Resurrecting the Commonwealth?
The Black Monk
Poland, Lithuania and Ukraine to form brigade for UN, EU and NATO
peacekeeping missions
By Corky Siemaszko
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER
The Poles and Lithuanians are trying to create something not seen
since 1795 - a fighting unit that also includes Ukrainians.
Under the plan, the three countries would form a brigade that would
take part in United Nations and European Union-sponsored peacekeeping
missions.
It would also serve under the auspices of NATO.
"This reflects our support for Ukraine," Polish deputy defense
minister Stanislaw Komorowski said after signing a letter of intent to
form the unit. "We want to tie Ukraine closer to Western structures,
including military ones."
Poland and Lithuania are in NATO and have been pushing to bring
Ukraine into the fold. NATO's pledge to some day admit the former
Soviet republic outraged the Russians.
A NATO spokesman said Moscow has no reason to be miffed by the Polish/
Lithuanian overture to Ukraine.
"There is absolutely no reason why cooperation between individual
allies and Ukraine should not be stepped up," said the spokesman,
James Appathurai.
There are, however, historic reasons why this could rankle the
Russians.
Poland was a great European power when it forged a union with
Lithuania and incorporated much of what is now Ukraine.
----------------
BM
Dmitry
> since 1795 - a fighting unit that also includes Ukrainians.
Seen since never before. Crimea has never been part of Polish-
Lithuanian Kingdom's fighting force.
> Under the plan, the three countries would form a brigade that would
> take part in United Nations and European Union-sponsored peacekeeping
> missions.
So Ukrainian conscripts will have a chance to visit Bosnia for free?
>
> It would also serve under the auspices of NATO.
>
> "This reflects our support for Ukraine," Polish deputy defense
> minister Stanislaw Komorowski said after signing a letter of intent to
> form the unit. "We want to tie Ukraine closer to Western structures,
> including military ones."
I'm not sure what Polish deputy defence minister is trying to defend
Poland from and why he is in such desperate need of Ukrainians
conscripts. Is Slovakia planning to invade Poland or what is this
that is theatening Poland? In recent years many Polish nationals
found their economic refuge in UK and Ireland. The focuss should be
on economy, not defence from immagionary enemy. Besides, it is hard
to predict that Supreme Commander-in-chief of Ukrainian army will
remain in his post for the rest of his life.
>
> Poland and Lithuania are in NATO and have been pushing to bring
> Ukraine into the fold. NATO's pledge to some day admit the former
> Soviet republic outraged the Russians.
Playing "NATO" game with Russians is silly and waste of time. If
Polish and Lithuanian governments think that this can improve the life
quality of their citizens they are making a mistake.
EZ
I think Ukraine is torn between two 'poles' - Russia and the EU/NATO.
Poland and Lithuania want to help it to move closer to NATO. Russians
of course view this as a 'zero sum game' and consider that if Ukraine
moves closer to the NATO then it is bad for Russia. I am not sure that
this is a zero sum game though.
On the other hand, IMHO Poland/Lithuania are too much influenced by
their history. As Shimon Peres once said to a Lithuanian newspaper
"history is above us". Same here - what ideas people have grown with,
they tend to stick with them and they tend to have little control over
those ideas. Poland - because of its proximity and language similarity
wants to have Ukraine on its side. Is this a realistic goal though?
Best regards,
EZ
The Black Monk
> > since 1795 - a fighting unit that also includes Ukrainians.
>
> Seen since never before. Crimea has never been part of Polish-
> Lithuanian Kingdom's fighting force.
Actually the Crimean tatars may have fought with the Poles on occasion
(not sure). They were certainly allied with Ukrainians sometimes.
> > Under the plan, the three countries would form a brigade that would
> > take part in United Nations and European Union-sponsored peacekeeping
> > missions.
>
> So Ukrainian conscripts will have a chance to visit Bosnia for free?
Good for them. They'll probably be paid better, too.
>
> > It would also serve under the auspices of NATO.
>
> > "This reflects our support for Ukraine," Polish deputy defense
> > minister Stanislaw Komorowski said after signing a letter of intent to
> > form the unit. "We want to tie Ukraine closer to Western structures,
> > including military ones."
>
> I'm not sure what Polish deputy defence minister is trying to defend
> Poland from and why he is in such desperate need of Ukrainians
> conscripts. Is Slovakia planning to invade Poland or what is this
> that is theatening Poland? In recent years many Polish nationals
> found their economic refuge in UK and Ireland. The focuss should be
> on economy, not defence from immagionary enemy. Besides, it is hard
> to predict that Supreme Commander-in-chief of Ukrainian army will
> remain in his post for the rest of his life.
Or even after January 2010.
regards,
BM
>
>
> > Poland and Lithuania are in NATO and have been pushing to bring
> > Ukraine into the fold. NATO's pledge to some day admit the former
> > Soviet republic outraged the Russians.
>
> Playing "NATO" game with Russians is silly and waste of time. If
> Polish and Lithuanian governments think that this can improve the life
> quality of their citizens they are making a mistake.
>
>
>
>
>
> > A NATO spokesman said Moscow has no reason to be miffed by the Polish/
> > Lithuanian overture to Ukraine.
>
> > "There is absolutely no reason why cooperation between individual
> > allies and Ukraine should not be stepped up," said the spokesman,
> > James Appathurai.
>
> > There are, however, historic reasons why this could rankle the
> > Russians.
>
> > Poland was a great European power when it forged a union with
> > Lithuania and incorporated much of what is now Ukraine.
>
> > ----------------
>
> > BM- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
The Black Monk
Who knows? If Ukraine splits (and I doubt it will) then the 25-30
million people NOT joining Russia would probably quickly join NATO and
have very close relations with Poland and Lithuania.
Poland's goals are quite logical. It is squeezed betwen Germany
(basically, Germany/France with 140 million people) and Russia. Poland
alone can only be a subsidiary of either of those two powers - given
the current situation this would be Germany. It cannot, like the
Scandanavian countries which are geographically isolated, get away
with being apart from those two. If it doesn't want to be for Germany
what Canada or Mexico are to the USA Poland needs to reach out to
places where it can form an equal or even dominant partnership. For
this reason the more intelligent Polish politicians are playing with
the resurrection of the old Commonwealth and have learned from their
past stupid mistakes by not trying to impose Polish culture or
religion on their eastern neighbors.
An alliance of 40 million Poles, 45 million Ukrainians, and a few
million Balts can defend its interests better than each of these
seperately. What do Ukrainians get out of this? Well, their position
would be stronger within such an alliance in which their population is
about equal to Poalnd's than with Russia, which has 3 times Ukraine's
population.
One of the most important aspects of the Austro-Hungarian Empire is
that by uniting the small nations of east-central Europe they avoided
being puppets or slaves of their powerful neighbors. Poland's seems
to be following a similar approach. Note that its efforts are
supported by Britain and America but thwarted by France and Germany,
for whom a Polish-Ukrainian alliance is negative due to its possible
implications.
regards,
BM
>
> Best regards,
> EZ
>
> http://tautietis.blogspot.com- Hide quoted text -
Dmitry
Ukraine is certainly not a solid piece and at this stage is not ready
for making any long term military alliances. In my opinion it should
stay neutral until there is a certain political stability established
in the country.
Dmitry
> million Balts can defend its interests better than each of these
> seperately.
May be Bulgaria, Romania, Slovakia etc. could be invited too and
Poland could form "Eastern European Union"? Warszawa could become the
Bruxelles of the East. For the bulk purposes Georgia could be invited
too.... I still don't understand who are they trying to defend
themselves from. Aliens, Russians, Taliban? How would doubling the
amount of conscrips help?
> What do Ukrainians get out of this? Well, their position
> would be stronger within such an alliance in which their population is
> about equal to Poalnd's than with Russia, which has 3 times Ukraine's
> population.
>
> One of the most important aspects of the Austro-Hungarian Empire is
> that by uniting the small nations of east-central Europe they avoided
> being puppets or slaves of their powerful neighbors. Poland's seems
> to be following a similar approach. Note that its efforts are
> supported by Britain and America but thwarted by France and Germany,
> for whom a Polish-Ukrainian alliance is negative due to its possible
> implications.
Britain and America have a recent history of making very wrong moves.
France and Germany seem to have wiser foreign policies. One has to
examine the implications before making any serious moves.
>
> regards,
>
> BM
>
>
>
> > Best regards,
> > EZ
>
> >http://tautietis.blogspot.com-Hide quoted text -
The Black Monk
> > An alliance of 40 million Poles, 45 million Ukrainians, and a few
> > million Balts can defend its interests better than each of these
> > seperately.
>
> May be Bulgaria, Romania, Slovakia etc. could be invited too and
> Poland could form "Eastern European Union"? Warszawa could become the
> Bruxelles of the East.
Pilsudski's dream was an alliance from Finland to Romania. It was
undone by stupid populist nationalism (not the least of which within
Poland itself, by Pilsudski's political enemies).
> For the bulk purposes Georgia could be invited
> too.... I still don't understand who are they trying to defend
> themselves from.
There is no specific imminent military threat. The battalion seems to
be symbolic of something more than merely military. Look, nations can
be either objects of subjects of history. Polish leaders are going for
the first thing for their country, and they know they have no chance
of doing so alone.
> Aliens, Russians, Taliban? How would doubling the
> amount of conscrips help?
>
> > What do Ukrainians get out of this? Well, their position
> > would be stronger within such an alliance in which their population is
> > about equal to Poalnd's than with Russia, which has 3 times Ukraine's
> > population.
>
> > One of the most important aspects of the Austro-Hungarian Empire is
> > that by uniting the small nations of east-central Europe they avoided
> > being puppets or slaves of their powerful neighbors. Poland's seems
> > to be following a similar approach. Note that its efforts are
> > supported by Britain and America but thwarted by France and Germany,
> > for whom a Polish-Ukrainian alliance is negative due to its possible
> > implications.
>
> Britain and America have a recent history of making very wrong moves.
That was Bush's idiocy. Support for EE goes beyond Bush.
> France and Germany seem to have wiser foreign policies. One has to
> examine the implications before making any serious moves.
Yes.
regards,
BM
>
>
>
>
>
> > regards,
>
> > BM
>
> > > Best regards,
> > > EZ
>
> > >http://tautietis.blogspot.com-Hidequoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
Dmitry
> > too.... I still don't understand who are they trying to defend
> > themselves from.
>
> There is no specific imminent military threat. The battalion seems to
> be symbolic of something more than merely military.
Exactly - there is no threat. The focus should be on well being of
Polish citizens instead of playing "symbolic" games. Lot's of
ordinary Poles have recently left the country in search for better
quality of life whilst the elite are busy working on their superficial
military alliances.
> Look, nations can
> be either objects of subjects of history. Polish leaders are going for
> the first thing for their country, and they know they have no chance
> of doing so alone.
Whatever they are going for, being objects or subjects, Ukrainian
"entry" wouldn't help. May be they are just bored and want to do
something what turns their egos on?
The Black Monk
> > > For the bulk purposes Georgia could be invited
> > > too.... I still don't understand who are they trying to defend
> > > themselves from.
>
> > There is no specific imminent military threat. The battalion seems to
> > be symbolic of something more than merely military.
>
> Exactly - there is no threat. The focus should be on well being of
> Polish citizens instead of playing "symbolic" games.
Being able to act in the world independantly rather than being a
puppet of one's big neighbor is good for the wellbeing of Polish
citizens. Do you think that Polish citizens will come first for
German policymakers?
> Lot's of
> ordinary Poles have recently left the country in search for better
> quality of life whilst the elite are busy working on their superficial
> military alliances.
There is no link between Polish polciies towards Ukraine and Poles
leaving Poland for better jobs in the West.
And, incidentally, your info is somewhat outdated because many of
those Poles are now coming back:
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/finance/2008/1208/1228571631794.html
33% of Poles may return home
In this section »
Report shows construction activity close to record lowsWhite House and
Congress seek to finalise deal on rescue of car firmsLAURA SLATTERYA
THIRD of Polish workers in Ireland may return home over the next year
as Poland takes up its position as one of Europe's fastest-growing
economies, according to Ireland's largest recruitment company, CPL.
As the Irish recession takes hold and the banking sector is left
reeling from the credit crunch and the collapse of the housing market,
senior Irish financial services employees are also lining up to find
jobs in Poland, said CPL.
.....
> > Look, nations can
> > be either objects of subjects of history. Polish leaders are going for
> > the first thing for their country, and they know they have no chance
> > of doing so alone.
>
> Whatever they are going for, being objects or subjects, Ukrainian
> "entry" wouldn't help. May be they are just bored and want to do
> something what turns their egos on?
With a Ukrainian alliance Poland doubles its population and gains
access to Ukrainian industry and natural resources. Ukraine is
currently a big mess but it has significant potential.
How does reaching out to and establishing closer relations with
Ukraine "not help" Poland? It certainly does "not help" Russia, but
what's the negative for Poland?
The fact is that alone, Poland can at best be to Germany what Canada
is to America. Actually its position may be worse, because Canada at
least has leverage due to its oil. Poland, like Ukraine, sits on the
gas pipelines but these are being bypassed. Incidentally, the north
and south streams are a major factor in terms of escalating Poland's
activity with Ukraine.
regards,
BM
>
>
>
> > > Aliens, Russians, Taliban? How would doubling the
> > > amount of conscrips help?
>
> > > > What do Ukrainians get out of this? Well, their position
> > > > would be stronger within such an alliance in which their population is
> > > > about equal to Poalnd's than with Russia, which has 3 times Ukraine's
> > > > population.
>
> > > > One of the most important aspects of the Austro-Hungarian Empire is
> > > > that by uniting the small nations of east-central Europe they avoided
> > > > being puppets or slaves of their powerful neighbors. Poland's seems
> > > > to be following a similar approach. Note that its efforts are
> > > > supported by Britain and America but thwarted by France and Germany,
> > > > for whom a Polish-Ukrainian alliance is negative due to its possible
> > > > implications.
>
> > > Britain and America have a recent history of making very wrong moves.
>
> > That was Bush's idiocy. Support for EE goes beyond Bush.
>
> > > France and Germany seem to have wiser foreign policies. One has to
> > > examine the implications before making any serious moves.
>
> > Yes.
>
> > regards,
>
> > BM
>
> > > > regards,
>
> > > > BM- Hide quoted text -
Dmitry
> On Nov 19, 2:04 pm, Dmitry <dmitrijsfedot...@inbox.lv> wrote:
>
> > > > For the bulk purposes Georgia could be invited
> > > > too.... I still don't understand who are they trying to defend
> > > > themselves from.
>
> > > There is no specific imminent military threat. The battalion seems to
> > > be symbolic of something more than merely military.
>
> > Exactly - there is no threat. The focus should be on well being of
> > Polish citizens instead of playing "symbolic" games.
>
> Being able to act in the world independantly rather than being a
> puppet of one's big neighbor is good for the wellbeing of Polish
> citizens. Do you think that Polish citizens will come first for
> German policymakers?
Lots of Polish people settled in Germany after the fall of Berlin
wall. So in a way they were helped by German policymakers by allowing
them to come and stay.
>
> > Lot's of
> > ordinary Poles have recently left the country in search for better
> > quality of life whilst the elite are busy working on their superficial
> > military alliances.
>
> There is no link between Polish polciies towards Ukraine and Poles
> leaving Poland for better jobs in the West.
Exactly. The elite is out of touch with real needs of Polish people.
Whilst Polish policymakers are busy with "acting in the world" Polish
people find their own way of looking after themselves.
> And, incidentally, your info is somewhat outdated because many of
> those Poles are now coming back:
There is a difference between "now coming back" and "may return
home". My info might be more up to date than Laura Slattery's? A
third of Polish émigrés have returned home when recession kicked in
here, but those who had permanent positions are staying. I talk to
Poles who are still here and they have no intentions to go back. Two
years ago there were plenty of cars with Polish number plates around,
now there are far less of them because they bought new right hand
drive vehicles registered here. Generally speaking, Polish people are
very clever with practical things and they wouldn't waste money on
such things if they plan to go back.
>
> http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/finance/2008/1208/1228571631794.html
>
> 33% of Poles may return home
> In this section »
> Report shows construction activity close to record lowsWhite House and
> Congress seek to finalise deal on rescue of car firmsLAURA SLATTERYA
> THIRD of Polish workers in Ireland may return home over the next year
> as Poland takes up its position as one of Europe's fastest-growing
> economies, according to Ireland's largest recruitment company, CPL.
>
> As the Irish recession takes hold and the banking sector is left
> reeling from the credit crunch and the collapse of the housing market,
> senior Irish financial services employees are also lining up to find
> jobs in Poland, said CPL.
-)) We'll have to return to this conversation when mass immigration
from Ireland to Poland takes place. May be Laura is some kind
"prophet", I don't know, but she seems to be jumping into conclusions
too easily. I'm not up to date with Irish situation very much, but
usually it is not very different from British in this subject area.
> > Whatever they are going for, being objects or subjects, Ukrainian
> > "entry" wouldn't help. May be they are just bored and want to do
> > something what turns their egos on?
>
> With a Ukrainian alliance Poland doubles its population and gains
> access to Ukrainian industry and natural resources. Ukraine is
> currently a big mess but it has significant potential.
Sounds like you are talking about an imaginary new-age Polish-
Ukrainian kingdom. These days doubling of population doesn't
necessarily benefit economic development. What natural resources and
what parts of Ukrainian industry could benefit Polish people? You
don't mean those gas pipes going through Ukraine? The tap is in
Russia and it was not very long ago when Kremlin turned it off when
Ukraine couldn't pay the bill.
Doubling population could cause many problems, such as mass
immigration from Eastern part of the Kingdom to the Western and Polish
government having to deal with Crimea and other parts of Ukraine where
the population is very pro-Russian. And consequently they will have
to deal with Russia in a more direct way, which requires political
skills and fair amount of wisdom. I'm not convinced that the current
Polish government has such qualities. Ambitions are good, but they
can't take you very far if you lack of essential skills.
> How does reaching out to and establishing closer relations with
> Ukraine "not help" Poland? It certainly does "not help" Russia, but
> what's the negative for Poland?
I thought Poland already has close relationship with Ukraine. You
have to explain how "more closer" relationship with Ukraine can
benefit Polish people (without references to journalists who write
things because it is their "bread&butter", if you could, please).
>
> The fact is that alone, Poland can at best be to Germany what Canada
> is to America. Actually its position may be worse, because Canada at
> least has leverage due to its oil. Poland, like Ukraine, sits on the
> gas pipelines but these are being bypassed. Incidentally, the north
> and south streams are a major factor in terms of escalating Poland's
> activity with Ukraine.
The effort should be on investment in locally produced renewable
energies not on integration of Crimea into Polish Kingdom.
>
> regards,
>
> BM
Are there any articles that predicting Poles leaving Ireland for
Doneck/Makiivka? There should be no end for fantasies -))
Actually, Donetsk was the only place I visited that inspired me to
write the song about it. The lyrics were:
Gorod lishaj, burye pleshi, unylje plechi, zhelezo i shlak, chorno-
belyj landshaft, ljudi spjat ne dysha, chjornyj zapah iz shaht dlja
ludei anasha. Na sobore kuranty speshat is speshat - tol'ko vremja
vperjod ne na shag etc....
My apologies to those who doesn't understand Russian language. I can't
translate these things to English. Can only say that I wasn't
impressed with the city.
Vladimir Makarenko
Don't know if you said this out of intuition based on common sense - but
unfortunately you are deadly right: I read a year or so ago a NYT
article how country side Poles making living off "mining" coal in rat
holes crowling in and out dragging baskets of coal to sell for fraction
of a single USD.
This is not even XIX cent, it is XIIth.
VM.
>
>> And, incidentally, your info is somewhat outdated because many of
>> those Poles are now coming back:
>
> There is a difference between "now coming back" and "may return
> home". My info might be more up to date than Laura Slattery's? A
> third of Polish �migr�s have returned home when recession kicked in
The Black Monk
> On 19 Nov, 19:48, The Black Monk <ch....@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Nov 19, 2:04 pm, Dmitry <dmitrijsfedot...@inbox.lv> wrote:
>
> > > > > For the bulk purposes Georgia could be invited
> > > > > too.... I still don't understand who are they trying to defend
> > > > > themselves from.
>
> > > > There is no specific imminent military threat. The battalion seems to
> > > > be symbolic of something more than merely military.
>
> > > Exactly - there is no threat. The focus should be on well being of
> > > Polish citizens instead of playing "symbolic" games.
>
> > Being able to act in the world independantly rather than being a
> > puppet of one's big neighbor is good for the wellbeing of Polish
> > citizens. Do you think that Polish citizens will come first for
> > German policymakers?
>
> Lots of Polish people settled in Germany after the fall of Berlin
> wall. So in a way they were helped by German policymakers by allowing
> them to come and stay.
Are you suggesting that this is an example of the German government is
thinking of Poles' welfare?
A lot of Russians came to America in the 90's. By your logic, the
90's must have been a time when america was really looking out for the
Russian people.
> > > Lot's of
> > > ordinary Poles have recently left the country in search for better
> > > quality of life whilst the elite are busy working on their superficial
> > > military alliances.
>
> > There is no link between Polish polciies towards Ukraine and Poles
> > leaving Poland for better jobs in the West.
>
> Exactly. The elite is out of touch with real needs of Polish people.
Let me rephrase so it's clearer: there is no link between Poland's
Ukraine policies and Poles having to leave Poland to find work
elsewhere.
> Whilst Polish policymakers are busy with "acting in the world" Polish
> people find their own way of looking after themselves.
As is always the case with any government in the world.
> > And, incidentally, your info is somewhat outdated because many of
> > those Poles are now coming back:
>
> There is a difference between "now coming back" and "may return
> home". My info might be more up to date than Laura Slattery's? A
> third of Polish émigrés have returned home when recession kicked in
> here, but those who had permanent positions are staying.
Of course. So?
> I talk to Poles who are still here and they have no intentions to go back.
Sure. And?
> Two
> years ago there were plenty of cars with Polish number plates around,
> now there are far less of them because they bought new right hand
> drive vehicles registered here. Generally speaking, Polish people are
> very clever with practical things and they wouldn't waste money on
> such things if they plan to go back.
Of course if someone has spent 10 years in a place and has made major
investments (such as buying a house, etc.) they will be less likily to
start over again. But that says more about the past situation in
Poland, when those people left, then the current one.
Here's from the New York Times:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/26/world/europe/26poles.html
WARSAW — For a long time, Germany has been good to Katarzyna, a 28-
year-old Polish woman who works in a pharmacy in Frankfurt during the
day and cleans houses in the evenings.
In six years, she has earned enough money to buy a sporty Audi and an
apartment in Poland, while still having enough cash to travel widely
in Europe. Millions of other Poles made similar moves from their home
country, especially in the four years since Poland joined the European
Union. But now a strong economy in Poland, and an increasingly acute
labor shortage, are beckoning migrants like Katarzyna back. She is
moving to Warsaw in July.
--------
The Times online stating that era of mass Polish emigration is over:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article3378877.ece
A wave of immigration that helped to fuel Britain’s early 21st century
boom is over, as the Polish plumber and thousands like him go home.
The Times has established that, for the first time since they began
arriving en masse four years ago, more UK-based Poles are returning to
their homeland than are entering Britain.
Statistics show that only 38,680 Poles signed up to the Government’s
register of migrant workers in the third quarter of 2007, a slump of
18 per cent from the previous year. Polish officials say that Poles
leaving the country outnumber thoses coming in.
Half of the estimated one million British-based Poles are expected to
return home, said the Centre for International Relations, a Warsaw-
based think-tank.
Chris Zietkowski, 34, a Polish painter and decorator, told The Times
that he wanted to return home this year. “Two years ago I could make
five times the amount of money here than I could in Poland,” he said.
“Now the wages are about the same and the living costs in the UK are
much higher. There is a lot of work in Poland, probably more than in
the UK. It’s a good time to go back.”
Mr Zietkowski added that many of his friends were also thinking about
returning. “The feeling is: why be away from your family and your home-
land for no reason?”
Kasia Popyla, 23, is a student physio-therapist who has just returned
to Poland. “I used to make £800 per month,” she said. “Since the
summer I’ve watched the zloty value of my savings, which are in
pounds, fall lower and lower.
