, just because they were fighting with Soviets. It's not like they had much f*cking choices who to fight nazis with or you would rather become potato fertilizer for the nazis than fight them?

[MZKT]

So tell my why Red Army liberated Poland why the hell they didn't stop at Bug river?

Yes, it was a mistake. I agree with you, they should have waited until nazis depopulate Poland and only then finish the last nazis and take over an empty country.

[daily666]

Damn, that what they teach you in Poland right now, spit on the graves of Polish patriots, just because they were fighting with Soviets. It's not like they had much f*cking choices who to fight nazis with or you would rather become potato fertilizer for the nazis than fight them?

No they don't teach that. I'm also against generalisations. I don't know what Herrman had in mind but apart of some scumbags Switek mentioned the regular soldiers were just regular soldiers, they were fighting (or at least they were told so) for free Poland and some of them even tried to help the Warsaw Uprising. Some of those guys (1AWP) did assault Berlin with the Russians.

[Sergei]

http://blogs.salon.com/0001330/myImages/2007/03/03/sherffius21.jpg

Sponsored by ConocoPhilips and ExxonMobil, eh? :) Where is the Bush cartel and his oil lobby in this equation?

[daily666]

Yes, it was a mistake. I agree with you, they should have waited until nazis depopulate Poland and only then finish the last nazis and take over an empty country.

In small part this was exactly what they did. Stalin did hold an offensive and waited with the armies for one month at the banks of Vistula watching how Nazis depopulate Warsaw and destroy what's left of it. 250.000 people were dead and 85% of the city was in ruins.

[Switek]

Yes, it was a mistake. I agree with you, they should have waited until nazis depopulate Poland and only then finish the last nazis and take over an empty country.

I can imagine that world without Poles (truoblemakers and whatever) could be a dream place for some :lol:

[Switek]

In small part this was exactly what they did. Stalin did hold an offensive and waited with the armies for one month at the banks of Vistula watching how Nazis depopulate Warsaw and destroy what's left of it. 250.000 people were dead and 85% of the city was in ruins.

Oh come on, dailly, MZKT ant many others do not know few simple facts...


The limited landings by the 1st Polish army, mentioned above, represented the only external force which arrived to physically support the uprising. Most importantly, there was limited support in terms of airdrops from the Western allies, (the Royal Air Force, in which a number of Polish, Australian, Canadian and South African pilots flew, made 223 sorties and lost 34 aircraft), but the effect of these airdrops was mostly psychological, as all but one American airdrop had to be carried out from faraway Brindisi in Italy. Although the Soviets briefly (13 September–28) provided some airdrops--but without parachutes and only when the uprising was on the verge of collapse--they actively prevented Allied assistance by denying landing rights to Allied aircraft on Soviet-occupied territory, and even shot down a number of those which carried supplies from Italy.

American support was also limited. After Stalin's objections to supporting the uprising, Churchill telegrammed Roosevelt on August 25 and proposed sending planes in defiance of Stalin, to "see what happens". Unable and unwilling to upset Stalin before the Yalta Conference, Roosevelt replied on August 26 with: I do not consider it advantageous to the long-range general war prospect for me to join you in the proposed message to Uncle Joe.

Also of significant note was the existence of an American airbase at Poltava in the Ukraine, from which an airdrop was made during the "Frantic Mission" in mid-September. However, this action infuriated Stalin, who immediately forbade all Allied presence in Soviet airspace.

but I do not find any sense to discuss topic what is obvious for some and taboo for others...

[Drako]

Pleaaaaaase someone lock this thread... We've been through this so many times already... If anyone has twisted sight at his country's history he won't change it no matter how much you discuss/argue/bitch about it. One thing is sure - Russia and Europe can't get along since Russia will always think about itself as an empire, and europe will never treat it as one.

[Smersh]

Kilgor:
When will you learn that anti communism / soviet union is not automatically pro nazi ?

I will just quote from this thread.



And if there was no [Nazi] Germany, the whole of Europe would have been under communist occupation.
[Nazi] Germany was the only thing between the Red Army and Europe, that's just something people will have to learn to live with.Considering all facists were and are the most rabid anti-communists/Soviet Union-ists, I think there is a strong link between them.

yeah, I agree these Russian themed threads are out of control, because of certain people a thread about modern Russia turns into a dicussion about communism, Katyn, Poland, Molotov-Ribbentrop pact, etc.

[Kilgor]

Kilgor:

I will just quote from this thread.

Considering all facists were and are the most rabid anti-communists/Soviet Union-ists, I think there is a strong link between them.

Have you considered that the two choices were almost equally unpalatable ?

and would give a example of of Churchill, a man who hated both systems.

[daily666]

Have you considered that the two choices were almost equally unpalatable ?

and would give a example of of Churchill, a man who hated both systems.

Beacuse both systems were actually Socialisms and Churchill hated socialism. The one in Germany was a National - Socialism/Nazionalsozialismus (hence the name "Nazis" so avoided by communist propaganda) and in Russia it was Communism (a revolutionary Socialism).

[Smersh]

I guess their both socialism if socialism means: a monopoly corporate take-over the economy, nationalism, anti-semitism, anti-slavism, anti-communism?!, anti-socialism?! and white supremacy. And is supported by artistocrats, big business, and conservatives, and nationalists.

This is completely off topic!!!

[Flamming_Python]

I guess their both socialism if socialism means: a monopoly corporate take-over the economy, nationalism, anti-semitism, anti-slavism, anti-communism?!, anti-socialism?! and white supremacy. And is supported by artistocrats, big business, and conservatives, and nationalists.

This is completely off topic!!!

x2

I never thought one could include so many contradictions in one description.

[Flamming_Python]

Beacuse both systems were actually Socialisms and Churchill hated socialism. The one in Germany was a National - Socialism/Nazionalsozialismus (hence the name "Nazis" so avoided by communist propaganda) and in Russia it was Communism (a revolutionary Socialism).

No daily the National Socialist party had no relation with Socialism.

It was named such in order to carry more favour with the workers. You can find many examples in the early 20th century party politics of this. During the short-lived Russian republic of 1917, almost all the parties had very left-wing, worker and socialistic names (perhaps with the exception of the Cadets), no matter how right wing they might have actually been.