“At the end of the day we are Polish, we left in our early 20s and are
coming back to get married and watch our kids grow up in Poland.”
> >http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/finance/2008/1208/1228571631794.html
>
> > 33% of Poles may return home
> > In this section »
> > Report shows construction activity close to record lowsWhite House and
> > Congress seek to finalise deal on rescue of car firmsLAURA SLATTERYA
> > THIRD of Polish workers in Ireland may return home over the next year
> > as Poland takes up its position as one of Europe's fastest-growing
> > economies, according to Ireland's largest recruitment company, CPL.
>
> > As the Irish recession takes hold and the banking sector is left
> > reeling from the credit crunch and the collapse of the housing market,
> > senior Irish financial services employees are also lining up to find
> > jobs in Poland, said CPL.
>
> -)) We'll have to return to this conversation when mass immigration
> from Ireland to Poland takes place.
It's stating in Britain already.
> May be Laura is some kind
> "prophet", I don't know, but she seems to be jumping into conclusions
> too easily.
Her and everybody else.
> I'm not up to date with Irish situation very much, but usually it is not very different from British in this subject area.
If so then the Irish are definitely going back. As we have seen, this
year more Poles are returning to Poland than arriving in Britain.
> > > Whatever they are going for, being objects or subjects, Ukrainian
> > > "entry" wouldn't help. May be they are just bored and want to do
> > > something what turns their egos on?
>
> > With a Ukrainian alliance Poland doubles its population and gains
> > access to Ukrainian industry and natural resources. Ukraine is
> > currently a big mess but it has significant potential.
>
> Sounds like you are talking about an imaginary new-age Polish-
> Ukrainian kingdom.
Only in the same sense that Franco-German integration is an "imaginary
new-age Charlemagne's Kingdom."
> These days doubling of population doesn't
> necessarily benefit economic development. What natural resources and
> what parts of Ukrainian industry could benefit Polish people?
The same kind that benefit the German people from closer ties with
France, American people for closer ties with Canada, etc.
> You
> don't mean those gas pipes going through Ukraine? The tap is in
> Russia and it was not very long ago when Kremlin turned it off when
> Ukraine couldn't pay the bill.
Ukraine is one of the world's largest steel producers, among other
things.
> Doubling population could cause many problems, such as mass
> immigration from Eastern part of the Kingdom to the Western and Polish
> government having to deal with Crimea and other parts of Ukraine where
> the population is very pro-Russian.
You make it sound like it was very bad for West Germany to unite with
East Germany.
Crimea's Russian population is tiny and in reality not very important.
> And consequently they will have
> to deal with Russia in a more direct way, which requires political
> skills and fair amount of wisdom. I'm not convinced that the current
> Polish government has such qualities. Ambitions are good, but they
> can't take you very far if you lack of essential skills.
>
> > How does reaching out to and establishing closer relations with
> > Ukraine "not help" Poland? It certainly does "not help" Russia, but
> > what's the negative for Poland?
>
> I thought Poland already has close relationship with Ukraine. You
> have to explain how "more closer" relationship with Ukraine can
> benefit Polish people (without references to journalists who write
> things because it is their "bread&butter", if you could, please).
Polish people benefit from having a strong Polish state that is not
dominated by its neighbors.
> > The fact is that alone, Poland can at best be to Germany what Canada
> > is to America. Actually its position may be worse, because Canada at
> > least has leverage due to its oil. Poland, like Ukraine, sits on the
> > gas pipelines but these are being bypassed. Incidentally, the north
> > and south streams are a major factor in terms of escalating Poland's
> > activity with Ukraine.
>
> The effort should be on investment in locally produced renewable
> energies not on integration of Crimea into Polish Kingdom.
Noone is talking about a new Polish Kingdom. Integrating with Ukraine
is not mutually exclusive with investing in locally produced renewable
resources (which in any case is absurd given Poland's massive coal
deposits).
Why your obsession with Crimea's 1.2 million Russians, about 3% of
Ukraine's population and rapidly declining - Crimea lost about
400,000 people from 1989 and 2001 censuses, or 16% of its population,
the worst decline in all of Ukraine. There is no need to worry too
much about a people that have themselves chosen nonexistence.
> > regards,
>
> > BM
>
> Are there any articles that predicting Poles leaving Ireland for
> Doneck/Makiivka? There should be no end for fantasies -))
As I have shown, in 2009 already more Poles are leaving Britain than
arriving. Why do you think Ireland is different?
> Actually, Donetsk was the only place I visited that inspired me to
> write the song about it. The lyrics were:
> Gorod lishaj, burye pleshi, unylje plechi, zhelezo i shlak, chorno-
> belyj landshaft, ljudi spjat ne dysha, chjornyj zapah iz shaht dlja
> ludei anasha. Na sobore kuranty speshat is speshat - tol'ko vremja
> vperjod ne na shag etc....
Thanks for confirming that it is a sh*thole. All the money generted
there went straight into the hands of the loal oligarchs, and yet the
people of Donetsk still follow their bidding.
regards,
BM
>
> My apologies to those who doesn't understand Russian language. I can't
> translate these things to English. Can only say that I wasn't
> impressed with the city.- Hide quoted text -
Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr.
> http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/2009/11/16/2009-11-16_poland_li...
>
> Poland, Lithuania and Ukraine to form brigade for UN, EU and NATO
> peacekeeping missions
> By Corky Siemaszko
> DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER
>
> The Poles and Lithuanians are trying to create something not seen
> since 1795 - a fighting unit that also includes Ukrainians.
>
I wonder what happened in 1795.... Oh, now I remember: came Bohdan
Khmelnitsky, and the Ukrainians finally managed to get rid of the
Polish-Lithuanian Catholic yoke.
Somehow I suspect that the history will once again repeat itself in
January 2010, as the next president - be it Yanukovych or Tymoshenko -
will have no desire to ram NATO down the throat of unwilling
Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr.
Well, EZ, that's not how they see it in Ukraine. Ukrainians do not
equate NATO with EU at all. EU is admired, and most people would want
to join EU ASAP. But NATO is mostly hated as a warmongering
organsation.
Moreover, Ukrainians are not stupid and know very well that NATO is
controlled not by EU but by USA, and USA is hardly an EU country.
What comes to mind is the American government's racist views towards
Ukrainians and other Slavs, as exemplified by the famous statement
from the official US State Department spokesman, who said in 1999 that
the last thing NATO wants to see is "a bunch of Ukrainians running
around with guns"
http://www.scribd.com/doc/12844473/The-Ukrainian-Weekly-199920
PARSIPPANY, N.J. – The fallout from Assistant Secretary of State James
M. Rubin’s remarks on the Kosovo crisis about “a bunch of
Ukrainians ... running around with guns on their sides” continued this
week as Ukrainian Americans made their feelings known to the U.S.
Department of State and Ukraine’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs issued a
statement. Mr. Rubin, spokesman for the State Department, made his
controversial statement on the May 2 broadcast of CNN’s “Late Edition”
when asked by correspondent Wolf Blitzer to comment on the composition
of a proposed international force that would go to Kosovo to maintain
the peace and protect returning refugees. In a May 3 letter to
Secretary of State Madeleine K. Albright, the Ukrainian Congress
Committee of America expressed its “dismay” about the “illconsidered
characterization by Mr. Rubin of a Ukrainian role in a possible
peacekeeping force in Kosovo” and said the comment “has clearly
endangered U.S.Ukrainian relations at a time when U.S. policy warrants
the utmost respect for Ukraine’s strategic role.”
>
> Poland and Lithuania want to help it to move closer to NATO. Russians
> of course view this as a 'zero sum game' and consider that if Ukraine
> moves closer to the NATO then it is bad for Russia. I am not sure that
> this is a zero sum game though.
>
Even if we forget about Russia, most Ukrainians would still not want
to be in NATO for several reasons:
1. They see no need for a warmongering organisation in Europe.
2. They view NATO's rape of Serbia in 1999 as a rape of Ukraine
itself, because they know that NATO sided with Albanian drug lords
against Serbs because Serbs are Greek Orthodox Slavs, just like most
Ukrainians.
>
> On the other hand, IMHO Poland/Lithuania are too much influenced by
> their history. As Shimon Peres once said to a Lithuanian newspaper
> "history is above us". Same here - what ideas people have grown with,
> they tend to stick with them and they tend to have little control over
> those ideas. Poland - because of its proximity and language similarity
> wants to have Ukraine on its side. Is this a realistic goal though?
>
Well, not only did Poland own Ukraine at some point, it tried on
numerous occasions to enslave Russia too. Until Russia and Ukraine re-
united and enslaved Poland instead.
Poland would be well-advised not to repeat history.
Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr.
> > An alliance of 40 million Poles, 45 million Ukrainians, and a few
> > million Balts can defend its interests better than each of these
> > seperately.
>
> May be Bulgaria, Romania, Slovakia etc. could be invited too and
> Poland could form "Eastern European Union"? Warszawa could become the
> Bruxelles of the East. For the bulk purposes Georgia could be invited
> too.... I still don't understand who are they trying to defend
> themselves from. Aliens, Russians, Taliban? How would doubling the
> amount of conscrips help?
>
Let me remind you that the word "Pole" evokes the most painful
memories in Ukrainian minds, comparable only to the word "German".
If you want to find out the depth of Ukrainian hate towards the Polish
oppressors, just read Ukraine's national hero Taras Shevchenko's
descriptions. Here are a few quotes:
http://www.duel.ru/200549/?49_6_1
Take good care, Poles!
Rue the day, dogs!
The haydamaks are coming to visit you!
Death to the Polish gentry!
We are going to have a party!
So that our children know and tell our grandchildren
How the haydamaks tortured the Poles!
For all the suffering that we have suffered!
The crowd is shouting:
"Kill the Poles!"
In Chigirin - a meatgrinder.
The city is clogged with corpses,
full of black polish blood.
"This is not punishment enough for Poles!"
Those who were still alive - they were finished off with knives,
so that these dogs will never get up!
All along the roads high ranking Poles were hanging.
Lower ranking Poles - well, haydamaks didn't want to waste the rope on
them.
On streets, roads - piles of corpses in the night,
With dogs and ravens eating their flesh.
Only Polish children and dogs remained alive.
Even Ukrainian women joined the haydamaks.
Whose fault is this? The Catholic priests and Jesuits!
> > What do Ukrainians get out of this? Well, their position
> > would be stronger within such an alliance in which their population is
> > about equal to Poalnd's than with Russia, which has 3 times Ukraine's
> > population.
>
> > One of the most important aspects of the Austro-Hungarian Empire is
> > that by uniting the small nations of east-central Europe they avoided
> > being puppets or slaves of their powerful neighbors. Poland's seems
> > to be following a similar approach. Note that its efforts are
> > supported by Britain and America but thwarted by France and Germany,
> > for whom a Polish-Ukrainian alliance is negative due to its possible
> > implications.
>
> Britain and America have a recent history of making very wrong moves.
> France and Germany seem to have wiser foreign policies. One has to
> examine the implications before making any serious moves.
>
>
>
> > regards,
>
> > BM
>
> > > Best regards,
> > > EZ
>
> > >http://tautietis.blogspot.com-Hidequoted text -
The Black Monk
This poem is about as relevant to today's relations between Poland and
Ukraine as the mutual slaughter of millions of soldiers in World War I
are relevant to today's Germany-France relations.
regards,
BM
>
> > > What do Ukrainians get out of this? Well, their position
> > > would be stronger within such an alliance in which their population is
> > > about equal to Poalnd's than with Russia, which has 3 times Ukraine's
> > > population.
>
> > > One of the most important aspects of the Austro-Hungarian Empire is
> > > that by uniting the small nations of east-central Europe they avoided
> > > being puppets or slaves of their powerful neighbors. Poland's seems
> > > to be following a similar approach. Note that its efforts are
> > > supported by Britain and America but thwarted by France and Germany,
> > > for whom a Polish-Ukrainian alliance is negative due to its possible
> > > implications.
>
> > Britain and America have a recent history of making very wrong moves.
> > France and Germany seem to have wiser foreign policies. One has to
> > examine the implications before making any serious moves.
>
> > > regards,
>
> > > BM
>
> > > > Best regards,
> > > > EZ
>
> > > >http://tautietis.blogspot.com-Hidequotedtext -
The Black Monk
>
> > I think Ukraine is torn between two 'poles' - Russia and the EU/NATO.
>
> Well, EZ, that's not how they see it in Ukraine. Ukrainians do not
> equate NATO with EU at all. EU is admired, and most people would want
> to join EU ASAP. But NATO is mostly hated as a warmongering
> organsation.
In the last poll only 54% oppose Ukraine joining NATO. I doubt that
every one of those people who oppose Ukraine joining NATO, actually
"hate" it. Many of them to probably, but not everyone. So
realistically perhaps 1/3 or so of Ukraine's population actually
"hate" NATO.
What's with the exaggeration?
> Moreover, Ukrainians are not stupid and know very well that NATO is
> controlled not by EU but by USA, and USA is hardly an EU country.
>
> What comes to mind is the American government's racist views towards
> Ukrainians and other Slavs, as exemplified by the famous statement
> from the official US State Department spokesman, who said in 1999 that
> the last thing NATO wants to see is "a bunch of Ukrainians running
> around with guns"
>
> http://www.scribd.com/doc/12844473/The-Ukrainian-Weekly-199920
>
> PARSIPPANY, N.J. – The fallout from Assistant Secretary of State James
> M. Rubin’s remarks on the Kosovo crisis about “a bunch of
> Ukrainians ... running around with guns on their sides” continued this
> week as Ukrainian Americans made their feelings known to the U.S.
> Department of State and Ukraine’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs issued a
> statement. Mr. Rubin, spokesman for the State Department, made his
> controversial statement on the May 2 broadcast of CNN’s “Late Edition”
> when asked by correspondent Wolf Blitzer to comment on the composition
> of a proposed international force that would go to Kosovo to maintain
> the peace and protect returning refugees. In a May 3 letter to
> Secretary of State Madeleine K. Albright, the Ukrainian Congress
> Committee of America expressed its “dismay” about the “illconsidered
> characterization by Mr. Rubin of a Ukrainian role in a possible
> peacekeeping force in Kosovo” and said the comment “has clearly
> endangered U.S.Ukrainian relations at a time when U.S. policy warrants
> the utmost respect for Ukraine’s strategic role.”
Nice bit of 10 year old information.
> > Poland and Lithuania want to help it to move closer to NATO. Russians
> > of course view this as a 'zero sum game' and consider that if Ukraine
> > moves closer to the NATO then it is bad for Russia. I am not sure that
> > this is a zero sum game though.
>
> Even if we forget about Russia, most Ukrainians would still not want
> to be in NATO for several reasons:
>
> 1. They see no need for a warmongering organisation in Europe.
Again, 54% in Ukraine oppose NATO membership. Their reasons are not
monolithic. I doubt that all of those 54% see NATO as warmongering.
> 2. They view NATO's rape of Serbia in 1999 as a rape of Ukraine
> itself, because they know that NATO sided with Albanian drug lords
> against Serbs because Serbs are Greek Orthodox Slavs, just like most
> Ukrainians.
Yes, the NATO invasion of Serbia really lost NATO a lot of support in
Ukraine (it also lost America and the West the support of most Russian
liberals, reducing pro-Americanism in Russia, common in 1990, to a
fringe belief).
The idiots responsible for the NATO invasion of Serbia basically chose
Albanians over Ukrainians and Russians, probably in a foolish and
misguided attempt to gain sympathy from the Muslim world to compensate
for support of Israel and various hated regimes.
9-11 proved the failure of that approach.
> > On the other hand, IMHO Poland/Lithuania are too much influenced by
> > their history. As Shimon Peres once said to a Lithuanian newspaper
> > "history is above us". Same here - what ideas people have grown with,
> > they tend to stick with them and they tend to have little control over
> > those ideas. Poland - because of its proximity and language similarity
> > wants to have Ukraine on its side. Is this a realistic goal though?
>
> Well, not only did Poland own Ukraine at some point, it tried on
> numerous occasions to enslave Russia too. Until Russia and Ukraine re-
> united and enslaved Poland instead.
>
> Poland would be well-advised not to repeat history.
Poles no longer try to enslave Ukrainians as they did in the mid 16th
century. When they did so, the Commonwealth fell apart quite
quickly.
When Poles and Ukrainians worked together (say around 1600) they
together captured Moscow and defeated the Ottoman Empire. Perhaps
memories of the Moscow campaign are what drive some Russians to
hysterics when Poland and Ukraine start forging closer ties.
regards,
BM
Dmitry
> > wall. So in a way they were helped by German policymakers by allowing
> > them to come and stay.
>
> Are you suggesting that this is an example of the German government is
> thinking of Poles' welfare?
No, but every little helps.
> A lot of Russians came to America in the 90's. By your logic, the
> 90's must have been a time when america was really looking out for the
> Russian people.
Not looking out, but American policymakers allowed Russians to come
and settle there. So whatever the policies were, they benefited
Russian people.
> > > > Lot's of
> > > > ordinary Poles have recently left the country in search for better
> > > > quality of life whilst the elite are busy working on their superficial
> > > > military alliances.
>
> > > There is no link between Polish polciies towards Ukraine and Poles
> > > leaving Poland for better jobs in the West.
>
> > Exactly. The elite is out of touch with real needs of Polish people.
>
> Let me rephrase so it's clearer: there is no link between Poland's
> Ukraine policies and Poles having to leave Poland to find work
> elsewhere.
There could be a link when the government is focusing on things that
do not relate to the needs of people that they govern. There must be
something wrong with Poland if people run away from it.
If Polish-Ukrainian Kingdom becomes the reality there will be a clear
link between the fruits of the policy and even more Poles trying to
settle abroad.
> > Whilst Polish policymakers are busy with "acting in the world" Polish
> > people find their own way of looking after themselves.
>
> As is always the case with any government in the world.
Despite Tony Blair's war policies, which were completely disconnected
with needs of British people, there was no mass exodus from Britain.
> > I talk to Poles who are still here and they have no intentions to go back.
>
> Sure. And?
They are not going back to Poland, even if the article in irishtimes
predicts that they will.
> Of course if someone has spent 10 years in a place and has made major
> investments (such as buying a house, etc.) they will be less likily to
> start over again.
Much less than 10 years. 10 years ago Polish community here were
emerges from the end of WWII (mainly those who fought in the army on
British side). New community started to settle since Poland joined EU
and most came around 5 to 2 years ago.
> But that says more about the past situation in
> Poland, when those people left, then the current one.
>
> Here's from the New York Times:
>
> http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/26/world/europe/26poles.html
>
> WARSAW — For a long time, Germany has been good to Katarzyna, a 28-
> year-old Polish woman who works in a pharmacy in Frankfurt during the
> day and cleans houses in the evenings.
>
> In six years, she has earned enough money to buy a sporty Audi and an
> apartment in Poland, while still having enough cash to travel widely
> in Europe. Millions of other Poles made similar moves from their home
> country, especially in the four years since Poland joined the European
> Union. But now a strong economy in Poland, and an increasingly acute
> labor shortage, are beckoning migrants like Katarzyna back. She is
> moving to Warsaw in July.
Wow! What a success story! She might decide to move back to Germany
when Ukraine unite with Poland and a sporty Audi is stolen by the
Ukrainians who moved to Warsaw but not yet found employment there, you
never know.
> The Times online stating that era of mass Polish emigration is over:
Obviously. There aren't many vacancies here these days, consequently
not so many try to succeed. There isn't much point is statements like
this unless there is an aim to cut down recently growing support for
BNP.
>
> http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article3378877.ece
>
> A wave of immigration that helped to fuel Britain’s early 21st century
> boom is over, as the Polish plumber and thousands like him go home.
Plumbers get paid more in Poland than in England? I should inform
people in Latvia (less travel, same left hand drive, and better
money).
> The Times has established that, for the first time since they began
> arriving en masse four years ago, more UK-based Poles are returning to
> their homeland than are entering Britain.
>
> Statistics show that only 38,680 Poles signed up to the Government’s
> register of migrant workers in the third quarter of 2007, a slump of
> 18 per cent from the previous year. Polish officials say that Poles
> leaving the country outnumber thoses coming in.
There are no statistics of those who didn't register. About a third
has left recently because their temporary jobs ceased to exist, not
because there are better paid jobs in Poland. Now the job market in
UK on its slow way to recovery, so I don't see why Poles living and
working here would want to leave (unless it is true that the salaries
in Poland are higher than here).
> Half of the estimated one million British-based Poles are expected to
> return home, said the Centre for International Relations, a Warsaw-
> based think-tank.
I wonder how often the thinking tank is updating their findings. Many
things changed since last November.
>
> Chris Zietkowski, 34, a Polish painter and decorator,
I this point it would be very interesting to hear a professional
opinion from Andrius.
> told The Times
> that he wanted to return home this year. “Two years ago I could make
> five times the amount of money here than I could in Poland,” he said.
> “Now the wages are about the same and the living costs in the UK are
> much higher. There is a lot of work in Poland, probably more than in
> the UK. It’s a good time to go back.”
>
> Mr Zietkowski added that many of his friends were also thinking about
> returning. “The feeling is: why be away from your family and your home-
> land for no reason?”
>
> Kasia Popyla, 23, is a student physio-therapist who has just returned
> to Poland. “I used to make £800 per month,” she said. “Since the
> summer I’ve watched the zloty value of my savings, which are in
> pounds, fall lower and lower.
>
> “At the end of the day we are Polish, we left in our early 20s and are
> coming back to get married and watch our kids grow up in Poland.”
At the end of the day one can always find few quotes that support the
view they are presenting in their article.
>
> > >http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/finance/2008/1208/1228571631794.html
>
> > > 33% of Poles may return home
> > > In this section »
> > > Report shows construction activity close to record lowsWhite House and
> > > Congress seek to finalise deal on rescue of car firmsLAURA SLATTERYA
> > > THIRD of Polish workers in Ireland may return home over the next year
> > > as Poland takes up its position as one of Europe's fastest-growing
> > > economies, according to Ireland's largest recruitment company, CPL.
> > I'm not up to date with Irish situation very much, but usually it is not very different from British in this subject area.
>
> If so then the Irish are definitely going back. As we have seen, this
> year more Poles are returning to Poland than arriving in Britain.
Could be anything. Do CPL know how many are returning from Germany or
United States. How exactly do they measure arrive/return ratio?
> > These days doubling of population doesn't
> > necessarily benefit economic development. What natural resources and
> > what parts of Ukrainian industry could benefit Polish people?
>
> The same kind that benefit the German people from closer ties with
> France, American people for closer ties with Canada, etc.
Not sure about Canadians. Every Canadian I have ever spoken to hates
United States. It is always good to have close ties between people of
different countries. What exactly was the plan of Polish Government?
> > You
> > don't mean those gas pipes going through Ukraine? The tap is in
> > Russia and it was not very long ago when Kremlin turned it off when
> > Ukraine couldn't pay the bill.
>
> Ukraine is one of the world's largest steel producers, among other
> things.
Great! Why is Poland buying steel from Russia whilst trying to
establish some "very special" ties with Ukraine?
> > Doubling population could cause many problems, such as mass
> > immigration from Eastern part of the Kingdom to the Western and Polish
> > government having to deal with Crimea and other parts of Ukraine where
> > the population is very pro-Russian.
>
> You make it sound like it was very bad for West Germany to unite with
> East Germany.
You make it sound like Poland and Ukraine is one country temporarily
separated for 45 years. Besides, even German unification has created
some minor internal problems.
>
> Crimea's Russian population is tiny and in reality not very important.
According to 2001 Ukrainian Census, the population of Crimea was
2,033,700.[47] The ethnic makeup was comprised the following self-
reported groups: Russians: 58.32%; Ukrainians: 24.32%; Crimean Tatars:
12.1%; Belarusians: 1.44%; Tatars: 0.54%; Armenians: 0.43%; Jews:
0.22%; and Italians: 0.015%.
It is important because that part is particularly keen in having very
close ties with Russia.
> > I thought Poland already has close relationship with Ukraine. You
> > have to explain how "more closer" relationship with Ukraine can
> > benefit Polish people (without references to journalists who write
> > things because it is their "bread&butter", if you could, please).
>
> Polish people benefit from having a strong Polish state that is not
> dominated by its neighbors.
Yes, but Ukraine is very unlikely to provide any assistance in this
process.
> > > The fact is that alone, Poland can at best be to Germany what Canada
> > > is to America. Actually its position may be worse, because Canada at
> > > least has leverage due to its oil. Poland, like Ukraine, sits on the
> > > gas pipelines but these are being bypassed. Incidentally, the north
> > > and south streams are a major factor in terms of escalating Poland's
> > > activity with Ukraine.
>
> > The effort should be on investment in locally produced renewable
> > energies not on integration of Crimea into Polish Kingdom.
>
> Noone is talking about a new Polish Kingdom. Integrating with Ukraine
> is not mutually exclusive with investing in locally produced renewable
> resources (which in any case is absurd given Poland's massive coal
> deposits).
>
> Why your obsession with Crimea's 1.2 million Russians, about 3% of
> Ukraine's population and rapidly declining - Crimea lost about
> 400,000 people from 1989 and 2001 censuses, or 16% of its population,
> the worst decline in all of Ukraine. There is no need to worry too
> much about a people that have themselves chosen nonexistence.
I'm not obsessed with Crimea's Russians. However, in Crimea they are
the highest influence.
Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr.
> >On Nov 21, 5:14 am, "Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr."
>
> <ostap_bender_1...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > On Nov 17, 4:35 pm, EZ <zvi...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > I think Ukraine is torn between two 'poles' - Russia and the EU/NATO.
>
> > Well, EZ, that's not how they see it in Ukraine. Ukrainians do not
> > equate NATO with EU at all. EU is admired, and most people would want
> > to join EU ASAP. But NATO is mostly hated as a warmongering
> > organsation.
>
> In the last poll only 54% oppose Ukraine joining NATO. I doubt that
> every one of those people who oppose Ukraine joining NATO, actually
> "hate" it. Many of them to probably, but not everyone. So
> realistically perhaps 1/3 or so of Ukraine's population actually
> "hate" NATO.
>
> What's with the exaggeration?
>
And how many people favour joining NATO? 10%? 20%?
You know very well that this problem is ageless and is as valid today
as it was 10 years ago. And the problem is that Americans and many
other Westerners view Russians, Ukrainians and other Slavs as racially
inferior. No wonder in USA the term "Polish joke" means "a joke about
stupid people".
>
> > > Poland and Lithuania want to help it to move closer to NATO. Russians
> > > of course view this as a 'zero sum game' and consider that if Ukraine
> > > moves closer to the NATO then it is bad for Russia. I am not sure that
> > > this is a zero sum game though.
>
> > Even if we forget about Russia, most Ukrainians would still not want
> > to be in NATO for several reasons:
>
> > 1. They see no need for a warmongering organisation in Europe.
>
> Again, 54% in Ukraine oppose NATO membership. Their reasons are not
> monolithic. I doubt that all of those 54% see NATO as warmongering.
>
> > 2. They view NATO's rape of Serbia in 1999 as a rape of Ukraine
> > itself, because they know that NATO sided with Albanian drug lords
> > against Serbs because Serbs are Greek Orthodox Slavs, just like most
> > Ukrainians.
>
> Yes, the NATO invasion of Serbia really lost NATO a lot of support in
> Ukraine (it also lost America and the West the support of most Russian
> liberals, reducing pro-Americanism in Russia, common in 1990, to a
> fringe belief).
>
> The idiots responsible for the NATO invasion of Serbia basically chose
> Albanians over Ukrainians and Russians, probably in a foolish and
> misguided attempt to gain sympathy from the Muslim world to compensate
> for support of Israel and various hated regimes.
>
No. That was not the reason for the invasion. The same anti-Serb
bigotry was demonstrated by USA, Germany and much of the West (with
the exception of Greece) from the start of the Yugoslav wars. For
example, back in 1995 the Western newspapers were full of front page
headlines like: "Another 200 Bosnians ethnically cleansed by Serbs!".
However, when Catholic Croatia ethnically cleansed 400 000 Croatians
of Orthodox faith (what they call Serbs) in a couple of days, this
news was hardly reported. Moreover, it was USA that had actually
trained the Croat military how to ethnically cleanse Serbs.
Let me remind you that the Serbophobia that swept the West in 1990s
was orchestrated not by Muslims but by Catholic Croats. And it was
Croats who trained KLA most vigorously. The crux of the problem was
that Germany and Croatia lost to Russia and Serbia in WW2, and this
was a continuation of this geopolitical battle.
The reasons for the NATO's rape of Serbia were:
1. Serbs were Orthodox Christians, just like Russians and Ukrianians.
Thus, defeating them felt like defeating Russians, something that NATO
countries had yearned for 40 years. Actually, some NATO countries -
like Germany and Italy- actually tried to defeat Russians but were
humiliated instead. So, these were really old grudges.
1a. More importantly, Serbia is seen as Russia's friend. Thus,
destroying Serbia meant destroying Russia's centuries-old ambitions to
control the Balkans.
2. Serbia stood for the re-unification of Yugoslavia. Croatia stood
for the balkanization of the Balkans. Since the divide-and-conquer
principle is the operating principle of USA and NATO, they stood to
benefit from divided and fratricidal Yugoslavia and to suffer from a
united Yugoslavia, which was likely to be friendly to Russia.
The rape of Serbia was a continuation of the Cold War with Russia,
which NATO has never stopped fighting to this very day, even though
Hillary Clinton has issued medals for the Victory in Cold War.
And speaking of this medal, you too can become a War hero. You can
purchase you war hero medal from the US government:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cold_War_Victory_Medal
The Cold War Victory Medal is both an official medal of the National
Guard and an unofficial military medal of the United States. It is
awarded by the State of Louisiana and in ribbon form only by the State
of Alaska. In the medal's unofficial capacity it can be purchased by
any member of the United States military, or civilian employees of the
federal government, who served in their positions honorably during the
years of the Cold War, specifically September 2, 1945 to December 26,
1991. On April 12, 2007 senators Hillary Clinton and Susan Collins
announced they were reintroducing legislation in the Senate that will
authorize the Secretary of Defense to issue the Cold War Service Medal
to Cold War Veterans.
So, did you work as a federal tax collector between 1945 and 1991? If
so - send your money to Uncle Sam, and your tireless efforts to extort
money from the innocent American taxpayers will be rewarded by a medal
that said that you have sacrificed your life to defeat Communism. And
don't worry - the money that you send to Uncle Sam, will be put to
good use: to kill Iraqis, Afghanis and various other natives and to
start new wars against other oil-rich countries.
>
> 9-11 proved the failure of that approach.
>
> > > On the other hand, IMHO Poland/Lithuania are too much influenced by
> > > their history. As Shimon Peres once said to a Lithuanian newspaper
> > > "history is above us". Same here - what ideas people have grown with,
> > > they tend to stick with them and they tend to have little control over
> > > those ideas. Poland - because of its proximity and language similarity
> > > wants to have Ukraine on its side. Is this a realistic goal though?
>
> > Well, not only did Poland own Ukraine at some point, it tried on
> > numerous occasions to enslave Russia too. Until Russia and Ukraine re-
> > united and enslaved Poland instead.
>
> > Poland would be well-advised not to repeat history.
>
> Poles no longer try to enslave Ukrainians as they did in the mid 16th
> century.
How do you know? The only way to find out is to give Ukraine to Poland
and NATO and to see if history will repeat itself.
>
> When they did so, the Commonwealth fell apart quite
> quickly.
> When Poles and Ukrainians worked together (say around 1600) they
> together captured Moscow and defeated the Ottoman Empire. Perhaps
> memories of the Moscow campaign are what drive some Russians to
> hysterics when Poland and Ukraine start forging closer ties.
>
Actually, nobody in Russia knows that Ukrainians "captured Moscow".
However, Russians are aware of the long history of Polish attempts to
enslave Russia for centuries. That's why the Polish whinings about
"historical Russian imperialism" seem so laughable.
But tell me more about this Ukrainian capture of Moscow. What were its
motivations? How exactly did it happen? Why is Moscow no longer under
this joint Polish-Ukrainian occupation? Can you give me references?
The Black Monk
40 years of communism leaving the country in shambles.
> If Polish-Ukrainian Kingdom becomes the reality there will be a clear
> link between the fruits of the policy and even more Poles trying to
> settle abroad.
>
> > > Whilst Polish policymakers are busy with "acting in the world" Polish
> > > people find their own way of looking after themselves.
>
> > As is always the case with any government in the world.
>
> Despite Tony Blair's war policies, which were completely disconnected
> with needs of British people, there was no mass exodus from Britain.
>
> > > I talk to Poles who are still here and they have no intentions to go back.
>
> > Sure. And?
>
> They are not going back to Poland, even if the article in irishtimes
> predicts that they will.
And the ones in Britain *are*.
>
> > Of course if someone has spent 10 years in a place and has made major
> > investments (such as buying a house, etc.) they will be less likily to
> > start over again.
>
> Much less than 10 years. 10 years ago Polish community here were
> emerges from the end of WWII (mainly those who fought in the army on
> British side). New community started to settle since Poland joined EU
> and most came around 5 to 2 years ago.
Whatever. Either way of course people who have already bought houses
will be less likely to uproot themselves. The most accurate guage of
what is happening is the most recent trends - more Poles leaving than
arriving.
>
> > But that says more about the past situation in
> > Poland, when those people left, then the current one.
>
> > Here's from the New York Times:
>
> >http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/26/world/europe/26poles.html
>
> > WARSAW — For a long time, Germany has been good to Katarzyna, a 28-
> > year-old Polish woman who works in a pharmacy in Frankfurt during the
> > day and cleans houses in the evenings.
>
> > In six years, she has earned enough money to buy a sporty Audi and an
> > apartment in Poland, while still having enough cash to travel widely
> > in Europe. Millions of other Poles made similar moves from their home
> > country, especially in the four years since Poland joined the European
> > Union. But now a strong economy in Poland, and an increasingly acute
> > labor shortage, are beckoning migrants like Katarzyna back. She is
> > moving to Warsaw in July.
>
> Wow! What a success story! She might decide to move back to Germany
> when Ukraine unite with Poland and a sporty Audi is stolen by the
> Ukrainians who moved to Warsaw but not yet found employment there, you
> never know.
And here Dmitry's anti-Ukrainian racism becomes apparent.
>
> > The Times online stating that era of mass Polish emigration is over:
>
> Obviously. There aren't many vacancies here these days, consequently
> not so many try to succeed. There isn't much point is statements like
> this unless there is an aim to cut down recently growing support for
> BNP.
Yes, its a conspiracy.
>
>
> >http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article3378877.ece
>
> > A wave of immigration that helped to fuel Britain’s early 21st century
> > boom is over, as the Polish plumber and thousands like him go home.
>
> Plumbers get paid more in Poland than in England? I should inform
> people in Latvia (less travel, same left hand drive, and better
> money).
Go for it.
>
> > The Times has established that, for the first time since they began
> > arriving en masse four years ago, more UK-based Poles are returning to
> > their homeland than are entering Britain.
>
> > Statistics show that only 38,680 Poles signed up to the Government’s
> > register of migrant workers in the third quarter of 2007, a slump of
> > 18 per cent from the previous year. Polish officials say that Poles
> > leaving the country outnumber thoses coming in.
>
> There are no statistics of those who didn't register. About a third
> has left recently because their temporary jobs ceased to exist, not
> because there are better paid jobs in Poland. Now the job market in
> UK on its slow way to recovery, so I don't see why Poles living and
> working here would want to leave (unless it is true that the salaries
> in Poland are higher than here).
Relative to cost of living Polish salaries are higher in certain
industries. And its about the future - they are rising.
> > Half of the estimated one million British-based Poles are expected to
> > return home, said the Centre for International Relations, a Warsaw-
> > based think-tank.
>
> I wonder how often the thinking tank is updating their findings. Many
> things changed since last November.
Has Polish economy gotten worse vis a vis the British one since that
time?
>
> > Chris Zietkowski, 34, a Polish painter and decorator,
>
> I this point it would be very interesting to hear a professional
> opinion from Andrius.
>
> > told The Times
> > that he wanted to return home this year. “Two years ago I could make
> > five times the amount of money here than I could in Poland,” he said.
> > “Now the wages are about the same and the living costs in the UK are
> > much higher. There is a lot of work in Poland, probably more than in
> > the UK. It’s a good time to go back.”
>
> > Mr Zietkowski added that many of his friends were also thinking about
> > returning. “The feeling is: why be away from your family and your home-
> > land for no reason?”
>
> > Kasia Popyla, 23, is a student physio-therapist who has just returned
> > to Poland. “I used to make £800 per month,” she said. “Since the
> > summer I’ve watched the zloty value of my savings, which are in
> > pounds, fall lower and lower.
>
> > “At the end of the day we are Polish, we left in our early 20s and are
> > coming back to get married and watch our kids grow up in Poland.”
>
> At the end of the day one can always find few quotes that support the
> view they are presenting in their article.
So you have nothing substantive to say when preented wit the facts
that more Poles are leaving Britain for Poalnd than arriving there.
>
>
> > > >http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/finance/2008/1208/1228571631794.html
>
> > > > 33% of Poles may return home
> > > > In this section »
> > > > Report shows construction activity close to record lowsWhite House and
> > > > Congress seek to finalise deal on rescue of car firmsLAURA SLATTERYA
> > > > THIRD of Polish workers in Ireland may return home over the next year
> > > > as Poland takes up its position as one of Europe's fastest-growing
> > > > economies, according to Ireland's largest recruitment company, CPL.
> > > I'm not up to date with Irish situation very much, but usually it is not very different from British in this subject area.
>
> > If so then the Irish are definitely going back. As we have seen, this
> > year more Poles are returning to Poland than arriving in Britain.
>
> Could be anything. Do CPL know how many are returning from Germany or
> United States. How exactly do they measure arrive/return ratio?
Are you stating they are lying or that you know more than they do?
And you know more than do the journalists at the Times who wrote the
article?
>
> > > These days doubling of population doesn't
> > > necessarily benefit economic development. What natural resources and
> > > what parts of Ukrainian industry could benefit Polish people?
>
> > The same kind that benefit the German people from closer ties with
> > France, American people for closer ties with Canada, etc.
>
> Not sure about Canadians. Every Canadian I have ever spoken to hates
> United States.
LOL. Not very realistic. Canadians thibnk they are better versions
of Americans but they certainly don't hate them.
> It is always good to have close ties between people of
> different countries. What exactly was the plan of Polish Government?
Probably to create a close Ukrainian-Polish partnership akin to the
current Franco-German one.
> > > You
> > > don't mean those gas pipes going through Ukraine? The tap is in
> > > Russia and it was not very long ago when Kremlin turned it off when
> > > Ukraine couldn't pay the bill.
>
> > Ukraine is one of the world's largest steel producers, among other
> > things.
>
> Great! Why is Poland buying steel from Russia whilst trying to
> establish some "very special" ties with Ukraine?
And?
> > > Doubling population could cause many problems, such as mass
> > > immigration from Eastern part of the Kingdom to the Western and Polish
> > > government having to deal with Crimea and other parts of Ukraine where
> > > the population is very pro-Russian.
>
> > You make it sound like it was very bad for West Germany to unite with
> > East Germany.
>
> You make it sound like Poland and Ukraine is one country temporarily
> separated for 45 years. Besides, even German unification has created
> some minor internal problems.
Sure it has. And?
>
> > Crimea's Russian population is tiny and in reality not very important.
>
> According to 2001 Ukrainian Census, the population of Crimea was
> 2,033,700.[47] The ethnic makeup was comprised the following self-
> reported groups: Russians: 58.32%; Ukrainians: 24.32%; Crimean Tatars:
> 12.1%; Belarusians: 1.44%; Tatars: 0.54%; Armenians: 0.43%; Jews:
> 0.22%; and Italians: 0.015%.
>
> It is important because that part is particularly keen in having very
> close ties with Russia.
Sure. But it's better to think of the long term than the short-term.
Crimean Russians are not reproducing. They are dying out. In the long
term, they are irrelevant. Crimea lost 400,000 people between 1989
and 2001. And that's IN SPITE OF the influx of a couple 100,000
Criman tatars.
>
> > > I thought Poland already has close relationship with Ukraine. You
> > > have to explain how "more closer" relationship with Ukraine can
> > > benefit Polish people (without references to journalists who write
> > > things because it is their "bread&butter", if you could, please).
>
> > Polish people benefit from having a strong Polish state that is not
> > dominated by its neighbors.
>
> Yes, but Ukraine is very unlikely to provide any assistance in this
> process.
Your claim that a nation of 45 million educated people with the most
fertile farmland in the world, one of the top streel producers, with a
functioning space industry wouldn't be an advantage.
>
> > > > The fact is that alone, Poland can at best be to Germany what Canada
> > > > is to America. Actually its position may be worse, because Canada at
> > > > least has leverage due to its oil. Poland, like Ukraine, sits on the
> > > > gas pipelines but these are being bypassed. Incidentally, the north
> > > > and south streams are a major factor in terms of escalating Poland's
> > > > activity with Ukraine.
>
> > > The effort should be on investment in locally produced renewable
> > > energies not on integration of Crimea into Polish Kingdom.
>
> > Noone is talking about a new Polish Kingdom. Integrating with Ukraine
> > is not mutually exclusive with investing in locally produced renewable
> > resources (which in any case is absurd given Poland's massive coal
> > deposits).
>
> > Why your obsession with Crimea's 1.2 million Russians, about 3% of
> > Ukraine's population and rapidly declining - Crimea lost about
> > 400,000 people from 1989 and 2001 censuses, or 16% of its population,
> > the worst decline in all of Ukraine. There is no need to worry too
> > much about a people that have themselves chosen nonexistence.
>
> I'm not obsessed with Crimea's Russians. However, in Crimea they are
> the highest influence.
Only for a generation or so.
regards,
BM
The Black Monk
<ostap_bender_1...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Nov 17, 9:02 am, The Black Monk <ch....@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/2009/11/16/2009-11-16_poland_li...
>
> > Poland, Lithuania and Ukraine to form brigade for UN, EU and NATO
> > peacekeeping missions
> > By Corky Siemaszko
> > DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER
>
> > The Poles and Lithuanians are trying to create something not seen
> > since 1795 - a fighting unit that also includes Ukrainians.
>
> I wonder what happened in 1795.... Oh, now I remember: came Bohdan
> Khmelnitsky, and the Ukrainians finally managed to get rid of the
> Polish-Lithuanian Catholic yoke.
That was in the 17th century. Apparently you are as much an expert on
Ukrainian history as you are on atheism, Nazism, Godwin's Law, etc.
regards,
BM
> > BM- Hide quoted text -
The Black Monk
<ostap_bender_1...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Nov 21, 11:01 am, The Black Monk <ch....@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > >On Nov 21, 5:14 am, "Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr."
>
> > <ostap_bender_1...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Nov 17, 4:35 pm, EZ <zvi...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > I think Ukraine is torn between two 'poles' - Russia and the EU/NATO.
>
> > > Well, EZ, that's not how they see it in Ukraine. Ukrainians do not
> > > equate NATO with EU at all. EU is admired, and most people would want
> > > to join EU ASAP. But NATO is mostly hated as a warmongering
> > > organsation.
>
> > In the last poll only 54% oppose Ukraine joining NATO. I doubt that
> > every one of those people who oppose Ukraine joining NATO, actually
> > "hate" it. Many of them to probably, but not everyone. So
> > realistically perhaps 1/3 or so of Ukraine's population actually
> > "hate" NATO.
>
> > What's with the exaggeration?
>
> And how many people favour joining NATO? 10%? 20%?
23%. So a bare majority oppose joining NATO (most of whom probably
don't oppose joining out of hatred), 1/4 want to join it, and 1/4
don't care or are unsure. From this you state "NATO is mostly hated as
a warmongering organsation."
>
So what do Russian have against Chukchis?
Interesting theiory. Did you know that Orthodox Slavic Bulgaria is
also a NATO member?
Oops.
> And speaking of this medal, you too can become a War hero. You can
> purchase you war hero medal from the US government:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cold_War_Victory_Medal
> The Cold War Victory Medal is both an official medal of the National
> Guard and an unofficial military medal of the United States. It is
> awarded by the State of Louisiana and in ribbon form only by the State
> of Alaska. In the medal's unofficial capacity it can be purchased by
> any member of the United States military, or civilian employees of the
> federal government, who served in their positions honorably during the
> years of the Cold War, specifically September 2, 1945 to December 26,
> 1991. On April 12, 2007 senators Hillary Clinton and Susan Collins
> announced they were reintroducing legislation in the Senate that will
> authorize the Secretary of Defense to issue the Cold War Service Medal
> to Cold War Veterans.
>
> So, did you work as a federal tax collector between 1945 and 1991? If
> so - send your money to Uncle Sam, and your tireless efforts to extort
> money from the innocent American taxpayers will be rewarded by a medal
> that said that you have sacrificed your life to defeat Communism. And
> don't worry - the money that you send to Uncle Sam, will be put to
> good use: to kill Iraqis, Afghanis and various other natives and to
> start new wars against other oil-rich countries.
And the relvence of this all here?
>
>
> > 9-11 proved the failure of that approach.
>
> > > > On the other hand, IMHO Poland/Lithuania are too much influenced by
> > > > their history. As Shimon Peres once said to a Lithuanian newspaper
> > > > "history is above us". Same here - what ideas people have grown with,
> > > > they tend to stick with them and they tend to have little control over
> > > > those ideas. Poland - because of its proximity and language similarity
> > > > wants to have Ukraine on its side. Is this a realistic goal though?
>
> > > Well, not only did Poland own Ukraine at some point, it tried on
> > > numerous occasions to enslave Russia too. Until Russia and Ukraine re-
> > > united and enslaved Poland instead.
>
> > > Poland would be well-advised not to repeat history.
>
> > Poles no longer try to enslave Ukrainians as they did in the mid 16th
> > century.
>
> How do you know? The only way to find out is to give Ukraine to Poland
> and NATO and to see if history will repeat itself.
>
>
>
> > When they did so, the Commonwealth fell apart quite
> > quickly.
> > When Poles and Ukrainians worked together (say around 1600) they
> > together captured Moscow and defeated the Ottoman Empire. Perhaps
> > memories of the Moscow campaign are what drive some Russians to
> > hysterics when Poland and Ukraine start forging closer ties.
>
> Actually, nobody in Russia knows that Ukrainians "captured Moscow".
No, but they remember that when Poland and Ukraine were united this
entity captured Moscow. The Russian liberation of its territory from
that state is now a national holiday.
> However, Russians are aware of the long history of Polish attempts to
> enslave Russia for centuries. That's why the Polish whinings about
> "historical Russian imperialism" seem so laughable.
>
> But tell me more about this Ukrainian capture of Moscow. What were its
> motivations? How exactly did it happen? Why is Moscow no longer under
> this joint Polish-Ukrainian occupation? Can you give me references?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petro_Konashevych-Sahaidachny#Major_campaigns
In 1618, Sahaidachny joined the Anti-Turkish Holy League.[1] While his
battles with the Tatars and the Turks, the Polish-Lithuanian
Commonwealth was at war with Russia and was at times searching for
Sahaidachny; they wanted him to provide Władysław IV Vasa, the King of
the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, with 20,000 Cossacks near Moscow.
Sahaidachny did, and seized the forts in the cities of Livny and
Yelets. He returned to Zaporizhia, and did not only become a Koshovyi
Otaman, but was practically the Hetman of Ukraine.
http://www.day.kiev.ua/290619?idsource=261273&mainlang=eng
In 2001, Kyiv saw the unveiling of a monument to Petro Konashevych-
Sahaidachny, a prominent Cossack hetman of the early seventeenth
century, one of Ukraine’s most illustrious figures. Without doubt,
this outstanding historical personage deserves to be commemorated in
such a way more than any other Ukrainian statesman of those days. For
it was he who led the Cossacks in the victorious naval campaigns to
the Crimea and Turkey. He headed the Cossack troops when they nearly
captured Moscow fighting as part of the Polish army
----------
regards,
BM
- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr.
Nothing. Russians like Chukchas. They view them as very ignorant and
simplistic but nice people who should be ruled by wise Russians and
Jews for their own good. Is that analogous to how Ukrainians are
viewed by NATO?
Yes. It puzzles me. I suspect that Bulgarians were told that joining
NATO is a pre-condition to joining EU, so they sold their souls for 30
pieces of silver.
Actually, Greece too is a NATO country. Using the Turkish threat,
NATO forced Greece to vote in favour of the Rape of Serbia. However,
when Clinton tried to visit Greece later that year, the mass
demonstrations made him cancel his visit. He even mumbled something to
the effect that "all Greeks are Communists".
>
> Oops.
>
> > And speaking of this medal, you too can become a War hero. You can
> > purchase you war hero medal from the US government:
>
> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cold_War_Victory_Medal
> > The Cold War Victory Medal is both an official medal of the National
> > Guard and an unofficial military medal of the United States. It is
> > awarded by the State of Louisiana and in ribbon form only by the State
> > of Alaska. In the medal's unofficial capacity it can be purchased by
> > any member of the United States military, or civilian employees of the
> > federal government, who served in their positions honorably during the
> > years of the Cold War, specifically September 2, 1945 to December 26,
> > 1991. On April 12, 2007 senators Hillary Clinton and Susan Collins
> > announced they were reintroducing legislation in the Senate that will
> > authorize the Secretary of Defense to issue the Cold War Service Medal
> > to Cold War Veterans.
>
> > So, did you work as a federal tax collector between 1945 and 1991? If
> > so - send your money to Uncle Sam, and your tireless efforts to extort
> > money from the innocent American taxpayers will be rewarded by a medal
> > that said that you have sacrificed your life to defeat Communism. And
> > don't worry - the money that you send to Uncle Sam, will be put to
> > good use: to kill Iraqis, Afghanis and various other natives and to
> > start new wars against other oil-rich countries.
>
> And the relvence of this all here?
>
Stating facts? :-)
But seriously, the point is that the mixture of Russo- and Orthodoxo-
phobias with Cold War mongering are still a major factor in the
military-industrial complex's world
>
> > > 9-11 proved the failure of that approach.
>
> > > > > On the other hand, IMHO Poland/Lithuania are too much influenced by
> > > > > their history. As Shimon Peres once said to a Lithuanian newspaper
> > > > > "history is above us". Same here - what ideas people have grown with,
> > > > > they tend to stick with them and they tend to have little control over
> > > > > those ideas. Poland - because of its proximity and language similarity
> > > > > wants to have Ukraine on its side. Is this a realistic goal though?
>
> > > > Well, not only did Poland own Ukraine at some point, it tried on
> > > > numerous occasions to enslave Russia too. Until Russia and Ukraine re-
> > > > united and enslaved Poland instead.
>
> > > > Poland would be well-advised not to repeat history.
>
> > > Poles no longer try to enslave Ukrainians as they did in the mid 16th
> > > century.
>
> > How do you know? The only way to find out is to give Ukraine to Poland
> > and NATO and to see if history will repeat itself.
>
> > > When they did so, the Commonwealth fell apart quite
> > > quickly.
> > > When Poles and Ukrainians worked together (say around 1600) they
> > > together captured Moscow and defeated the Ottoman Empire. Perhaps
> > > memories of the Moscow campaign are what drive some Russians to
> > > hysterics when Poland and Ukraine start forging closer ties.
>
> > Actually, nobody in Russia knows that Ukrainians "captured Moscow".
>
> No, but they remember that when Poland and Ukraine were united this
> entity captured Moscow.
>
No. Nobody knows about the role of Ukraine in this. This is the first
time I am hearing this. Had we known that Kiev was involved in the
Polish conquests, it would have made them seem a bit less abhorrent.
>
> The Russian liberation of its territory from
> that state is now a national holiday.
>
From Poland. Not from Ukraine.
>
> > However, Russians are aware of the long history of Polish attempts to
> > enslave Russia for centuries. That's why the Polish whinings about
> > "historical Russian imperialism" seem so laughable.
>
> > But tell me more about this Ukrainian capture of Moscow. What were its
> > motivations? How exactly did it happen? Why is Moscow no longer under
> > this joint Polish-Ukrainian occupation? Can you give me references?
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petro_Konashevych-Sahaidachny#Major_camp...
>
> In 1618, Sahaidachny joined the Anti-Turkish Holy League.[1] While his
> battles with the Tatars and the Turks, the Polish-Lithuanian
> Commonwealth was at war with Russia and was at times searching for
> Sahaidachny; they wanted him to provide Władysław IV Vasa, the King of
> the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, with 20,000 Cossacks near Moscow.
> Sahaidachny did, and seized the forts in the cities of Livny and
> Yelets. He returned to Zaporizhia, and did not only become a Koshovyi
> Otaman, but was practically the Hetman of Ukraine.
>
> http://www.day.kiev.ua/290619?idsource=261273&mainlang=eng
>
> In 2001, Kyiv saw the unveiling of a monument to Petro Konashevych-
> Sahaidachny, a prominent Cossack hetman of the early seventeenth
> century, one of Ukraine’s most illustrious figures. Without doubt,
> this outstanding historical personage deserves to be commemorated in
> such a way more than any other Ukrainian statesman of those days. For
> it was he who led the Cossacks in the victorious naval campaigns to
> the Crimea and Turkey. He headed the Cossack troops when they nearly
> captured Moscow fighting as part of the Polish army
>
NEARLY captured? Didn't you claim:
>
> When Poles and Ukrainians worked together (say around 1600)
> they together captured Moscow
>
To summarise: Because Ukraine was part by Poland, some Ukrainians
served in the Polish army that tried to capture Moscow but didn't
capture it.
So, Ukrainians "captured" Moscow in 1600s the same way Austrians
"captured" Moscow in 1941? :-)
And do you know how the Poles convinced Ukrainians to participate in
Polish campaigns to conquer Moscow? By temporarily suspending in 1618
the official persecution of Orthodox Christians that was the very
basis of the Polish rule over the subjugated and enslaved Ukraine
prior to that:
And as far as those "glorious victories" over the Turks go - don't
make me laugh. Cossacs may have beaten up the Turks, but the Poles
used these Ukrainian victories to sign a peace treaty with Turkey,
which mandated that the Cossacs be suppressed and oppressed. So, as
always, Turkey and Poland again managed to use the gullible Ukrainians
into further making them slaves of the Poles. If Ukraine ever joins
NATO, it can continue this stupid suicidal tradition.
Dmitry
> > when Ukraine unite with Poland and a sporty Audi is stolen by the
> > Ukrainians who moved to Warsaw but not yet found employment there, you
> > never know.
>
> And here Dmitry's anti-Ukrainian racism becomes apparent.
Dmitry as an anti-Ukrainian racist. It's a new label, I've never been
racist in scb before -))
Despite the communist past, Poland is far wealthier than Ukraine. If
Poland establish a relationship with Ukraine that allows Ukrainians to
easily arrive and settle in Poland a fair part of Ukrainian population
will take this advantage. Perhaps Poland is now ready to handle it, I
don't know.
> Relative to cost of living Polish salaries are higher in certain
> industries. And its about the future - they are rising.
Good for them.
> > > Half of the estimated one million British-based Poles are expected to
> > > return home, said the Centre for International Relations, a Warsaw-
> > > based think-tank.
>
> > I wonder how often the thinking tank is updating their findings. Many
> > things changed since last November.
>
> Has Polish economy gotten worse vis a vis the British one since that
> time?
According to some sources Polish economy has grown 1.4% this year, UK
- 3.2%.
> > Could be anything. Do CPL know how many are returning from Germany or
> > United States. How exactly do they measure arrive/return ratio?
>
> Are you stating they are lying or that you know more than they do?
> And you know more than do the journalists at the Times who wrote the
> article?
I'm not stating that they are lying, just questioning how the figures
were obtained. It is obvious that emigration of Poles to UK has
slowed down and is unlikely to increase in nearest future. However,
I'm not convinced that we are going to see 1/3 of existing British
residents of Polish origin leaving this country next year.
> > It is always good to have close ties between people of
> > different countries. What exactly was the plan of Polish Government?
>
> Probably to create a close Ukrainian-Polish partnership akin to the
> current Franco-German one.
It is easy to create such relationship when both partners are on the
same or similar level. It can be still OK if the disadvantaged side
is much smaller in size (so the wealth can be shared without
significant side effects). Ukraine is massive; it has population
larger than Poland. Also Ukraine is politically unstable.
> > Great! Why is Poland buying steel from Russia whilst trying to
> > establish some "very special" ties with Ukraine?
>
> And?
Shouldn't they buy steel from Ukraine instead?
> > > Crimea's Russian population is tiny and in reality not very important.
>
> > According to 2001 Ukrainian Census, the population of Crimea was
> > 2,033,700.[47] The ethnic makeup was comprised the following self-
> > reported groups: Russians: 58.32%; Ukrainians: 24.32%; Crimean Tatars:
> > 12.1%; Belarusians: 1.44%; Tatars: 0.54%; Armenians: 0.43%; Jews:
> > 0.22%; and Italians: 0.015%.
>
> > It is important because that part is particularly keen in having very
> > close ties with Russia.
>
> Sure. But it's better to think of the long term than the short-term.
> Crimean Russians are not reproducing. They are dying out. In the long
> term, they are irrelevant. Crimea lost 400,000 people between 1989
> and 2001. And that's IN SPITE OF the influx of a couple 100,000
> Criman tatars.
Many of them have left for Russia. Those who remained are still
having children, so I don't think they are going to die out.
There are also things like this, with Lenin and red flags
http://www.russiatoday.ru/Politics/2009-04-12/Crimea__Ukraine_s_trump_card_in_game_with_Russia.html
> > Yes, but Ukraine is very unlikely to provide any assistance in this
> > process.
>
> Your claim that a nation of 45 million educated people with the most
> fertile farmland in the world, one of the top streel producers, with a
> functioning space industry wouldn't be an advantage.
I am starting to think that your perception of Ukraine has an element
of idealism.
> Only for a generation or so.
This can be assessed in 12 years time, no point speculating now.
The Black Monk
Well, you claimed that on the basis of Polish jokes Americans hate
Poles (or even worse -all Slavs).
The example of Chukchi jokes tells us that jokes about stupidiy have
nothing to do with hatred.
I'm sure it does.
> I suspect that Bulgarians were told that joining
> NATO is a pre-condition to joining EU, so they sold their souls for 30
> pieces of silver.
That may explain Bulgaria's actions, but you are as usual avoiding my
questions.
If NATO and the West hate Orthodox Slavs so much, why did they let
Bulgaria into NATO?
> Actually, Greece too is a NATO country. Using the Turkish threat,
> NATO forced Greece to vote in favour of the Rape of Serbia. However,
> when Clinton tried to visit Greece later that year, the mass
> demonstrations made him cancel his visit. He even mumbled something to
> the effect that "all Greeks are Communists".
Did you know that Polish president Kaczynsky condemned the theft of
Serbian land?
http://de-construct.net/?p=5881
While visiting Belgrade on Wednesday Kaczynski said he, along with
Polish opposition, is against the decision of Donald Tusk’s government
to recognize southern Serbian province of Kosovo as an independent
state.
“Polish government recognized Kosovo independence, but I won’t hide
that took place in the situation in which president of the state and
government do not share the same position,” Kaczynski said.
Rzeczpospolita today quoted Krzysztof Lisek of Tusk’s Civic Platform,
political party currently in power in Poland, who admonished President
Kaczynski for “criticizing government’s foreign policy during the
visit abroad”.
Polish media reported that Kaczynski didn’t only stress he opposes the
recognition of amputated Serbian province, but also openly backed the
policy of the Serbian government and President Tadić in regards to the
preservation of southern Kosovo-Metohija province.
“I am urging Mister President to continue to approach this issue
steadfastly as by now,” Kaczynski said according to the Polish media
reports.
According to the polls, majority of Polish people share President
Kaczynski’s firm position that Poland should not have backed Pristina
Albanians’ unilateral declaration of independence.
Fortunately for Putin and his ilk, Kaczynsky wasn't in power when NATO
decided to invade Serbia. That invasion was one of the best things to
happen for those guys. The pro-West forces within Russia became
totally discredited and marginalized, Russia now had the precedent to
steal Georgian land just as NATO stole Serb land, and Serbia had
nowhere to go but towards Russia which has really paid off for Russia:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/25/business/worldbusiness/25iht-pipe.4.9507398.html
Russia won the right Friday to direct a major supply route for natural
gas through its ally Serbia to Europe, a deal that analysts described
as a Kremlin victory in a "pipeline war" with the European Union.
The agreement, signed in the Kremlin before President Vladimir Putin
and visiting Serbian leaders, increased Moscow's control over energy
supplies to Europe and could undermine a rival EU project.
Strong Russian opposition to independence for the Serbian province of
Kosovo was a key bargaining chip in the negotiations that resulted in
Serbia joining the project, the South Stream natural gas pipeline.
Belgrade also agreed to sell a majority stake in Serbia's state-owned
oil monopoly, NIS, to the Russian natural gas giant, Gazprom, at a
favorable price.
South Stream is a project worth a projected €10 billion, or $14.7
billion, organized jointly by Gazprom and the Italian energy giant ENI
to carry Siberian gas to Europe via the Black Sea.
"Our close political relations were today converted into economic
results," Putin's chosen successor, First Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry
Medvedev, told reporters. "This is a great breakthrough."
...
Some analysts described the price as well below market value, giving
estimates of €1 billion to €2 billion, although others said the NIS
plant needed heavy reconstruction.
If that were the case NATO wouldn't have accepted Bulgaria, Greece or
Romania and wouldn't have been courting Ukraine. Or is wanting to
accept Orthodox Ukraine into NATO an example of hatred towards
Orthodox people in your opinion?
...cut...
>
> > > Actually, nobody in Russia knows that Ukrainians "captured Moscow".
>
> > No, but they remember that when Poland and Ukraine were united this
> > entity captured Moscow.
>
> No. Nobody knows about the role of Ukraine in this. This is the first
> time I am hearing this. Had we known that Kiev was involved in the
> Polish conquests, it would have made them seem a bit less abhorrent.
How so?
> > The Russian liberation of its territory from
> > that state is now a national holiday.
>
> From Poland. Not from Ukraine.
Yes.
It's not online, but Paul Robert Magocsi's book about Ukrainian
History published by the Uninersity of Toronto Press states on page
209 that Ukrainians helped Poles to capture Moscow.
Happy now?
> So, Ukrainians "captured" Moscow in 1600s the same way Austrians
> "captured" Moscow in 1941? :-)
You seem to enjoy jumping to conclusions and making yourself look
silly.
> And do you know how the Poles convinced Ukrainians to participate in
> Polish campaigns to conquer Moscow? By temporarily suspending in 1618
> the official persecution of Orthodox Christians that was the very
> basis of the Polish rule over the subjugated and enslaved Ukraine
> prior to that:
>
> http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A1%D0%B0%D0%B3%D0%B0%D0%B9%D0%B4%D0%...
My, you certainly are prone to exaggeration. Orthodoxy was not wiped
out by the Poles in Ukraine, as Greek Catholicism was by the Russians
in the 19th century.
> And as far as those "glorious victories" over the Turks go - don't
> make me laugh. Cossacs may have beaten up the Turks, but the Poles
> used these Ukrainian victories to sign a peace treaty with Turkey,
> which mandated that the Cossacs be suppressed and oppressed.
It depends how you define it.
> So, as
> always, Turkey and Poland again managed to use the gullible Ukrainians
> into further making them slaves of the Poles. If Ukraine ever joins
> NATO, it can continue this stupid suicidal tradition.
What do you think, if Ukraine were to join Russia instead? NOT a
stupid and suicidal tradition?
What is kind of funny is that when the last thing NATO needs is a
bunch of Ukrainians running around with guns this is an example of
anti-Slavic racism, but when NATO does want Ukraine to join, this is
(according to you) part of an evil plot to enslave Ukrainians. Just
like Romania, Bulgaria, Poland, etc. were also enslaved by NATO,
right? Or is Ukraine a special case according to you.
BM
The Black Monk
> > > Wow! What a success story! She might decide to move back to Germany
> > > when Ukraine unite with Poland and a sporty Audi is stolen by the
> > > Ukrainians who moved to Warsaw but not yet found employment there, you
> > > never know.
>
> > And here Dmitry's anti-Ukrainian racism becomes apparent.
>
> Dmitry as an anti-Ukrainian racist. It's a new label, I've never been
> racist in scb before -))
Well, what would you call it when the first thing that comes to mind
about Ukrainians in Warsaw is, a stolen car. If someone were to say
"if visa restictions for Russians are eliminated, cars will be stolen
by Russians moving to Europe" this would also reveal that person's
racism, no?
> Despite the communist past, Poland is far wealthier than Ukraine.
Poland and Ukraine were about equally wealthy in 1990. The
differences now are a reflection of mismanagement of the country by
Ukraine's leaders. Poland's leaders were generally patriots devoted to
helping their country. Ukraine's leaders were the old Soviet ruling
class with no loyalty to their country, who used independence to
plunder it.
> If
> Poland establish a relationship with Ukraine that allows Ukrainians to
> easily arrive and settle in Poland a fair part of Ukrainian population
> will take this advantage. Perhaps Poland is now ready to handle it, I
> don't know.
The Poles were forced by the EU to implement visa controls on
Ukrainians when Poland joined the EU. The Polish government tried to
fight this policy.
> > Relative to cost of living Polish salaries are higher in certain
> > industries. And its about the future - they are rising.
>
> Good for them.
>
> > > > Half of the estimated one million British-based Poles are expected to
> > > > return home, said the Centre for International Relations, a Warsaw-
> > > > based think-tank.
>
> > > I wonder how often the thinking tank is updating their findings. Many
> > > things changed since last November.
>
> > Has Polish economy gotten worse vis a vis the British one since that
> > time?
>
> According to some sources Polish economy has grown 1.4% this year, UK
> - 3.2%.
>
> > > Could be anything. Do CPL know how many are returning from Germany or
> > > United States. How exactly do they measure arrive/return ratio?
>
> > Are you stating they are lying or that you know more than they do?
> > And you know more than do the journalists at the Times who wrote the
> > article?
>
> I'm not stating that they are lying, just questioning how the figures
> were obtained. It is obvious that emigration of Poles to UK has
> slowed down and is unlikely to increase in nearest future. However,
> I'm not convinced that we are going to see 1/3 of existing British
> residents of Polish origin leaving this country next year.
Why would Poles stay in England if they make more (relative to cost of
living) in their own country.
> > > It is always good to have close ties between people of
> > > different countries. What exactly was the plan of Polish Government?
>
> > Probably to create a close Ukrainian-Polish partnership akin to the
> > current Franco-German one.
>
> It is easy to create such relationship when both partners are on the
> same or similar level. It can be still OK if the disadvantaged side
> is much smaller in size (so the wealth can be shared without
> significant side effects). Ukraine is massive; it has population
> larger than Poland. Also Ukraine is politically unstable.
No doubt Ukraine has problems. This does not mean the goal is not
important for both countries.
> > > Great! Why is Poland buying steel from Russia whilst trying to
> > > establish some "very special" ties with Ukraine?
>
> > And?
>
> Shouldn't they buy steel from Ukraine instead?
They are boycotting Ukrainian steel or something?
>
> > > > Crimea's Russian population is tiny and in reality not very important.
>
> > > According to 2001 Ukrainian Census, the population of Crimea was
> > > 2,033,700.[47] The ethnic makeup was comprised the following self-
> > > reported groups: Russians: 58.32%; Ukrainians: 24.32%; Crimean Tatars:
> > > 12.1%; Belarusians: 1.44%; Tatars: 0.54%; Armenians: 0.43%; Jews:
> > > 0.22%; and Italians: 0.015%.
>
> > > It is important because that part is particularly keen in having very
> > > close ties with Russia.
>
> > Sure. But it's better to think of the long term than the short-term.
> > Crimean Russians are not reproducing. They are dying out. In the long
> > term, they are irrelevant. Crimea lost 400,000 people between 1989
> > and 2001. And that's IN SPITE OF the influx of a couple 100,000
> > Criman tatars.
>
> Many of them have left for Russia. Those who remained are still
> having children,
The Russian pensioners?
> so I don't think they are going to die out.
Sure, there are a few young Russians having a few kids, but the
overall picture is a demographic catastrophe. Crimea lost 16% of its
population between the last Soviet census and 2001.
> There are also things like this, with Lenin and red flagshttp://www.russiatoday.ru/Politics/2009-04-12/Crimea__Ukraine_s_trump...
>
> > > Yes, but Ukraine is very unlikely to provide any assistance in this
> > > process.
>
> > Your claim that a nation of 45 million educated people with the most
> > fertile farmland in the world, one of the top streel producers, with a
> > functioning space industry wouldn't be an advantage.
>
> I am starting to think that your perception of Ukraine has an element
> of idealism.
How so?
>
> > Only for a generation or so.
>
> This can be assessed in 12 years time, no point speculating now.- Hide quoted text -
Well, Crimea's Russian population dropped from 65% to 58% in about 10
years. The next census will be in 2011 - it will be interestng to see
if Russians will even be the majority in Crimea then.
regards,
BM
Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr.
Neither does the remark “a bunch of Ukrainians running around with
guns on their sides”. it shows that Americans view Slavs as stupid,
mentally inferior people. And you know that the Americans do have such
a stereotype of Slavs. This also includes the belief that Slavic women
are fat and ugly, and Eastern Slavic men look like monsters and all
belong to "mafya". Just watch Law and Order an other US TV shows for a
good compilation of anti-Slavic bigotry. In law and Order, all
Russians look like a darker-skinned version of Colombians with
mustaches, speak with Latino or Greek accents, wear lether pants and
jackets, and are either murderers or gangsters or both (which is most
often). Even women (and that includes mustaches).
Because Bulgaria provides a critically important base for NATO troops,
vis-a-vis both the Balkans and the Black Sea and Russia. Not to
exclude Bulgarian (or any other) territory from the realm of NATO-
controlled territories would be stupid. Would it have been wiser for
NATO to refuse to station hteir troops in Bulgaria and to let Bulgaria
to become an ally of Russia instead.
Take, for example, Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan. There two countries are
certainly in the category of those despised by USA. But USA is willing
to kill to keep their bases there.
Or take Saudi Arabia. Hardly a country admired by Americans, to put it
mildly. But this doesn't prevent USA from making this abhorrent
dictatorship its major military ally.
And yet, the fact remains that Poland is among those abhorrent
countries that recognise Kosovo. So, what's your point? That not all
Poles like the fact that their government is a blind puppet of USA and
some Poles don't like NATO's anti-Slavic and anti-Chrisitian policies?
Fine. And not all Americans agree with the Rape of Serbia either. Here
is the official Republican Party's position back in 1999:
http://rpc.senate.gov/releases/1999/fr033199.htm
United States Senate
Republican Policy Committee
March 31, 1999
The Kosovo Liberation Army: Does Clinton Policy Support Group with
Terror, Drug Ties?
From 'Terrorists' to 'Partners'
Making Things Worse?
Charges of Drugs, Islamic Terror
Reports on KLA Drug and Criminal Links
Reports on Islamic Terror Links
Eradication of the Serbs in Krajina: The Clinton Administration has
stalled efforts to investigate what has been called the "biggest
ethnic cleansing" of the Balkan wars, one which the Clinton
Administration may itself have helped to facilitate:
"Investigators at the international war crimes tribunal in The
Hague have concluded that the Croatian Army carried out summary
executions, indiscriminate shelling of civilian populations and
'ethnic cleansing' during a 1995 assault that was a turning point in
the Balkan wars, according to tribunal documents. The investigators
have recommended that three Croatian generals be indicted, and an
American official said this week that the indictments could come
within a few weeks. . . . Any indictment of Croatian Army generals
could prove politically troublesome for the Clinton Administration,
which has a delicate relationship with Croatia, an American ally in
preserving the peace in Bosnia with a poor human rights record. The
August 1995 Croatian offensive, which drove some 100,000 Serbs from a
large swath of Croatia over four days, was carried out with the tacit
blessing of the United States by a Croatian Army that had been
schooled in part by a group of retired American military officers.
Questions still remain about the full extent of United States
involvement. In the course of the three-year investigation into the
assault, the United States has failed to provide critical evidence
requested by the tribunal, according to tribunal documents and
officials, adding to suspicion among some there that Washington is
uneasy about the investigation. Two senior Canadian military officers,
for example, who were in Croatia during the offensive, testified that
the assault, in which some 3,000 shells rained down on the city of
Knin over 48 hours, was indiscriminate and targeted civilians. . . . A
section of the tribunal's 150-page report is headed: 'The Indictment.
Operation Storm, A Prima Facie Case.': 'During the course of the
military offensive, the Croatian armed forces and special police
committed numerous violations of international humanitarian law,
including but not limited to, shelling of Knin and other cities,' the
report says. 'During, and in the 100 days following the military
offensive, at least 150 Serb civilians were summarily executed, and
many hundreds disappeared.' The crimes also included looting and
burning, the report says." ["War Crimes Panel Finds Croat Troops
'Cleansed' the Serbs," New York Times, 3/21/99]
The Krajina episode -- the largest in the recent Yugoslav wars, at
least until this week in Kosovo -- exposes the hypocrisy of the
Clinton claims as to why intervention in Kosovo is a humanitarian
imperative:
"Within four days, the Croatians drove out 150,000 Serbs, the
largest [until this week] ethnic cleansing of the entire Balkan wars.
Investigators in the Hague have concluded that this campaign was
carried out with brutality, wanton murder, and indiscriminate shelling
of civilians. . . . Krajina is Kosovo writ large. And yet, at the same
time, the U.S. did not stop or even protest the Croatian action. The
Clinton Administration tacitly encouraged it." [Charles Krauthammer,
"The Clinton Doctrine," Time magazine, 4/5/99]
In short, the absence of official confirmation of the reports cited
below can hardly be considered the last word in the matter. And given
this Administration's record, one might treat with some degree of
skepticism even a flat denial of KLA drug and terror ties -- which
thus far has not been offered. As the Clinton Administration searches
for new options in its Kosovo policy, these reports about KLA should
not be lightly dismissed.
---------------------------
One week into the bombing campaign, there is widespread discussion of
options for further actions. One option includes forging a closer
relationship between the United States and a controversial group, the
Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA), a group which has been cited in
unofficial reports for alleged ties to drug cartels and Islamic
terrorist organizations. This paper will examine those allegations in
the context of the currently unfolding air campaign.
Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr.
Why do you think that NATO people are so stupid as to refuse to
exploit Bulgaria, Greece and Romania?
>
>
> > > > Actually, nobody in Russia knows that Ukrainians "captured Moscow".
>
> > > No, but they remember that when Poland and Ukraine were united this
> > > entity captured Moscow.
>
> > No. Nobody knows about the role of Ukraine in this. This is the first
> > time I am hearing this. Had we known that Kiev was involved in the
> > Polish conquests, it would have made them seem a bit less abhorrent.
>
> How so?
>
Had this been an attempt on the part of Ukrainians to re-unite Ukes,
Russians and Belorussians and to restore the Orthodox Kievan Rus, I
would have viewed these campaigns with understanding. I mean, what
can be better than re-uniting Ukraine, Russia and Belorus?
Are you saying that the Poles actually captured Moscow in the 1618
campaign?
Or are you saying that Ukrainians helped UNFULFILLED Polish attempts
to capture Moscow?
[ This reminds me of an old Russian joke: Two Soviet women are
talking. One says:
- I want to go to Paris again!
- You have been to Paris?!! When?
- I haven't. But I again want to go there. ]
Or is it again the case that it is a FACT that the Poles didn't
capture Moscow, but you have a special definition of "TRUTH" in which
factual fallacies are "TRUE" just because they satisfy your personal
religious beliefs and fantasies, just like you told me that every word
in the Bible is TRUE even though many are factually false?
Did Poland capture Moscow in 1618 the same way that God created Man
out of clay and Woman out of Man's rib some 6 or 7 thousand years
ago?
>
> > So, Ukrainians "captured" Moscow in 1600s the same way Austrians
> > "captured" Moscow in 1941? :-)
>
> You seem to enjoy jumping to conclusions and making yourself look
> silly.
>
> > And do you know how the Poles convinced Ukrainians to participate in
> > Polish campaigns to conquer Moscow? By temporarily suspending in 1618
> > the official persecution of Orthodox Christians that was the very
> > basis of the Polish rule over the subjugated and enslaved Ukraine
> > prior to that:
>
> >http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A1%D0%B0%D0%B3%D0%B0%D0%B9%D0%B4%D0%...
>
> My, you certainly are prone to exaggeration. Orthodoxy was not wiped
> out by the Poles in Ukraine, as Greek Catholicism was by the Russians
> in the 19th century.
>
> > And as far as those "glorious victories" over the Turks go - don't
> > make me laugh. Cossacs may have beaten up the Turks, but the Poles
> > used these Ukrainian victories to sign a peace treaty with Turkey,
> > which mandated that the Cossacs be suppressed and oppressed.
>
> It depends how you define it.
>
Oh I am sure. Just as your definition of TRUTH make historical
fallacies true, your definition of "happiness" may include "being
oppressed".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doublethink
Doublethink
Doublethink is a word described in the fictional language of Newspeak
and the act of simultaneously accepting as correct two mutually
contradictory beliefs. It is related to, but distinct from, hypocrisy
and neutrality.
Doublethink is an integral concept of George Orwell's dystopian novel
Nineteen Eighty-Four. According to the novel, doublethink is:
“ To know and not to know, to be conscious of complete truthfulness
while telling carefully constructed lies, to hold simultaneously two
opinions which canceled out, knowing them to be contradictory and
believing in both of them..The power of holding two contradictory
beliefs in one's mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them....To
tell deliberate lies while genuinely believing in them, to forget any
fact that has become inconvenient, and then, when it becomes necessary
again, to draw it back from oblivion for just so long as it is needed,
to deny the existence of objective reality and all the while to take
account of the reality which one denies — all this is indispensably
necessary. Even in using the word doublethink it is necessary to
exercise doublethink. For by using the word one admits that one is
tampering with reality; by a fresh act of doublethink one erases this
knowledge; and so on indefinitely, with the lie always one leap ahead
of the truth.[1]"
Newspeak incorporates doublethink, as it contains many words that
create assumed associations between contradictory meanings, especially
true of fundamentally important words such as good and evil; right and
wrong; truth and falsehood; justice and injustice. Some see parallels
of this in Nietzsche's idea that "the truth is just as important as
the untruth".[2]
Doublethink is a form of trained, willful intellectual blindness to
contradictions in a belief system. Doublethink differs from ordinary
hypocrisy in that the "doublethinking" person deliberately had to
forget the contradiction between his two opposing beliefs — and then
deliberately forget that he had forgotten the contradiction. He then
had to forget the forgetting of the forgetting, and so on; this
intentional forgetting, once begun, continues indefinitely. In the
novel's notes, Orwell describes it as "controlled insanity".
In the case of workers at the Records Department in the Ministry of
Truth, doublethink means being able to falsify public records, and
then believe in the new history that they, themselves, had just
written. As revealed in Goldstein's Book, the Ministry's name is
itself an example of doublethink: the Ministry of Truth is really
concerned with lies.
Moreover, doublethink's self-deception allows the Party to maintain
huge goals and realistic expectations: If one is to rule, and to
continue ruling, one must be able to dislocate the sense of reality.
For the secret of rulership is to combine a belief in one's own
infallibility with the power to learn from past mistakes. Thus, each
Party member could be a credulous pawn, but would never lack relevant
information. The Party is both fanatical and well-informed. [Doesn't
this look like the Catholic Church or any other ruling religious body
for that matter?]
http://www.orwelltoday.com/doublethink.shtml.
Doublethink means the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in
one's mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them.
The Ministry of Peace concerns itself with War;
the Ministry of Truth with Lies;
the Ministry of Love with Torture; [Jesuits?]
and the Ministry of Plenty with Starvation.
>
> > So, as
> > always, Turkey and Poland again managed to use the gullible Ukrainians
> > into further making them slaves of the Poles. If Ukraine ever joins
> > NATO, it can continue this stupid suicidal tradition.
>
> What do you think, if Ukraine were to join Russia instead? NOT a
> stupid and suicidal tradition?
>
What would you think, if Ukrainian Cossasks conquered Moscow (again!)
and Minsk and made Russia and Belarus part of Ukraine/Kievan Rus?
>
> What is kind of funny is that when the last thing NATO needs is a
> bunch of Ukrainians running around with guns this is an example of
> anti-Slavic racism, but when NATO does want Ukraine to join, this is
> (according to you) part of an evil plot to enslave Ukrainians.
>
I am sure many in NATO salivate at the thought of using Ukrainian
territory to bully Russia. The opportunities are limitless! The wet
dreams of kicking the Russian fleet out of Sevastopol and establishing
NATO control over the Black Sea alone induces a spontaneous release of
tons of sperm from various NATO bodies.
And I am sure NATO leaders are as happy to rule Ukraine as Russians
are to rule Chukotka, to use your own analogy. Just because Russians
look down on Chukchas, doesn't prevent Russia from owning Chukotka,
does it? Ukraine will be even more welcomed in NATO than Chukotka in
the Russian Federation.
>
> Just
> like Romania, Bulgaria, Poland, etc. were also enslaved by NATO,
> right? Or is Ukraine a special case according to you.
>
Well, Ukraine is special in the sense that turning Ukrainiane and
especially Crimea into russophobic lands is more gratifying to the
NATO russophobes than turning Poles or Romanians into russophobes,
which is already mostly the case.
But, as i said, NATO will welcome any former pro-Russian country into
its folds and will use its territory to strengthen the stranglehold on
Russia. I assure you that if Lukashenka asks into NATO, he will be
welcomed there with happiness and orgasmic ecstasy and will be
immediately declared "the greatest libertarian, democrat and
humanitarian of the 20th and 21st century since Gandhi". Of course,
they won't let him into EU for a while.
Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr.
[continued]
Part of your question seems to be: Given that Americans and West
Europeans don't trust Ukrainians to "run around with arms", how can
that square with Ukraine being part of NATO? Well, the way it will
work is:
NATO will use the Ukrainian territory with gusto to place its troops
and weapons next to Russia's heart and belly.
NATO will gladly use Ukrainian teenage soldiers as cannon fodder in
America's and NATO's various wars around the World. I already reported
how back in 2008, Ukrainian reservists were given a choice by
Yuschenko: they can either serve in the Ukrainian army fighting floods
the Carpathians (for free) or serve in Georgia helping them fight
Russia (for money):
http://www.rusk.ru/svod.php?date=2009-01-30
Ukraine conducted a covert "mobilization": on August 12-13 2008
reservists were called. They were told : "either you'll go to the
Carpathians to reverse the effects of floods (for free), or for money
- serve in Georgia"
However, Ukrainians will be prevented from being appointed to high
command positions on the pretext that they can be "Russian spies".
This has already happened to other Eastern Europeans like Hungarians.
For example:
Diplomats see KGB-trained Hungarian committee head as danger to NATO
A story in Monday's International Herald Tribune quoted anonymous
Western diplomats as saying that the appointment of Moscow-trained
Sándor Laborc to head a special NATO committee on intelligence may
endanger the security of the alliance. Laborc, controversially
appointed to head Hungary's National Security Office earlier this
year, holds the NATO position because it is Hungary’s turn to head the
committee.
The newspaper, referring to Laborc as "a former Communist who was
trained at the KGB's Dzerzhinsky Academy from 1983 to 1989," notes
that his appointment to take charge of Hungarian security was not
supported by Parliament's national security committee and was "pushed
through" by Prime Minister Ferenc Gyurcsány and György Szilvásy, the
minister who oversees the secret services.
--------------------------------------
Ukrainian officers will also be banned from top NATO jobs under the
pretext that they were all Soviets an/or because they are ethnic
Russians.
The Black Monk
Okay, any evidence of exploitation of these countries by NATO.
FYI as fullfledged NATO members these countries have veto power over
any NATO decisions. Bulgaria is no more "exploited" by NATO as France
is.
If this were about placing bases in the countries without NATO
membership you would have apoint.
> >
> > > > > Actually, nobody in Russia knows that Ukrainians "captured Moscow".
> >
> > > > No, but they remember that when Poland and Ukraine were united this
> > > > entity captured Moscow.
> >
> > > No. Nobody knows about the role of Ukraine in this. This is the first
> > > time I am hearing this. Had we known that Kiev was involved in the
> > > Polish conquests, it would have made them seem a bit less abhorrent.
> >
> > How so?
> >
>
> Had this been an attempt on the part of Ukrainians to re-unite Ukes,
> Russians and Belorussians and to restore the Orthodox Kievan Rus, I
> would have viewed these campaigns with understanding. I mean, what
> can be better than re-uniting Ukraine, Russia and Belorus?
That's been tried. The results of that experiment weren't so
positive, were they?
No, that Ukrainians helped the Poles capture Moscow in earlier
campaigns. At least that's what Magocsi wrote. I'll defer to his
expertise.
> Or are you saying that Ukrainians helped UNFULFILLED Polish attempts
> to capture Moscow?
See above.
> [ This reminds me of an old Russian joke: Two Soviet women are
> talking. One says:
> - I want to go to Paris again!
> - You have been to Paris?!! When?
> - I haven't. But I again want to go there. ]
>
> Or is it again the case that it is a FACT that the Poles didn't
> capture Moscow, but you have a special definition of "TRUTH" in which
> factual fallacies are "TRUE" just because they satisfy your personal
> religious beliefs and fantasies, just like you told me that every word
> in the Bible is TRUE even though many are factually false?
History is composed of facts, many of which you are unaware of despite
arguing about them:
"Hetman Żółkiewski, whose only other choice was mutiny, decided to
follow the king's orders and left Smolensk in 1610, leaving only a
smaller force necessary to continue the siege. With Cossack
reinforcements, he marched on Moscow...
> Did Poland capture Moscow in 1618 the same way that God created Man
> out of clay and Woman out of Man's rib some 6 or 7 thousand years
> ago?
Um, I never claimed that Poland captured Moscow in 1618.
For someone so focused on empirical evidence and facts, you have an
awfully bad grasp of them, don't you.
BM
Dmitry
>
> > Dmitry as an anti-Ukrainian racist. It's a new label, I've never been
> > racist in scb before -))
>
> Well, what would you call it when the first thing that comes to mind
> about Ukrainians in Warsaw is, a stolen car. If someone were to say
> "if visa restictions for Russians are eliminated, cars will be stolen
> by Russians moving to Europe" this would also reveal that person's
> racism, no?
No. Bringing up bad scenarios is not racism. I have nothing against
Ukrainian people or any other nationalities.
> > Despite the communist past, Poland is far wealthier than Ukraine.
>
> Poland and Ukraine were about equally wealthy in 1990. The
> differences now are a reflection of mismanagement of the country by
> Ukraine's leaders. Poland's leaders were generally patriots devoted to
> helping their country. Ukraine's leaders were the old Soviet ruling
> class with no loyalty to their country, who used independence to
> plunder it.
This is why I don't think that Ukraine is ready to join European
structures just yet.
> > If
> > Poland establish a relationship with Ukraine that allows Ukrainians to
> > easily arrive and settle in Poland a fair part of Ukrainian population
> > will take this advantage. Perhaps Poland is now ready to handle it, I
> > don't know.
>
> The Poles were forced by the EU to implement visa controls on
> Ukrainians when Poland joined the EU. The Polish government tried to
> fight this policy.
Was there no visa control prior to joining EU?
> > I'm not stating that they are lying, just questioning how the figures
> > were obtained. It is obvious that emigration of Poles to UK has
> > slowed down and is unlikely to increase in nearest future. However,
> > I'm not convinced that we are going to see 1/3 of existing British
> > residents of Polish origin leaving this country next year.
>
> Why would Poles stay in England if they make more (relative to cost of
> living) in their own country.
If they settle here comfortably, there is no reason for them to enter
another adventure. Predictions don't necessarily drive people into
actions.
> > It is easy to create such relationship when both partners are on the
> > same or similar level. It can be still OK if the disadvantaged side
> > is much smaller in size (so the wealth can be shared without
> > significant side effects). Ukraine is massive; it has population
> > larger than Poland. Also Ukraine is politically unstable.
>
> No doubt Ukraine has problems. This does not mean the goal is not
> important for both countries.
I'm trying to think of people who populate the countries. The goals
of politicians don't always represent the goals of ordinary citizens.
> > > > Great! Why is Poland buying steel from Russia whilst trying to
> > > > establish some "very special" ties with Ukraine?
>
> > > And?
>
> > Shouldn't they buy steel from Ukraine instead?
>
> They are boycotting Ukrainian steel or something?
Is Ukraine not able to provide Poland with all of Poland's need for
steel?
> > Many of them have left for Russia. Those who remained are still
> > having children,
>
> The Russian pensioners?
There are plenty of Russians of various ages in Ukraine. Russians in
Crimea are not just pensioners. There lots of young people who oppose
proposed Ukrainian membership of NATO there.
>
> > so I don't think they are going to die out.
>
> Sure, there are a few young Russians having a few kids, but the
> overall picture is a demographic catastrophe. Crimea lost 16% of its
> population between the last Soviet census and 2001.
Mostly people are leaving the country because of economic reasons. So
far, Ukraine didn't do well enough to keep their population.
> > > Your claim that a nation of 45 million educated people with the most
> > > fertile farmland in the world, one of the top streel producers, with a
> > > functioning space industry wouldn't be an advantage.
>
> > I am starting to think that your perception of Ukraine has an element
> > of idealism.
>
> How so?
I doesn't sound like you are entirely in line with the reality. 45
million people who went through school, fertile soil and production of
steel have very little weight on the scale. How would 45 million
Ukrainians benifit Polish economy?
> > > Only for a generation or so.
>
> > This can be assessed in 12 years time, no point speculating now.- Hide quoted text -
>
> Well, Crimea's Russian population dropped from 65% to 58% in about 10
> years. The next census will be in 2011 - it will be interestng to see
> if Russians will even be the majority in Crimea then.
Who do you think will be a majority there?
>
> regards,
>
> BM
The Black Monk
> > > > And here Dmitry's anti-Ukrainian racism becomes apparent.
>
> > > Dmitry as an anti-Ukrainian racist. It's a new label, I've never been
> > > racist in scb before -))
>
> > Well, what would you call it when the first thing that comes to mind
> > about Ukrainians in Warsaw is, a stolen car. If someone were to say
> > "if visa restictions for Russians are eliminated, cars will be stolen
> > by Russians moving to Europe" this would also reveal that person's
> > racism, no?
>
> No. Bringing up bad scenarios is not racism.
Well, if the first type of scenario you bring up is a bad one (such as
stealing cars), this indicates some negative feelings towards the
people you are talking about.
> I have nothing against Ukrainian people or any other nationalities.
I will take you at your word and accept that you do not mean anything
bad towards any nationality.
> > > Despite the communist past, Poland is far wealthier than Ukraine.
>
> > Poland and Ukraine were about equally wealthy in 1990. The
> > differences now are a reflection of mismanagement of the country by
> > Ukraine's leaders. Poland's leaders were generally patriots devoted to
> > helping their country. Ukraine's leaders were the old Soviet ruling
> > class with no loyalty to their country, who used independence to
> > plunder it.
>
> This is why I don't think that Ukraine is ready to join European
> structures just yet.
Might not be, although the Polish project seems extra-European. AFAIK
Ukraine, dspite its spectacular decline post-independence, is
currently no more behind Poland than Poland was behind Germany when it
joined the EU.
> > > If
> > > Poland establish a relationship with Ukraine that allows Ukrainians to
> > > easily arrive and settle in Poland a fair part of Ukrainian population
> > > will take this advantage. Perhaps Poland is now ready to handle it, I
> > > don't know.
>
> > The Poles were forced by the EU to implement visa controls on
> > Ukrainians when Poland joined the EU. The Polish government tried to
> > fight this policy.
>
> Was there no visa control prior to joining EU?
It was very lax and forced to become much more strict after EU
ascension. Neither Poles nor Ukrainians were happy about this.
> > > I'm not stating that they are lying, just questioning how the figures
> > > were obtained. It is obvious that emigration of Poles to UK has
> > > slowed down and is unlikely to increase in nearest future. However,
> > > I'm not convinced that we are going to see 1/3 of existing British
> > > residents of Polish origin leaving this country next year.
>
> > Why would Poles stay in England if they make more (relative to cost of
> > living) in their own country.
>
> If they settle here comfortably, there is no reason for them to enter
> another adventure.
A lot of them came purely for economic reasons; they actually like
Poland more, want to raise their children in Poland with Polish
schools, want to have their family around, etc. Now that the Polish
economy is improving and they can make as much in Poland as in England
(taking into account cost of living), these people have no reason to
stay in England anymore.
> Predictions don't necessarily drive people into
> actions.
>
> > > It is easy to create such relationship when both partners are on the
> > > same or similar level. It can be still OK if the disadvantaged side
> > > is much smaller in size (so the wealth can be shared without
> > > significant side effects). Ukraine is massive; it has population
> > > larger than Poland. Also Ukraine is politically unstable.
>
> > No doubt Ukraine has problems. This does not mean the goal is not
> > important for both countries.
>
> I'm trying to think of people who populate the countries. The goals
> of politicians don't always represent the goals of ordinary citizens.
True, but they generally do. Statesmen ought to see the big picture
and make long-term plans while people are often focused on short-term
and immediate issues.
> > > > > Great! Why is Poland buying steel from Russia whilst trying to
> > > > > establish some "very special" ties with Ukraine?
>
> > > > And?
>
> > > Shouldn't they buy steel from Ukraine instead?
>
> > They are boycotting Ukrainian steel or something?
>
> Is Ukraine not able to provide Poland with all of Poland's need for
> steel?
I don't know the details about where Ukraine exports its steel nor
why.
> > > Many of them have left for Russia. Those who remained are still
> > > having children,
>
> > The Russian pensioners?
>
> There are plenty of Russians of various ages in Ukraine. Russians in
> Crimea are not just pensioners. There lots of young people who oppose
> proposed Ukrainian membership of NATO there.
Yes there are plenty of young people too (there are 1.6 million of so
Russians in Crimea, and they can't all be pensioners) but the
population is skewed towards the old.
>
>
> > > so I don't think they are going to die out.
>
> > Sure, there are a few young Russians having a few kids, but the
> > overall picture is a demographic catastrophe. Crimea lost 16% of its
> > population between the last Soviet census and 2001.
>
> Mostly people are leaving the country because of economic reasons. So
> far, Ukraine didn't do well enough to keep their population.
>
> > > > Your claim that a nation of 45 million educated people with the most
> > > > fertile farmland in the world, one of the top streel producers, with a
> > > > functioning space industry wouldn't be an advantage.
>
> > > I am starting to think that your perception of Ukraine has an element
> > > of idealism.
>
> > How so?
>
> I doesn't sound like you are entirely in line with the reality. 45
> million people who went through school, fertile soil and production of
> steel have very little weight on the scale. How would 45 million
> Ukrainians benifit Polish economy?
Like Poland 10 years ago (or still today) it would be a place for
investment, with a cheap educated workforce, abundant natural
resources (other than oil, unfortunately) and industries such as
steel, weapons, rockets, etc.
> > > > Only for a generation or so.
>
> > > This can be assessed in 12 years time, no point speculating now.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > Well, Crimea's Russian population dropped from 65% to 58% in about 10
> > years. The next census will be in 2011 - it will be interestng to see
> > if Russians will even be the majority in Crimea then.
>
> Who do you think will be a majority there?
Nobody. Russians will mot likely be a plurality but their share will
continue to decline.
regards,
BM
>
>
>
>
> > regards,
>
> > BM- Hide quoted text -
>
The Black Monk
So Ukrainian soldiers will be gien a choice to be paid to fight or not
fight? Good for them. To think that Ukrainian volunteers had once
been fighting in the Caucuses against Russia for free.
> http://www.rusk.ru/svod.php?date=2009-01-30
> Ukraine conducted a covert "mobilization": on August 12-13 2008
> reservists were called. They were told : "either you'll go to the
> Carpathians to reverse the effects of floods (for free), or for money
> - serve in Georgia"
>
> However, Ukrainians will be prevented from being appointed to high
> command positions on the pretext that they can be "Russian spies".
> This has already happened to other Eastern Europeans like Hungarians.
> For example:
>
> Diplomats see KGB-trained Hungarian committee head as danger to NATO
>
> A story in Monday's International Herald Tribune quoted anonymous
> Western diplomats as saying that the appointment of Moscow-trained
> Sándor Laborc to head a special NATO committee on intelligence may
> endanger the security of the alliance. Laborc, controversially
> appointed to head Hungary's National Security Office earlier this
> year, holds the NATO position because it is Hungary’s turn to head the
> committee.
>
> The newspaper, referring to Laborc as "a former Communist who was
> trained at the KGB's Dzerzhinsky Academy from 1983 to 1989," notes
> that his appointment to take charge of Hungarian security was not
> supported by Parliament's national security committee and was "pushed
> through" by Prime Minister Ferenc Gyurcsány and György Szilvásy, the
> minister who oversees the secret services.
> --------------------------------------
You claimed he was banned, but according to the article he holds the
position: "Laborc, controversially appointed to head Hungary's
National Security Office earlier this year, holds the NATO position
because it is Hungary’s turn to head the committee."
Here's more:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/04/world/europe/04hungary.html
BERLIN — The new chief of the Hungarian secret services, who spent six
years at the K.G.B.’s academy in Moscow during the 1980s, in January
became the chairman of NATO’s intelligence committee, a rotating post
that is held for a year.
> Ukrainian officers will also be banned from top NATO jobs under the
> pretext that they were all Soviets an/or because they are ethnic
> Russians.
"Also". You mean the Ukrainians will indeed hold those positions,
anonymous western diplomats will say that this may be a bad idea, and
you "also" will state that the Ukrainian officers do not hold the
piosition even though in reality they do?
BM
Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr.
Okay, any evidence of these countries getting benefits from NATO
membership? The only beneficiary may be Greece, because if it ever
tries to leave NATO, NATO will turn Cyprus into a second Kosovo.
>
> FYI as fullfledged NATO members these countries have veto power over
> any NATO decisions.
>
And the 15 Soviet republics in theory had a veto power over what the
Soviet leadership did. But was this power real?
In 1999 Greece initially refused to approve the Rape of Serbia, but it
was immediately blackmailed into submission.
FYI, the Greek supreme court has convicted NATO of crimes against
humanity. So, NATO is officially a criminal organization, according to
Greek law. But has Greece been able to enforce the ruling of its own
Highest Court?
So in reality, Greece has no veto power, and Bulgaria - even
less. :-)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legitimacy_of_NATO_bombing_of_Yugoslavia
...Greece was opposed, but had to agree to it under pressure of other
members... The Council of State, the Supreme Court of Greece, found
NATO guilty of war crimes for its 1999 bombing.[18]
Veto power, my foot.
>
> Bulgaria is no more "exploited" by NATO as France
> is.
>
> If this were about placing bases in the countries without NATO
> membership you would have apoint.
>
>
>
>
>
> > > > > > Actually, nobody in Russia knows that Ukrainians "captured Moscow".
>
> > > > > No, but they remember that when Poland and Ukraine were united this
> > > > > entity captured Moscow.
>
> > > > No. Nobody knows about the role of Ukraine in this. This is the first
> > > > time I am hearing this. Had we known that Kiev was involved in the
> > > > Polish conquests, it would have made them seem a bit less abhorrent.
>
> > > How so?
>
> > Had this been an attempt on the part of Ukrainians to re-unite Ukes,
> > Russians and Belorussians and to restore the Orthodox Kievan Rus, I
> > would have viewed these campaigns with understanding. I mean, what
> > can be better than re-uniting Ukraine, Russia and Belorus?
>
> That's been tried. The results of that experiment weren't so
> positive, were they?
>
You mean the Belovezhskaya Puscha, where the three presidents of
RSFSR, UkSSR and BelSSR decided to break up the nation in order to
wrestle the power from Gorbachev? Few if any expected that this
artificial break-up would last.
Hasn't the "Commonwealth" between Poland, Lithuania and their
Belorusan and Ukrainian slaves also been tried before? What were the
results of THAT experiment? Do you want to see a repeat of the
fratricidal results of that experiment, so eloquently described by
Shevchenko?
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish%E2%80%93Muscovite_War_(1605%E2%80...
>
> "Hetman Żółkiewski, whose only other choice was mutiny, decided to
> follow the king's orders and left Smolensk in 1610, leaving only a
> smaller force necessary to continue the siege. With Cossack
> reinforcements, he marched on Moscow...
>
Since Ukraine was under Polish occupation, surely Cossaks had to serve
in the Polish army, just as many Chukchis served in the Red Army. But
it would not make much sense to say that "when Russia and Chukotka
were united, this entity captured Berlin in 1945".
>
> History is composed of facts, many of which you are unaware of despite
> arguing about them
>
Given that you have brought up the Polish Hetman Żółkiewski as an
example of friendship and alliance between Poles and Ukes, you too are
probably not aware of major historical facts, one of which is that
this Hetman Żółkiewski is one of the most notorious butchers of Uke
Cossaks:
-----------------------------------
Stanisław Żółkiewski
В травні 1596 року Жолкевський, вигравши Солоницький бій з козаками,
підступом заволоділи табором, наказав вирвати кілька тисяч повстанців,
їхніх жінок і дітей.
In May 1596 Żółkiewski won the Solonytskyy battle with the Cossacks,
treacherously captured the camp, and ordered to slaughter several
thousand insurgents, their wives and children.
-----------------------------------
http://ukrainainkognita.org.ua/Rus/Istoria%20rus/nalyvaiko_rus/notesrus/nalyvaiko.htm
Solonitsky Battle
At the end of 1595 the Polish government instructed the hetman
Stanislaw Zolkiewski subdue the Cossak uprising... Despite the
promised amnesty for the rebels, Żółkiewski slaughtered most of the
Cossacks.
-----------------------------------
Nostalgic for those "great old days"? I recommend that you read up a
bit on what Uke life was **really** like under the Polish occupation.
>
> > Did Poland capture Moscow in 1618 the same way that God created Man
> > out of clay and Woman out of Man's rib some 6 or 7 thousand years
> > ago?
>
> Um, I never claimed that Poland captured Moscow in 1618.
>
Really? Let's go to the videotape:
--------------------------
BM wrote:
> Ostap wrote:
>
> > But tell me more about this Ukrainian capture of Moscow. What were its
> > motivations? How exactly did it happen?
>
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petro_Konashevych-Sahaidachny#Major_camp...
>
> In 1618, Sahaidachny joined the Anti-Turkish Holy League.[1] While his
> battles with the Tatars and the Turks, the Polish-Lithuanian
> Commonwealth was at war with Russia and was at times searching for
> Sahaidachny; they wanted him to provide Władysław IV Vasa, the King of
> the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, with 20,000 Cossacks near Moscow.
>
--------------------------
So, in what year did this happen, and did the Poles **really**
capture Moscow with Sahaidachny's help? Or were you blindly quoting
something that you knew nothing about?
>
> For someone so focused on empirical evidence and facts, you have an
> awfully bad grasp of them, don't you.
>
You are amazing.
> ...
>
> read more »
The Black Monk
> On Nov 23, 7:29 am, The Black Monk <ch....@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr. wrote:
> >
> >
> > > Why do you think that NATO people are so stupid as to refuse to
> > > exploit Bulgaria, Greece and Romania?
> >
> > Okay, any evidence of exploitation of these countries by NATO.
> >
>
> Okay, any evidence of these countries getting benefits from NATO
> membership? The only beneficiary may be Greece, because if it ever
> tries to leave NATO, NATO will turn Cyprus into a second Kosovo.
Well, an obvious one is that the country cannot be invaded by NATO.
Unless you believe Bulgaria or Romania cannot veto actions aginst
themselves?
> > FYI as fullfledged NATO members these countries have veto power over
> > any NATO decisions.
> >
>
> And the 15 Soviet republics in theory had a veto power over what the
> Soviet leadership did. But was this power real?
So you are comparing NATO members power vis a vis Brussells to the
Soviet Repubics' power vis a vis Moscow.
Nice grasp of reality.
>
> In 1999 Greece initially refused to approve the Rape of Serbia, but it
> was immediately blackmailed into submission.
Okay. Other NATO countries used leverage to convince Greece not to use
its veto power. Which it still had.
How likely would it be for NATO to blackmail everyone at once (Greece,
Romania, Bulgaria, Ukraine).
> FYI, the Greek supreme court has convicted NATO of crimes against
> humanity. So, NATO is officially a criminal organization, according to
> Greek law. But has Greece been able to enforce the ruling of its own
> Highest Court?
What does this have to do with veto power?
> So in reality, Greece has no veto power, and Bulgaria - even
> less. :-)
So you claim that Greece has no veto power and as proof you cite the
fact that its court decisions are unenforcable?
Are you having fun with such games?
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legitimacy_of_NATO_bombing_of_Yugoslavia
> ...Greece was opposed, but had to agree to it under pressure of other
> members... The Council of State, the Supreme Court of Greece, found
> NATO guilty of war crimes for its 1999 bombing.[18]
>
> Veto power, my foot.
Politics. There are instances when the president or governor also dos
not exercise veto power in exhachnge for having the legislature pass
laws that he likes.
Greece has veto power but was prevented from using by other NATO
members' maneuvering.
>
> >
> > Bulgaria is no more "exploited" by NATO as France
> > is.
> >
> > If this were about placing bases in the countries without NATO
> > membership you would have apoint.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > > > > > Actually, nobody in Russia knows that Ukrainians "captured Moscow".
> >
> > > > > > No, but they remember that when Poland and Ukraine were united this
> > > > > > entity captured Moscow.
> >
> > > > > No. Nobody knows about the role of Ukraine in this. This is the first
> > > > > time I am hearing this. Had we known that Kiev was involved in the
> > > > > Polish conquests, it would have made them seem a bit less abhorrent.
> >
> > > > How so?
> >
> > > Had this been an attempt on the part of Ukrainians to re-unite Ukes,
> > > Russians and Belorussians and to restore the Orthodox Kievan Rus, I
> > > would have viewed these campaigns with understanding. I mean, what
> > > can be better than re-uniting Ukraine, Russia and Belorus?
> >
> > That's been tried. The results of that experiment weren't so
> > positive, were they?
> >
>
> You mean the Belovezhskaya Puscha, where the three presidents of
> RSFSR, UkSSR and BelSSR decided to break up the nation in order to
> wrestle the power from Gorbachev? Few if any expected that this
> artificial break-up would last.
I mean the last 300 years. Didn't you know that Ukraine, Belarus and
Russia were united for about 300 years?
How did that experiment work out?
> Hasn't the "Commonwealth" between Poland, Lithuania and their
> Belorusan and Ukrainian slaves also been tried before? What were the
> results of THAT experiment? Do you want to see a repeat of the
> fratricidal results of that experiment, so eloquently described by
> Shevchenko?
It was no worse than the Russian experiment. Unlike Russians they
were unable (too small, too weak) to impose their will for more than
a couple of decades. Kmelnytsky's rebellion tore Poland-Lithuania
apart and shifted the balance of power away from Poland. Poles are
not stupid, they learned their lesson although by then it was too
late:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Hadiach
The Treaty of Hadiach (Polish: ugoda hadziacka) was a treaty signed on
16 September 1658 in Hadiach (Hadziacz, Hadiacz, Гадяч) between
representatives of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth (represented by
S. Bieniewski and K. Jewłaszewski) and Cossacks (represented by Hetman
Ivan Vyhovsky and starshyna (sztarszna, the elders) Yurii Nemyrych,
architect of the treaty, and Pavlo Teteria). It was designed to
elevate the Cossacks and Ruthenians to the position equal to that of
Poland and Lithuania in the Polish-Lithuanian Union and in fact
transforming the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth into a Polish-
Lithuanian-Ruthenian Commonwealth (Rzeczpospolita Trojga Narodów,
"Commonwealth of Three Nations").
There were even worse atrocities under Russia. Such as Baturyn:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baturyn
The area prospered under the rule of Hetman Ivan Mazepa (1687–1708),
increasing in size and population (with upwards of 20,000 residents).
Baturyn boasted 40 churches and chapels, two monasteries and a college
for government officials and diplomats (the Kantseliarsky Kurin). In
1708, the Zaporozhian Cossacks were caught in the midst of the Great
Northern War, in which Hetman Mazepa supported Sweden and its war with
the Russian Empire and for Ukraine’s independence. On Nov.13 1708
Baturyn was sacked and razed by the Russian army of Alexander
Menshikov, and all of its inhabitants were slaughtered. Dmytro
Chechel, the commanding officer of the Baturin garrison, was broken at
the wheel. Historian Serhiy Pavlenko estimates that 6-7.5 thousand
civilians and 5-6.5 thousand military personnel were murdered.[1]. The
population of the city in 1708 was 20,000. By 1726 the city was a
ghost town.
The point is that Ukraine and Poland have moved like, much like
eternally-warring Germany and France. Why does this make you so
uncomfortable?
> >
> > > Did Poland capture Moscow in 1618 the same way that God created Man
> > > out of clay and Woman out of Man's rib some 6 or 7 thousand years
> > > ago?
> >
> > Um, I never claimed that Poland captured Moscow in 1618.
> >
>
> Really? Let's go to the videotape:
>
> --------------------------
>
> BM wrote:
> > Ostap wrote:
> >
> > > But tell me more about this Ukrainian capture of Moscow. What were its
> > > motivations? How exactly did it happen?
> >
> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petro_Konashevych-Sahaidachny#Major_camp...
> >
> > In 1618, Sahaidachny joined the Anti-Turkish Holy League.[1] While his
> > battles with the Tatars and the Turks, the Polish-Lithuanian
> > Commonwealth was at war with Russia and was at times searching for
> > Sahaidachny; they wanted him to provide Władysław IV Vasa, the King of
> > the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, with 20,000 Cossacks near Moscow.
> >
> --------------------------
>
> So, in what year did this happen, and did the Poles **really**
> capture Moscow with Sahaidachny's help? Or were you blindly quoting
> something that you knew nothing about?
Um, you realise that I corrected myself? see below:
> > > Are you saying that the Poles actually captured Moscow in the 1618
> > > campaign?
> >
> > No, that Ukrainians helped the Poles capture Moscow in earlier
> > campaigns. At least that's what Magocsi wrote. I'll defer to his
> > expertise.
I guess ignoring things selectively serves your demogouery. Maybe
next you'll dig up old spelling mistakes of mine?
> > For someone so focused on empirical evidence and facts, you have an
> > awfully bad grasp of them, don't you.
> >
>
> You are amazing.
Why the trouble with facts?
Why don't you tell us again how a Hungarian was "prevented" from
getting a leadership post in NATO?
> > However, Ukrainians will be prevented from being appointed to high
> > command positions on the pretext that they can be "Russian spies".
> > This has already happened to other Eastern Europeans like Hungarians.
> > For example:
>
> > Diplomats see KGB-trained Hungarian committee head as danger to NATO
> http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/04/world/europe/04hungary.html
>
> BERLIN — The new chief of the Hungarian secret services, who spent six
> years at the K.G.B.’s academy in Moscow during the 1980s, in January
> became the chairman of NATO’s intelligence committee, a rotating post
> that is held for a year.
Oops.
BM
BM
Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr.
> Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr. wrote:
>
> > On Nov 23, 7:29 am, The Black Monk <ch....@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr. wrote:
>
> > > > Why do you think that NATO people are so stupid as to refuse to
> > > > exploit Bulgaria, Greece and Romania?
>
> > > Okay, any evidence of exploitation of these countries by NATO.
>
> > Okay, any evidence of these countries getting benefits from NATO
> > membership? The only beneficiary may be Greece, because if it ever
> > tries to leave NATO, NATO will turn Cyprus into a second Kosovo.
>
> Well, an obvious one is that the country cannot be invaded by NATO.
> Unless you believe Bulgaria or Romania cannot veto actions aginst
> themselves?
>
So, the only benefit that you have found is that by joining NATO,
these countries protect themselves from getting invaded by NATO? Well,
if this reason justifies joining NATO, the threat of invasion must
have been imminent. The same goes for Ukraine's reasons to join NATO.
But if NATO is such that civilised countries like Ukraine, Bulgaria,
Greece and Romania can be invaded by NATO for no fault of theirs, then
NATO must be worse than Nazi Germany. (yes, a Nazi reference again).
Is it really wise and decent to join an organisation just because
otherwise this organisation will destroy you? That's called
surrendering to blackmail.
Maybe instead of joining NATO, Ukraine should work on preventing NATO
aggressions in the first place?
If all European countries voluntarily joined the Nazi axis in WW2 in
order to prevent getting invaded by them, the World would have been a
horrible place now.
>
> > > FYI as fullfledged NATO members these countries have veto power over
> > > any NATO decisions.
>
> > And the 15 Soviet republics in theory had a veto power over what the
> > Soviet leadership did. But was this power real?
>
> So you are comparing NATO members power vis a vis Brussells to the
> Soviet Repubics' power vis a vis Moscow.
>
> Nice grasp of reality.
>
>
>
> > In 1999 Greece initially refused to approve the Rape of Serbia, but it
> > was immediately blackmailed into submission.
>
> Okay. Other NATO countries used leverage to convince Greece not to use
> its veto power. Which it still had.
>
During Communist Party Congresses, the delegates had the power to vote
NO. However, not once in the history of the USSR after, say, 1937 has
a single delegate ever voted NO, because consequences of this vote
would be deadly for him and his widow and orphans.
>
> How likely would it be for NATO to blackmail everyone at once (Greece,
> Romania, Bulgaria, Ukraine).
>
As likely as to blackmail one country at a time. These are all
militarily weaklings compared to USA. Since you proudly admit that
NATO is threatening to invade any small country that doesn't join it,
surely it will invade and destroy any small country or a group thereof
if it dares to veto and prevent NATO from doing what it feels it must
do.
When a country is inside of NATO, invading this country is much easier
for NATO logistically, just as it was easy for USSR to invade any
Warsaw Block country.
And speaking of the Warsaw pact, Eastern European countries had a veto
power (at least if voting together) over USSR's actions. But were they
REALLY free to do so?
Yes. And it was hardly a bad union.
>
> How did that experiment work out?
>
Much better than the alternative.
>
> > Hasn't the "Commonwealth" between Poland, Lithuania and their
>
> > Belorusan and Ukrainian slaves also been tried before? What were the
> > results of THAT experiment? Do you want to see a repeat of the
> > fratricidal results of that experiment, so eloquently described by
> > Shevchenko?
>
> It was no worse than the Russian experiment.
>
Well, the very fact that you are not an Orthodox Christian shows that
the Poles were very successful in damaging the Orthodox Church and
converting Ukes into Poles.
Relying on you for information on the Polish persecution of the
Ukrainians and their religion is like relying on Bosnians, who had
converted to Islam under Turkish occupation, on information about the
Turkish persecution of Christians.
> >http://uk.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A1%D1%82%D0%B0%D0%BD%D1%96%D1%81%D0%...
>
> > Stanisław Żółkiewski
>
> > В травні 1596 року Жолкевський, вигравши Солоницький бій з козаками,
> > підступом заволоділи табором, наказав вирвати кілька тисяч повстанців,
> > їхніх жінок і дітей.
>
> > In May 1596 Żółkiewski won the Solonytskyy battle with the Cossacks,
> > treacherously captured the camp, and ordered to slaughter several
> > thousand insurgents, their wives and children.
>
> > -----------------------------------
>
> >http://ukrainainkognita.org.ua/Rus/Istoria%20rus/nalyvaiko_rus/notesr...
Why does a prospect of the three Rus peoples re-uniting make **you**
so uncomfortable?
It's a religious issue. As a Catholic, you obviously want Ukraine to
become Catholic and fear that if Ukraine re-unites with Russia, it
will remain Orthodox.
>
> > > > Did Poland capture Moscow in 1618 the same way that God created Man
> > > > out of clay and Woman out of Man's rib some 6 or 7 thousand years
> > > > ago?
>
> > > Um, I never claimed that Poland captured Moscow in 1618.
>
> > Really? Let's go to the videotape:
>
> > --------------------------
>
> > BM wrote:
> > > Ostap wrote:
>
> > > > But tell me more about this Ukrainian capture of Moscow. What were its
> > > > motivations? How exactly did it happen?
>
> > >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petro_Konashevych-Sahaidachny#Major_camp...
>
> > > In 1618, Sahaidachny joined the Anti-Turkish Holy League.[1] While his
> > > battles with the Tatars and the Turks, the Polish-Lithuanian
> > > Commonwealth was at war with Russia and was at times searching for
> > > Sahaidachny; they wanted him to provide Władysław IV Vasa, the King of
> > > the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, with 20,000 Cossacks near Moscow.
>
> > --------------------------
>
> > So, in what year did this happen, and did the Poles **really**
> > capture Moscow with Sahaidachny's help? Or were you blindly quoting
> > something that you knew nothing about?
>
> Um, you realise that I corrected myself?
>
Corrected? So, you did initially claim this? Then do you insist:
>
> > > Um, I never claimed that Poland captured Moscow in 1618.
>
>
> > > > Are you saying that the Poles actually captured Moscow in the 1618
> > > > campaign?
>
> > > No, that Ukrainians helped the Poles capture Moscow in earlier
> > > campaigns. At least that's what Magocsi wrote. I'll defer to his
> > > expertise.
>
> I guess ignoring things selectively serves your demogouery. Maybe
> next you'll dig up old spelling mistakes of mine?
>
> > > For someone so focused on empirical evidence and facts, you have an
> > > awfully bad grasp of them, don't you.
>
> > You are amazing.
>
> Why the trouble with facts?
>
The trouble is with you lying that you "never claimed that Poland
captured Moscow in 1618".
>
> Why don't you tell us again how a Hungarian was "prevented" from
> getting a leadership post in NATO?
>
That's pretty low, isn't it?
>
> > > However, Ukrainians will be prevented from being appointed to high
> > > command positions on the pretext that they can be "Russian spies".
> > > This has already happened to other Eastern Europeans like Hungarians.
> > > For example:
>
> > > Diplomats see KGB-trained Hungarian committee head as danger to NATO
> >http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/04/world/europe/04hungary.html
>
> > BERLIN — The new chief of the Hungarian secret services, who spent six
> > years at the K.G.B.’s academy in Moscow during the 1980s, in January
> > became the chairman of NATO’s intelligence committee, a rotating post
> > that is held for a year.
>
> Oops.
>
That's childish, isn't it?
The Black Monk
> On Nov 24, 6:38 am, The Black Monk <ch....@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr. wrote:
> >
> > > On Nov 23, 7:29 am, The Black Monk <ch....@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr. wrote:
> >
> > > > > Why do you think that NATO people are so stupid as to refuse to
> > > > > exploit Bulgaria, Greece and Romania?
> >
> > > > Okay, any evidence of exploitation of these countries by NATO.
> >
> > > Okay, any evidence of these countries getting benefits from NATO
> > > membership? The only beneficiary may be Greece, because if it ever
> > > tries to leave NATO, NATO will turn Cyprus into a second Kosovo.
> >
> > Well, an obvious one is that the country cannot be invaded by NATO.
> > Unless you believe Bulgaria or Romania cannot veto actions aginst
> > themselves?
> >
>
> So, the only benefit that you have found is that by joining NATO,
No, its the only one I listed. NATO membership also makes invasions
by others less likely, of course, by adding an element of risk.
> these countries protect themselves from getting invaded by NATO? Well,
> if this reason justifies joining NATO, the threat of invasion must
> have been imminent.
Quite a leap there. Why is that? Why must a threat be imminent in
order to justify NATO membership. Obviously if the threat of invasion
were imminant the country would not be invited to join, because doing
so would take the option of invading off the table.
> The same goes for Ukraine's reasons to join NATO.
>
> But if NATO is such that civilised countries like Ukraine, Bulgaria,
> Greece and Romania can be invaded by NATO for no fault of theirs,
Well, Serbia was.
> then NATO must be worse than Nazi Germany. (yes, a Nazi reference again).
> Is it really wise and decent to join an organisation just because
> otherwise this organisation will destroy you? That's called
> surrendering to blackmail.
Really? Turkey had no trouble from NATO over its Kurdish problem.
> Maybe instead of joining NATO, Ukraine should work on preventing NATO
> aggressions in the first place?
The best way of doing so would be to join and to exercise veto power.
> If all European countries voluntarily joined the Nazi axis in WW2 in
> order to prevent getting invaded by them, the World would have been a
> horrible place now.
Sure. Of course NATO is hardly Nazi Germany, as you imply.
> > > > FYI as fullfledged NATO members these countries have veto power over
> > > > any NATO decisions.
> >
> > > And the 15 Soviet republics in theory had a veto power over what the
> > > Soviet leadership did. But was this power real?
> >
> > So you are comparing NATO members power vis a vis Brussells to the
> > Soviet Repubics' power vis a vis Moscow.
> >
> > Nice grasp of reality.
No comment from you.
So in this conversation you;ve already compared NATO to Nazi Germany
and to the Soviet Union.
I'm waiting for the Pol Pot comparison.
> >
> > > In 1999 Greece initially refused to approve the Rape of Serbia, but it
> > > was immediately blackmailed into submission.
> >
> > Okay. Other NATO countries used leverage to convince Greece not to use
> > its veto power. Which it still had.
> >
>
> During Communist Party Congresses, the delegates had the power to vote
> NO. However, not once in the history of the USSR after, say, 1937 has
> a single delegate ever voted NO, because consequences of this vote
> would be deadly for him and his widow and orphans.
So NATO is like the USSR, in terms of member states' freedom,
according to you.
> > How likely would it be for NATO to blackmail everyone at once (Greece,
> > Romania, Bulgaria, Ukraine).
> >
>
> As likely as to blackmail one country at a time. These are all
> militarily weaklings compared to USA. Since you proudly admit that
> NATO is threatening to invade any small country that doesn't join it,
No.
> surely it will invade and destroy any small country or a group thereof
> if it dares to veto and prevent NATO from doing what it feels it must
> do.
NATO has not invaded any NATO country, has it.
> When a country is inside of NATO, invading this country is much easier
> for NATO logistically, just as it was easy for USSR to invade any
> Warsaw Block country.
So which NATO members has NATO invaded?
> And speaking of the Warsaw pact, Eastern European countries had a veto
> power (at least if voting together) over USSR's actions. But were they
> REALLY free to do so?
After Nazi Germany and the USSR, you now compare NATO to the Warsaw
Pact.
Only if you feel that mass enserfment, banning of the language, forced
subjugation of the Orthodox Church, total elimination of the Catholic
Church, and a few million dead were "hardly a bad union."
Unlike Taras Shevchenko, who expressed the wish that Khmelnytsky had
ben strangled in his grave due to his decision to ally with Russia, I
don't blame him for his decision, although now we see it was a big
mistake.
> > How did that experiment work out?
> >
>
> Much better than the alternative.
By 1800 Ukrainians were worse off under Russia than they had ever been
under Poland.
> > > Hasn't the "Commonwealth" between Poland, Lithuania and their
> >
> > > Belorusan and Ukrainian slaves also been tried before? What were the
> > > results of THAT experiment? Do you want to see a repeat of the
> > > fratricidal results of that experiment, so eloquently described by
> > > Shevchenko?
> >
> > It was no worse than the Russian experiment.
> >
>
> Well, the very fact that you are not an Orthodox Christian shows that
> the Poles were very successful in damaging the Orthodox Church and
> converting Ukes into Poles.
I am neither Pole nor Roman Catholic. Russia managed to take control
over the previously independent Ukrainian Orthodox Church to a much
greater extent that the Poles or Roman Catholics ever controlled the
Ukrainian Catholic Church.
> Relying on you for information on the Polish persecution of the
> Ukrainians and their religion is like relying on Bosnians, who had
> converted to Islam under Turkish occupation, on information about the
> Turkish persecution of Christians.
Bad analogy, as usual. Ukrainian Catholics were also persecuted by
Poles.
Um, because the last time this happened a few million
Ukrainians,including some of my relatives, died. That's rather
reasonable, don't you think?
> It's a religious issue. As a Catholic, you obviously want Ukraine to
> become Catholic and fear that if Ukraine re-unites with Russia, it
> will remain Orthodox.
I consider Orthodoxy to be no less valid than Catholicism, so why
should I want Ukraine to become all Catholic?
Why do you like to make up stories?
>
> >
> > > > > Did Poland capture Moscow in 1618 the same way that God created Man
> > > > > out of clay and Woman out of Man's rib some 6 or 7 thousand years
> > > > > ago?
> >
> > > > Um, I never claimed that Poland captured Moscow in 1618.
> >
> > > Really? Let's go to the videotape:
> >
> > > --------------------------
> >
> > > BM wrote:
> > > > Ostap wrote:
> >
> > > > > But tell me more about this Ukrainian capture of Moscow. What were its
> > > > > motivations? How exactly did it happen?
> >
> > > >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petro_Konashevych-Sahaidachny#Major_camp...
> >
> > > > In 1618, Sahaidachny joined the Anti-Turkish Holy League.[1] While his
> > > > battles with the Tatars and the Turks, the Polish-Lithuanian
> > > > Commonwealth was at war with Russia and was at times searching for
> > > > Sahaidachny; they wanted him to provide Władysław IV Vasa, the King of
> > > > the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, with 20,000 Cossacks near Moscow.
> >
> > > --------------------------
> >
> > > So, in what year did this happen, and did the Poles **really**
> > > capture Moscow with Sahaidachny's help? Or were you blindly quoting
> > > something that you knew nothing about?
> >
> > Um, you realise that I corrected myself?
> >
>
> Corrected? So, you did initially claim this? Then do you insist:
>
> >
> > > > Um, I never claimed that Poland captured Moscow in 1618.
No, I was mistaken and corrected myself. Do you have a problem with
that? Should I, like you, make 3 times more mistakes but never
correct myself?
> > > > > Are you saying that the Poles actually captured Moscow in the 1618
> > > > > campaign?
> >
> > > > No, that Ukrainians helped the Poles capture Moscow in earlier
> > > > campaigns. At least that's what Magocsi wrote. I'll defer to his
> > > > expertise.
> >
> > I guess ignoring things selectively serves your demogouery. Maybe
> > next you'll dig up old spelling mistakes of mine?
> >
> > > > For someone so focused on empirical evidence and facts, you have an
> > > > awfully bad grasp of them, don't you.
> >
> > > You are amazing.
> >
> > Why the trouble with facts?
> >
>
> The trouble is with you lying that you "never claimed that Poland
> captured Moscow in 1618".
Kind of like you lying that no eastern European ever had a position in
NATO? Or you lying that I compared someone to Nazis? Etc.
> >
> > Why don't you tell us again how a Hungarian was "prevented" from
> > getting a leadership post in NATO?
> >
>
> That's pretty low, isn't it?
Yes, your lies are quite low indeed.
> > > > However, Ukrainians will be prevented from being appointed to high
> > > > command positions on the pretext that they can be "Russian spies".
> > > > This has already happened to other Eastern Europeans like Hungarians.
> > > > For example:
> >
> > > > Diplomats see KGB-trained Hungarian committee head as danger to NATO
> > >http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/04/world/europe/04hungary.html
> >
> > > BERLIN — The new chief of the Hungarian secret services, who spent six
> > > years at the K.G.B.’s academy in Moscow during the 1980s, in January
> > > became the chairman of NATO’s intelligence committee, a rotating post
> > > that is held for a year.
> >
> > Oops.
> >
>
> That's childish, isn't it?
Quite.
BM
Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr.
> Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr. wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Nov 24, 6:38 am, The Black Monk <ch....@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr. wrote:
>
> > > > On Nov 23, 7:29 am, The Black Monk <ch....@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr. wrote:
>
> > > > > > Why do you think that NATO people are so stupid as to refuse to
> > > > > > exploit Bulgaria, Greece and Romania?
>
> > > > > Okay, any evidence of exploitation of these countries by NATO.
>
> > > > Okay, any evidence of these countries getting benefits from NATO
> > > > membership? The only beneficiary may be Greece, because if it ever
> > > > tries to leave NATO, NATO will turn Cyprus into a second Kosovo.
>
> > > Well, an obvious one is that the country cannot be invaded by NATO.
> > > Unless you believe Bulgaria or Romania cannot veto actions aginst
> > > themselves?
>
> > So, the only benefit that you have found is that by joining NATO,
>
> No, its the only one I listed. NATO membership also makes invasions
> by others less likely, of course, by adding an element of risk.
>
Other than NATO countries, who else poses any danger of invading
Bulgaria and Greece?
>
> > these countries protect themselves from getting invaded by NATO? Well,
> > if this reason justifies joining NATO, the threat of invasion must
> > have been imminent.
>
> Quite a leap there. Why is that? Why must a threat be imminent in
> order to justify NATO membership. Obviously if the threat of invasion
> were imminant the country would not be invited to join, because doing
> so would take the option of invading off the table.
>
I don't understand the problem here.You give a country a choice: to
either join NATO or to be invaded by, USA or Turkey or both at some
point in the near future.
>
> > The same goes for Ukraine's reasons to join NATO.
>
> > But if NATO is such that civilised countries like Ukraine, Bulgaria,
> > Greece and Romania can be invaded by NATO for no fault of theirs,
>
> Well, Serbia was.
>
Exactly my point. So, you want Ukraine to join this criminal
organisation called NATO?
>
> > then NATO must be worse than Nazi Germany. (yes, a Nazi reference again).
> > Is it really wise and decent to join an organisation just because
> > otherwise this organisation will destroy you? That's called
> > surrendering to blackmail.
>
> Really? Turkey had no trouble from NATO over its Kurdish problem.
>
We are talking about the anti-Slavic and anti-Orthodox biases in NATO.
Since Turkey is neither Slavic nor Orthodox Christian, I once again
fail to see your point and fail to see the point in going around in
circles.
In fact, I am ready for a new topic.
The Black Monk
<ostap_bender_1...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Nov 24, 8:31 pm, The Black Monk <ch....@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr. wrote:
>
> > > On Nov 24, 6:38 am, The Black Monk <ch....@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr. wrote:
>
> > > > > On Nov 23, 7:29 am, The Black Monk <ch....@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr. wrote:
>
> > > > > > > Why do you think that NATO people are so stupid as to refuse to
> > > > > > > exploit Bulgaria, Greece and Romania?
>
> > > > > > Okay, any evidence of exploitation of these countries by NATO.
>
> > > > > Okay, any evidence of these countries getting benefits from NATO
> > > > > membership? The only beneficiary may be Greece, because if it ever
> > > > > tries to leave NATO, NATO will turn Cyprus into a second Kosovo.
>
> > > > Well, an obvious one is that the country cannot be invaded by NATO.
> > > > Unless you believe Bulgaria or Romania cannot veto actions aginst
> > > > themselves?
>
> > > So, the only benefit that you have found is that by joining NATO,
>
> > No, its the only one I listed. NATO membership also makes invasions
> > by others less likely, of course, by adding an element of risk.
>
> Other than NATO countries, who else poses any danger of invading
> Bulgaria and Greece?
You're forgetting someone here, arent' you?
> > > these countries protect themselves from getting invaded by
NATO? Well,
> > > if this reason justifies joining NATO, the threat of invasion must
> > > have been imminent.
>
> > Quite a leap there. Why is that? Why must a threat be imminent in
> > order to justify NATO membership. Obviously if the threat of invasion
> > were imminant the country would not be invited to join, because doing
> > so would take the option of invading off the table.
>
> I don't understand the problem here.You give a country a choice: to
> either join NATO or to be invaded by, USA or Turkey or both at some
> point in the near future.
Or the possibility of such. In Ukraine's case, the danger is from the
East.
> > > The same goes for Ukraine's reasons to join NATO.
>
> > > But if NATO is such that civilised countries like Ukraine, Bulgaria,
> > > Greece and Romania can be invaded by NATO for no fault of theirs,
>
> > Well, Serbia was.
>
> Exactly my point. So, you want Ukraine to join this criminal
> organisation called NATO?
Russia which acted exactly as NATO when it stole Georgian territory is
no better. So of the choice ios NATO or Russia, morally speaking the
two are on the same level now.
The bottom line, then, is which would be safer for Ukraine.
>
> > > then NATO must be worse than Nazi Germany. (yes, a Nazi reference again).
> > > Is it really wise and decent to join an organisation just because
> > > otherwise this organisation will destroy you? That's called
> > > surrendering to blackmail.
>
> > Really? Turkey had no trouble from NATO over its Kurdish problem.
>
> We are talking about the anti-Slavic and anti-Orthodox biases in NATO.
> Since Turkey is neither Slavic nor Orthodox Christian, I once again
> fail to see your point and fail to see the point in going around in
> circles.
>
> In fact, I am ready for a new topic.
No doubt about that.
Dmitry
>
> Well, if the first type of scenario you bring up is a bad one (such as
> stealing cars), this indicates some negative feelings towards the
> people you are talking about.
>
> > I have nothing against Ukrainian people or any other nationalities.
>
> I will take you at your word and accept that you do not mean anything
> bad towards any nationality.
Thank you. I accept that my comment was sarcastic and inappropriate.
I was trying to say that in the proposed scenario Poland may suffer
from economic imbalance.
> > > > Despite the communist past, Poland is far wealthier than Ukraine.
>
> > > Poland and Ukraine were about equally wealthy in 1990. The
> > > differences now are a reflection of mismanagement of the country by
> > > Ukraine's leaders. Poland's leaders were generally patriots devoted to
> > > helping their country. Ukraine's leaders were the old Soviet ruling
> > > class with no loyalty to their country, who used independence to
> > > plunder it.
>
> > This is why I don't think that Ukraine is ready to join European
> > structures just yet.
>
> Might not be, although the Polish project seems extra-European. AFAIK
> Ukraine, dspite its spectacular decline post-independence, is
> currently no more behind Poland than Poland was behind Germany when it
> joined the EU.
My view is that after Bulgarian and Romanian entry it is time to put
any future expansions on hold. There are plenty of issues to sort out
within the existing union before making any further "territorial"
steps.
> > Was there no visa control prior to joining EU?
>
> It was very lax and forced to become much more strict after EU
> ascension. Neither Poles nor Ukrainians were happy about this.
At the same time Poles enjoyed an easy entry to Western European
countries. Also their earnings here helped Polish economy to
sustain. "Polish-Ukrainian union" wouldn't have brought such
benefits.
> > If they settle here comfortably, there is no reason for them to enter
> > another adventure.
>
> A lot of them came purely for economic reasons; they actually like
> Poland more, want to raise their children in Poland with Polish
> schools, want to have their family around, etc.
Of course and not only Polish.
> Now that the Polish
> economy is improving and they can make as much in Poland as in England
> (taking into account cost of living), these people have no reason to
> stay in England anymore.
It very mush depends on how adventurous the person is. I know people
who move from country to country almost every year, but they are a
minority.
Last summer I performed at Polish "Festiwal". It was the first ever
in the city. Brilliantly organised in all aspects. Despite the rain
(it was outdoor event) plenty of people attended. They are already
organising the second one for next summer. I'll have to wait and
see. If I'm not playing there next year I will remember that it was
predicted by you and "irishtimes". BTW the Ukrainian part was
delivered by "anti-Ukrainian racist" (we wre the only band there who
sang in Ukrainian language).
> > I'm trying to think of people who populate the countries. The goals
> > of politicians don't always represent the goals of ordinary citizens.
>
> True, but they generally do. Statesmen ought to see the big picture
> and make long-term plans while people are often focused on short-term
> and immediate issues.
The recent biggest statesman in the world created two long-term wars.
Generally, they create issues whilst people become victims of their
"creations".
> > There are plenty of Russians of various ages in Ukraine. Russians in
> > Crimea are not just pensioners. There lots of young people who oppose
> > proposed Ukrainian membership of NATO there.
>
> Yes there are plenty of young people too (there are 1.6 million of so
> Russians in Crimea, and they can't all be pensioners) but the
> population is skewed towards the old.
I don't think Ukraine is about to become politically united. Last
electon events shown that the country is devided and I haven't heard
of any significant changes since.
Dmitry
> humanity. So, NATO is officially a criminal organization, according to
> Greek law. But has Greece been able to enforce the ruling of its own
> Highest Court?
Greek policies can be strange. Policy against Macedonia is one of he
most rediculous.
Dmitry
> aggressions in the first place?
Ukraine doesn't have such power.
Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr.
> > America's and NATO's various wars around the World. I already reported
> > how back in 2008, Ukrainian reservists were given a choice by
> > Yuschenko: they can either serve in the Ukrainian army fighting floods
> > the Carpathians (for free) or serve in Georgia helping them fight
> > Russia (for money):
>
> So Ukrainian soldiers will be gien a choice to be paid to fight or not
> fight?
>
No. These soldiers were given a choice to be paid to fight Ossetians
and Russians or NOT to be paid to fight floods. It is like a choice to
either to murder and be given food, or to save lives but go hungry.
Yuschenko at his best. I am glad he will be no more come this January.
Can't wait.
>
> Good for them. To think that Ukrainian volunteers had once
> been fighting in the Caucuses against Russia for free.
>
Proud, eh?
>
> >http://www.rusk.ru/svod.php?date=2009-01-30
> > Ukraine conducted a covert "mobilization": on August 12-13 2008
> > reservists were called. They were told : "either you'll go to the
> > Carpathians to reverse the effects of floods (for free), or for money
> > - serve in Georgia"
>
>
> > > So you are comparing NATO members power vis a vis Brussells to the
> > > Soviet Repubics' power vis a vis Moscow.
>
> > > Nice grasp of reality.
>
> No comment from you.
>
Yes, I am comparing the power of Bulgaria and Greece in NATO to the
power of Bulgaria in Warsaw Pact.
Now about the union between Russia and Ukraine. Whatever horrible
things happened to Ukraine, they happened because of Communists not
because of Russians. I am not aware of any Ukrainian mass rebellions
in the 200 years leading to 1917 when Ukraine was part of the Russian
Empire. I am not aware of any mass slaughters that Cossaks committed
against Russians or anybody else, unlike the times when they were
owned by Poles. This shows me that the anger at the Russian Czars was
much smaller than it had been at the Polish Kings.
>
> > Why does a prospect of the three Rus peoples re-uniting make **you**
> > so uncomfortable?
>
> Um, because the last time this happened a few million
> Ukrainians,including some of my relatives, died. That's rather
> reasonable, don't you think?
>
That was due to Communists, not due to Russians.
>
> > > > Hasn't the "Commonwealth" between Poland, Lithuania and their
> > > > Belorusan and Ukrainian slaves also been tried before? What were the
> > > > results of THAT experiment? Do you want to see a repeat of the
> > > > fratricidal results of that experiment, so eloquently described by
> > > > Shevchenko?
>
>
> > > Poles are
> > > not stupid, they learned their lesson although by then it was too
> > > late:
>
So, they learned their lesson and never bothered Ukes since 1658, eh?
That reminds me of Tom Lehrer's song "MLF Lullaby":
Once all the Germans were warlike and mean,
But that couldn't happen again.
We taught them a lesson in 1918
And they've hardly bothered us since then.
>
> > >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Hadiach
>
> > > The Treaty of Hadiach (Polish: ugoda hadziacka) was a treaty signed on
> > > 16 September 1658
>
That was not the first (nor the last) time that Poles temporarily
suspended persecution of Ukes and Orthodox Christians, was it? Isn’t
the entire history of Polish-Ukrainian relations full of episodes when
Poles temporarily agreed to treat Ukes like they were almost human,
only to revert to the old ways soon after? For example, every time
Poland needed Cossaks to invade Russia, it temporarily suspended
persecution of Ukes, and the Ukes in their naïve trust, swallowed this
hook time and time again .
Why was 16 September 1658 any different? Are you sure that by 16
September 1658, Poles had finally learned their lesson and never again
mistreated Ukes?
>
> The Poles and Lithuanians are trying to create something not seen
> since 1795 - a fighting unit that also includes Ukrainians.
>
There have never been any fighting units that included both Poles and
Ukes together since 1795?!
>
> Poles no longer try to enslave Ukrainians as they did in the mid 16th
> century. When they did so, the Commonwealth fell apart quite
> quickly.
>
>
> The point is that Ukraine and Poland have moved like,
> much like eternally-warring Germany and France.
>
Which year exactly marks the time of this “moving on”? 1658? 1795?
Haven’t there been lots of hostilities between Poles and Ukes since
1795? Hasn’t there been lots of repression and exploitation of
Ukrainians by Polish governing authorities, Polish persecution of
Ukrainians, mass arrests, and armed struggle of Ukrainian patriots
against Poland?
Let’s face it: the Polish promise in 1658 to stop oppressing and
persecuting Ukes was no more sincere or lasting than all their
previous promises. As long as Poland has power over Ukes, it abused
this power. So, why do you want to return to this arrangement?
The Black Monk
<ostap_bender_1...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Nov 24, 8:31 pm, The Black Monk <ch....@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr. wrote:
>
> > > NATO will gladly use Ukrainian teenage soldiers as cannon fodder in
> > > America's and NATO's various wars around the World. I already reported
> > > how back in 2008, Ukrainian reservists were given a choice by
> > > Yuschenko: they can either serve in the Ukrainian army fighting floods
> > > the Carpathians (for free) or serve in Georgia helping them fight
> > > Russia (for money):
>
> > So Ukrainian soldiers will be gien a choice to be paid to fight or not
> > fight?
>
> No. These soldiers were given a choice to be paid to fight Ossetians
> and Russians or NOT to be paid to fight floods. It is like a choice to
> either to murder and be given food, or to save lives but go hungry.
> Yuschenko at his best. I am glad he will be no more come this January.
> Can't wait.
So they would have starved otherwise? It would be hard to help fight
floods if they were starving.
> > Good for them. To think that Ukrainian volunteers had once
> > been fighting in the Caucuses against Russia for free.
>
> Proud, eh?
It depends on the conflict. Fighting with Chechens, which they did,
was bad.
> > >http://www.rusk.ru/svod.php?date=2009-01-30
> > > Ukraine conducted a covert "mobilization": on August 12-13 2008
> > > reservists were called. They were told : "either you'll go to the
> > > Carpathians to reverse the effects of floods (for free), or for money
> > > - serve in Georgia"
>
> > > > So you are comparing NATO members power vis a vis Brussells to the
> > > > Soviet Repubics' power vis a vis Moscow.
>
> > > > Nice grasp of reality.
>
> > No comment from you.
>
> Yes, I am comparing the power of Bulgaria and Greece in NATO to the
> power of Bulgaria in Warsaw Pact.
Wow.
> Now about the union between Russia and Ukraine. Whatever horrible
> things happened to Ukraine, they happened because of Communists not
> because of Russians. I am not aware of any Ukrainian mass rebellions
> in the 200 years leading to 1917 when Ukraine was part of the Russian
> Empire.
This is a convenient date because by 1717 most Ukrainian resistence
was crushed. Baturin was razed and all its population slaughtered a
few year before. There is only this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zaporozhian_Cossacks#The_end_of_the_Zaporozhian_Host_.281775.29
On June 5, 1775, General Tekeli's forces divided into 5 detachments
and surrounded the Sich with artillery and infantry. The lack of
southern borders and enemies in the past years had a profound effect
on the combat-ability of the Cossacks, who realised the Russian
infantry was to destroy them only after being surrounded. To trick the
Cossacks, a rumour was spread that the army was crossing Cossack lands
en route to guard the borders. The surprise encirclement put a
devastating blow to the morale of the Cossacks.
Petro Kalnyshevsky was given two hours to decide on the Empress's
ultimatum. Under the guidance of a starshyna Lyakh, behind
Kalnyshevky's back a conspiracy was formed with a group of 50 Cossacks
to go fishing in the river Ingul next to the Southern Buh in Ottoman
provinces. The pretext was enough to allow the Russians to let the
Cossacks out of the siege, who were joined by five thousand others.
The fleeing Cossacks traveled to the Danube Delta where they formed
the new Danube Sich, under the protectorate of the Ottoman Empire.
When Tekeli became aware of the escape, there was little left to do
for the remaining 12 thousand Cossacks. The Sich was razed to the
ground. The Cossacks were disarmed in the mostly bloodless operation
while their treasury and archives were confiscated. Petro Kalnyshevsky
was arrested and exiled to the Solovki, where he lived in confinement
to 112 years of age. Most upper level Cossack Council members, such as
Pavlo Holovaty and Ivan Hloba, were repressed and exiled as well,
although lower level commanders and rank and file Cossacks were
allowed to join the Russian hussar and dragoon regiments.[12]
> I am not aware of any mass slaughters that Cossaks committed
> against Russians or anybody else, unlike the times when they were
> owned by Poles.
This is a function not of people's happiness but of their having been
defeated. The Russians did a magnificent job of subduing Ukraine by
garrisoning it with its soldiers, and removing the Cossacks from the
territory completely. The Russians allowed the Polish landlords to
stay and live as they always did, yet there were no subsequent
rebellions nor slaughtering of Polish landlords either. Just because
there were fewer or no uprisings did not mean people were happier. It
just means they were under tighter control. After all there were
fewer uprisings against Stalin than there had been against Lenin. Was
it because people were happier and more satisfied?
> This shows me that the anger at the Russian Czars was
> much smaller than it had been at the Polish Kings.
This was due to the relative strength of the Russians vis a vis
Ukrainians compared to the Poles and is further evidence for a Polish
"reunion" being better than a "Russian" one. Poland was never able to
subdue Ukraine. Russia was.
>
> > > Why does a prospect of the three Rus peoples re-uniting make **you**
> > > so uncomfortable?
>
> > Um, because the last time this happened a few million
> > Ukrainians,including some of my relatives, died. That's rather
> > reasonable, don't you think?
>
> That was due to Communists, not due to Russians.
True, but it was a "Ukrainian Belarus Russia Union."
> > > > > Hasn't the "Commonwealth" between Poland, Lithuania and their
> > > > > Belorusan and Ukrainian slaves also been tried before? What were the
> > > > > results of THAT experiment? Do you want to see a repeat of the
> > > > > fratricidal results of that experiment, so eloquently described by
> > > > > Shevchenko?
>
> > > > Poles are
> > > > not stupid, they learned their lesson although by then it was too
> > > > late:
>
> So, they learned their lesson and never bothered Ukes since 1658, eh?
>
> That reminds me of Tom Lehrer's song "MLF Lullaby":
>
> Once all the Germans were warlike and mean,
> But that couldn't happen again.
> We taught them a lesson in 1918
> And they've hardly bothered us since then.
Nice.
>
>
> > > >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Hadiach
>
> > > > The Treaty of Hadiach (Polish: ugoda hadziacka) was a treaty signed on
> > > > 16 September 1658
>
> That was not the first (nor the last) time that Poles temporarily
> suspended persecution of Ukes and Orthodox Christians, was it? Isn’t
> the entire history of Polish-Ukrainian relations full of episodes when
> Poles temporarily agreed to treat Ukes like they were almost human,
> only to revert to the old ways soon after? For example, every time
> Poland needed Cossaks to invade Russia, it temporarily suspended
> persecution of Ukes, and the Ukes in their naïve trust, swallowed this
> hook time and time again.
Sure. And when that happened, Poles were bitten. In 1648 they were
fatally weakened.
> Why was 16 September 1658 any different?
Because the consequence for Poland of angering the Ukrainians were now
quite obvious. Khmelnytsky proved that there was no chance for Poland
to subdue Ukraine.
Nor is there now.
Russia is another story.
> Are you sure that by 16
> September 1658, Poles had finally learned their lesson and never again
> mistreated Ukes?
Not all Poles.
>
> > The Poles and Lithuanians are trying to create something not seen
> > since 1795 - a fighting unit that also includes Ukrainians.
>
> There have never been any fighting units that included both Poles and
> Ukes together since 1795?!
This is incorrect, actually. I just posted it, I didn't write it.
Poles and Ukrainians fought together here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet-Polish_War#The_tide_turns:_Operation_Kiev
And, I believe, in Iraq.
> > Poles no longer try to enslave Ukrainians as they did in the mid 16th
> > century. When they did so, the Commonwealth fell apart quite
> > quickly.
>
> > The point is that Ukraine and Poland have moved like,
> > much like eternally-warring Germany and France.
>
> Which year exactly marks the time of this “moving on”? 1658? 1795?
In the 19th century in the parts of Ukraine belonged to the Russian
Empire, Ukrainians and Poles were allied against Russians. When Gogol
was in an anti-Russian mood he was quite comfortable hanging out with
anti-Russian Polish exiles in Paris, such as Mickiewicz.
This is a very brief article about Poles in Russian-ruled Ukraine:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukrainian_school
In Polish poetry, the Ukrainian school were a group of three Romantic
poets of the early 19th century who hailed from Ukraine, on the
southeastern fringes of the Polish-inhabited lands of the time (this
period followed the partition of the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth).
[1][2] The three—Antoni Malczewski, Józef Bohdan Zaleski, and Seweryn
Goszczyński—produced a distinct style of Polish Romanticism through
the incorporation of Ukrainian life, landscapes, history, political
events, and folklore into their works.[1] They in turn influenced both
Lithuanian and Ukrainian Romantic poetry, and, along with other Polish
poets, constituted a link between the various literatures of the post-
partition Commonwealth.[2]
Here is one of those Poles from Ukraine, Zaleski (who communicated
with Gogol in the Ukrainian language) writing about his meetings with
Gogol:
http://www.wumag.kiev.ua/index2.php?param=pgs20033/52
Bohdan Zaleski, the Polish writer born in Ukraine, who was mentioned
by Danylevsky, was a witness and participant of these meetings: “About
twenty five years ago, Gogol, a poet (sic) famous in Muscovy, came to
Paris where he met Mickiewicz of blessed memory and me, and we struck
up a close friendship… Naturally, we talked mostly about the Moskals
(Moskal — derogatory term for a Russian — tr.), toward whom both we
and he had animosity. Over and over again we kept returning to the
discussion of their having been greatly influenced by the Finns and
their culture. Gogol, with all the passion of a Little Russian,
insisted that the Finnish impact had been very considerable, and
quoted [to substantiate his arguments] from collections of folk songs
in several Slavic tongues, of which he had quite a few with him. He
wrote a brilliant essay about the Finnish impact on Moskal culture and
read this essay to us. He argued that the spirit, customs and morality
of the Moskals were strikingly different from the rest of the Slavonic
brethren, quoting from the Czech, Serbian, Ukrainian and other Slavic
songs, and making comparisons. For every human feeling there was a
song — our, Slavic songs were gentle and soft, while the Moscow songs
were wild, gloomy, even cannibalistic at times — in other words,
typically Finnish. No wonder, as you can imagine, that our hearts
rejoiced at that little essay of Gogol’s… In the collection of Gogol’s
works published posthumously, the essay does not appear. What happened
to it? It would have come in handy in support of such arguments.
Anyway, whether this essay will appear eventually in any of the
collections of Gogol’s works or not, it would be not so difficult to
write a comparative article of this sort even now, though,
unfortunately, it will lack all those pertinent, revealing and witty
jokes about the Moskals, which Gogol, a great wit himself, knew in
such an abundance, and which he could retell in his inimitable
manner.”
(I don't know what Gogol had against Finns - BM)
Indeed, after every 19th century Polish rebellion Ukrainian national
figures were also persecuted by the Russian authorities due to links
to the Poles.
In Austria, OTOH, the relations were quite bitter. In fact, when
Poles from Kiev (often exiles) came to Lviv before 1914 they werre
shocked to see how the two communities hated each other there, given
the close relationships between Poles and UKrainians in Ukraine.
So during the 19th century there were already two quite different
trends within Polish society with respect to Ukraine.
During and after the Revolution the nobleman Pilsudski represented the
pro-Ukrainian trend while his rival Dmowski, a modern nationalist of
the middle classes, the latter. Unfortunately democratic elections in
Poland brought Dmowski to power, and Ukrainians within Poland were
persecuted (along with Jews, because while Pilsudski like the Polish
king was the protetor of Jews Dmowski, the man of the people, was a
vicious antisemite). Pilsudksi sent Poles to fight, and die, for
Ukraine, while Dmowski betrayed them at Riga.
After the mass Polish-Ukrainian slaughter of the 1940's there is
practically no Ukrainian minority in Poland (nor Polish minority in
western Ukraine). All mainstream Polish political forces have adopted
Pilsudski's approach. Those calling for a return of "Polish"
territories are as marginal and fringe as Germans seeking the retuirn
of Kalinigrad oblast. There is currently to force within Polish
politics that would seek to do anything bad to Ukraine.
> Haven’t there been lots of hostilities between Poles and Ukes since
> 1795? Hasn’t there been lots of repression and exploitation of
> Ukrainians by Polish governing authorities, Polish persecution of
> Ukrainians, mass arrests, and armed struggle of Ukrainian patriots
> against Poland?
Ukrainain middle class nationalists initiated a slaughter of up to
100,000 Poles. Polish communists deported almost all Ukrainians from
what is now Poland. Ironically these actions removed the competing
claims to territories of mixed ethnicities and enabled the two
countries to have peaceful relations. No Ukrainian parties, even
nationalist ones, have issues against Poles currently. Likewise, none
of the main Polish political parties has problems with Ukrainians. In
contrast many Russian politicans such as Moscow's mayor agitate to
have Crimea taken from Ukraine.
> Let’s face it: the Polish promise in 1658 to stop oppressing and
> persecuting Ukes was no more sincere or lasting than all their
> previous promises. As long as Poland has power over Ukes, it abused
> this power.
Who will abuse Ukrainians when nobody expresses the wish to do so?
Moreover Poles could not do so even if they wanted. Poland, unlike
Russia, is not 3 times larger by population than is Ukraine.
> So, why do you want to return to this arrangement?
It would not be a return to the old arrangement but something
comparable to the current Franco-German partnership.
BM
Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr.
> On Nov 25, 8:31 pm, "Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr."
>
> > > > so uncomfortable?
>
> > > Um, because the last time this happened a few million
> > > Ukrainians,including some of my relatives, died. That's rather
> > > reasonable, don't you think?
>
> > That was due to Communists, not due to Russians.
>
> True, but it was a "Ukrainian Belarus Russia Union."
>
So what? Shit happens. Ukraine, Belarus and Russia were in a union
when the Mongols came and destroyed everything. But you don’t blame
that on the fact that they were united, do you? Communists could have
come to power in Ukraine and/or Russia even if they were separate
countries.
And yet, Poles oppressed Ukes many times since then, often to tragic
results. So, the Poles didn’t “they learn their lesson in 1968”, did
they?
>
> > Are you sure that by 16
> > September 1658, Poles had finally learned their lesson and never again
> > mistreated Ukes?
>
> Not all Poles.
>
Exactly. Just like not all Germans learned their lesson in 1918.
>
> > > The Poles and Lithuanians are trying to create something not seen
> > > since 1795 - a fighting unit that also includes Ukrainians.
>
> > There have never been any fighting units that included both Poles and
> > Ukes together since 1795?!
>
> This is incorrect, actually. I just posted it, I didn't write it.
> Poles and Ukrainians fought together here:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet-Polish_War#The_tide_turns:_Operat...
>
> And, I believe, in Iraq.
>
Didn’t they fight together many times as part of the Austrian (and
Russian) imperial forces?
>
> > > Poles no longer try to enslave Ukrainians as they did in the mid 16th
> > > century. When they did so, the Commonwealth fell apart quite
> > > quickly.
>
> > > The point is that Ukraine and Poland have moved like,
> > > much like eternally-warring Germany and France.
>
> > Which year exactly marks the time of this “moving on”? 1658? 1795?
>
> In the 19th century in the parts of Ukraine belonged to the Russian
> Empire, Ukrainians and Poles were allied against Russians. When Gogol
> was in an anti-Russian mood he was quite comfortable hanging out with
> anti-Russian Polish exiles in Paris, such as Mickiewicz.
>
How about what happened between Poles and Ukes when Poland became an
independent country after WW1, kept Galicia and even occupied parts of
formerly Russian Ukraine?
>
> In Austria, OTOH, the relations were quite bitter. In fact, when
> Poles from Kiev (often exiles) came to Lviv before 1914 they werre
> shocked to see how the two communities hated each other there, given
> the close relationships between Poles and UKrainians in Ukraine.
>
In Kiev, didn’t Ukes and Poles also have good relations with
Russians?
Aren’t you saying that under the Russian rule, different Slavic
ethnicities got along with each other infinitely better than under
Poles and Austrians? So, why re-unite with Poland and not with Russia?
Would you rather live in hatred like they did in Lviv or in peace like
they did in Kiev?
>
> So during the 19th century there were already two quite different
> trends within Polish society with respect to Ukraine.
>
> During and after the Revolution the nobleman Pilsudski represented the
> pro-Ukrainian trend while his rival Dmowski, a modern nationalist of
> the middle classes, the latter. Unfortunately democratic elections in
> Poland brought Dmowski to power, and Ukrainians within Poland were
> persecuted (along with Jews, because while Pilsudski like the Polish
> king was the protetor of Jews Dmowski, the man of the people, was a
> vicious antisemite).
>
So, who is in charge in modern Poland? The King or the people?
>
> After the mass Polish-Ukrainian slaughter of the 1940's there is
> practically no Ukrainian minority in Poland (nor Polish minority in
> western Ukraine).
>
Exactly my point. So, Poland didn’t learn any lessons in 1658,
Ukrianians continued to be persecuted well into the 20th century. And
even then, the Poles didn’t stop voluntarily. Thee persecution of
Ukrainians stopped simply because USSR took Western Ukraine away from
Poland.
>
> > Haven’t there been lots of hostilities between Poles and Ukes since
> > 1795? Hasn’t there been lots of repression and exploitation of
> > Ukrainians by Polish governing authorities, Polish persecution of
> > Ukrainians, mass arrests, and armed struggle of Ukrainian patriots
> > against Poland?
>
> Ukrainain middle class nationalists initiated a slaughter of up to
> 100,000 Poles. Polish communists deported almost all Ukrainians from
> what is now Poland. Ironically these actions removed the competing
> claims to territories of mixed ethnicities and enabled the two
> countries to have peaceful relations. No Ukrainian parties, even
> nationalist ones, have issues against Poles currently. Likewise, none
> of the main Polish political parties has problems with Ukrainians. In
> contrast many Russian politicans such as Moscow's mayor agitate to
> have Crimea taken from Ukraine.
>
> > Let’s face it: the Polish promise in 1658 to stop oppressing and
> > persecuting Ukes was no more sincere or lasting than all their
> > previous promises. As long as Poland has power over Ukes, it abused
> > this power.
>
> Who will abuse Ukrainians when nobody expresses the wish to do so?
>
Who ever expresses the wish to abuse anybody? Did USA say that it
wanted to invade Iraq to abuse Iraqis? All conquests are made in the
name of improving the life of the conquered people.
Did the Russians, who enforced the re-unification of Ukraine and
Russia in the 17th and early 18th centuries, express the wish to abuse
Ukrainians?
>
> Moreover Poles could not do so even if they wanted. Poland, unlike
> Russia, is not 3 times larger by population than is Ukraine.
>
So, if Poland grabbed not all of Ukraine but a small part of it – say,
Galicia – it would have an easier time abusing Ukrainians?
>
> > So, why do you want to return to this arrangement?
>
> It would not be a return to the old arrangement but something
> comparable to the current Franco-German partnership.
>
Maybe Ukraine should form a partnership with its other historical
enemy: Turkey? Nobody in Turkey expresses the wish to abuse Ukrainians
and the Turks are also part of NATO .
How does it sound: “a Turko-Ukrainian Commonwealth” or “a Turko-
Ukrainian partnership”? Or even better: “a Turko-Polish-Ukrainian
Commonwealth”.
Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr.
Well, don't be modest. These same Western Uke nationalists fought
against Russians not only in Chechnya but in Abkhazia as well, and
would do so even on the side of Bin Laden.
http://www.jamestown.org/single/?no_cache=1&tx_ttnews%5Btt_news%5D=3198
Radical Ukrainian Nationalism and the War in Chechnya
Publication: North Caucasus Analysis Volume: 7 Issue: 13
By: Andrew McGregor
On March 18 Russia’s Prosecutor General announced the launch of a
criminal case involving the participation of a number of Ukraine’s
leading radical nationalists as mercenaries in the war in Chechnya.
All those charged, including leading ultra-nationalists Dimitro
Korchinski and the late Anatoli Lupinos, were members of the Ukrainian
National Assembly-Ukrainian People’s Self Defense Organization (UNA-
UNSO). The UNA-UNSO members are alleged to have fought alongside
Chechen forces during combat actions in 2000-2001. The Russian
Security Service (FSB) is running an ongoing investigation in Chechnya
(Itar-Tass, March 18; Interfax, March 18).
The UNA-UNSO
The UNA-UNSO has its origins in the turbulent days of the collapse of
the Soviet Union in 1991. The UNSO was created as a paramilitary
“patriotic” organization intended to defend the nationalist ideals of
the UNA and oppose “anti-Ukrainian separatist movements,” especially
in the Crimea and eastern Ukraine (both home to a large ethnic Russian
population). UNSO street fighters quickly gained attention by military-
style marches and attacks on pro-Russian political meetings throughout
Ukraine.
The movement’s literature often refers to the Middle Ages, when Kiev
rather than Moscow was the cultural and political centre of the Slavic
world. The power base of the UNA-UNSO is in western Ukraine, the
traditional home of anti-Russian nationalism that took its most
virulent form in the formation of a Ukrainian SS division that fought
Soviet troops in World War II. In public rallies UNSO members don
black uniforms under their banner of a black cross on a red field.
Although UNSO members were sent to Lithuania and Moldova’s
Transnistria region in the early 1990s, significant UNSO military
operations began with the dispatch of a small group of fighters to
Abkhazia to defend Georgian sovereignty in the summer of 1993. Under
the command of ex-Soviet officer Valery Bobrovich, UNSO’s “Argo” squad
of roughly 150 men found themselves in the thick of the fighting.
Russian and Ukrainian security forces declared that UNSO members were
acting as mercenaries.
UNSO members have also been active in the anti-Lukashenko opposition
movement in Belarus, participating in demonstrations and riots. In
2000-2001 the UNA-UNSO was prominent in opposition to Ukrainian
President Leonid Kuchma, who was under suspicion of ordering the death
of a leading Ukrainian journalist.
The UNA’s political program appears to an outsider to be full of
contradictions. Despite close ties to the Ukrainian Orthodox Church
and a general view that Muslims (“the Turks”) are an anti-Slavic
threat, the movement supports Chechnya’s Islamic resistance. While
supporting the separatist Chechens, the UNA strongly opposes any sign
of separatist sentiment amongst Ukraine’s Crimean Tatars. Despite the
UNA’s participation in Ukrainian elections, the party maintains an
anti-democratic stance, agitating instead for direct presidential
rule. Like many populist-based movements, UNA-UNSO aims are often
dependent upon the political winds or even the composition of a
speaker’s audience.
In December 2001, Russian Communist Duma deputy Viktor Ilyukhin
alleged that Ukraine’s nationalist groups were helping Osama bin Laden
organize on Ukrainian territory while the Ukraine government supplied
Chechen rebels with weapons and other military equipment (Interfax,
December 10, 2001). No evidence was presented to substantiate these
claims. At the same time, the trial of flamboyant but inept Chechen
warlord Salman Raduev heard evidence that 20 Ukrainian nationalists
were active participants in the warlord’s terrorist activities in
1997-98 (RIA Novosti, November 30, 2001).
In November 2002 the UNA-UNSO organized rallies at three Russian
consulates in the Ukraine to protest the storming of Moscow’s Nord-Est
theater where Chechen militants had organized a mass hostage taking.
During the crisis UNA-UNSO made a public appeal to the militants to
release the Ukrainian nationals, reminding them of UNSO support in the
first Chechen war. The appeal was ignored and a number of Ukrainian
hostages where killed when Russian special forces used gas to
immobilize the militants.
----------------------------------------
>
> > > Good for them. To think that Ukrainian volunteers had once
> > > been fighting in the Caucuses against Russia for free.
>
Yes, thanks to Yuschenko, fighting against Russians, Abkhazis and
Ossetians has become a paying job. Maybe Yuschenko will pay UNA-UNSO
back for their efforts in the 1990s to forward the agendas that are so
dear to Yuschenko: fighting the Russians and harassing the Crimeans?
He has until January to do so. After that, sanity will return.
Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr.
<ostap_bender_1...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Nov 25, 7:09 pm, The Black Monk <ch....@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Nov 25, 8:31 pm, "Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr."
>
> > > > > Why does a prospect of the three Rus peoples re-uniting make **you**
> > > > > so uncomfortable?
>
> > > > Um, because the last time this happened a few million
> > > > Ukrainians,including some of my relatives, died. That's rather
> > > > reasonable, don't you think?
>
> > > That was due to Communists, not due to Russians.
>
> > True, but it was a "Ukrainian Belarus Russia Union."
>
> So what? Shit happens. Ukraine, Belarus and Russia were in a union
> when the Mongols came and destroyed everything. But you don’t blame
> that on the fact that they were united, do you? Communists could have
> come to power in Ukraine and/or Russia even if they were separate
> countries.
>
Of course, the longer the 3 republics remain separate, the more
difficult it will be to re-unite. In the early 1990s and even later,
the majority of people in all 3 republics wanted re-unification.
Lukashenka won presidency in Belarus on his promise to re-unite.
However, by now the desire to re-unite has diminished. Relatively few
Ukrainians want it (23% - 35%), and much fewer Russians (12%), but
certainly more Ukrainians are in favour of closer ties with Russia
than with Poland or EU in general:
Graham Stack in Kyiv for Russia Profile (www.russiaprofile.org)
Opinion polls show Ukraine to be a Russian-leaning country very
different from the one described by Western media and Ukrainian
foreign policy elites.
“If we were to fantasise, and pretend that {Russian Prime Minister}
Vladimir Putin would run for the post of Ukrainian president, then
according to opinion poll results he would win right off,” says
analyst Alexei Lyashenko of Kyiv’s polling institute Research &
Branding (R&B). “His only serious competitor would be {Russian
President} Dmitry Medvedev.”
The R&B poll published May 25 show that for all the rhetoric about
westwards-bound Ukraine breaking free of Russia’s malign influence and
Putin’s imperialism, the reality on the ground is very different.
“In fact, Vladimir Putin’s rating in Ukraine is nothing new, but quite
steady,” adds Lapshen. “It was over 50% even during the Orange
Revolution.”
Opinion poll results published in May indicate that 58% of Ukrainians
have a positive relationship to Vladimir Putin, and 56% to current
Russian President Dmitry Medvedev. 21% have a neutral relationship to
the Russian PM and ex-president, and 16% negative, with the respective
figures 25% and 14% for Medvedev.
R&B’s survey also finds that 35% of Ukrainians would like to see
Ukraine united with Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan, compared to 22%
who wished to join the EU, and 10% who wanted a restored Soviet Union.
These results were confirmed by a poll published June 17 by the Kyiv
International Institute of Sociology (KIIS). According to KIIS
president Valery Khmelko, 23% of Ukrainians desire full unification
with Russia – compared to only 12% of Russians wishing the same.
Doubtlessly due to the 2008-2009 political and economic crisis
wracking Ukraine, the number of Ukrainians desiring ‘reunification’
has risen over the last year from 20% to 23%, and the number of
Russians in favour has fallen from 19% to 12%.
“These findings also indicate that the ‘prevailing willingness of
Russians to append Ukraine to their country forming one state’ is an
erroneous idea as the overwhelming majority of Russians do not want
such a union,” notes KIIS president Khmelko.
While only a quarter of Ukrainian respondents want full unification
with Russia, 68% want an EU-style border-free regime with Russia, with
Russia and Ukraine being ‘independent but friendly states’ without a
visa regime or custom controls.
Only 7.8% of respondents were in favour of Ukraine’s relations with
Russia becoming the same as relations with other countries, i.e. with
border controls, customs and visas.
This in fact contrasts even with sentiment in Russia, where
respondents are far more cautious about union with Ukraine. Perhaps
due to the Ukrainian leadership’s antagonistic policies towards
Russia, amplified by the Russian state-controlled media, only 50% of
Russian respondents want to see a border-free regime between the
countries. 29.1% want relations with Ukraine to be the same as for
other countries.
“Ukrainians’ attitude to Russia is much better than Russians’ attitude
to Ukraine; over 90% of people in Ukraine have a positive attitude to
Russia – and it has become even better over the past year,” points out
Khmelko.
Surprisingly, in contrast to geography, age group does not influence
the attitude towards Russia and its leaders, according to the polls.
None of the current Ukrainian leaders can compete with Putin and
Medvedev in terms of popularity. Pro-Russian head of opposition Party
of Regions Viktor Yanukovych currently enjoys a 25% rating, Prime
Minister Yulia Tymoshenko 14%, and new face Arsenyi Yatsenyuk 13%.
Only 2% of Ukrainians would vote for President Yushchenko, the most
anti-Russian top Ukrainian official, in upcoming elections January
2010.
Neither do Ukrainians have much sympathy for Georgian President
Mikheil Sakhashvili, whom Yushchenko vocally supported during the
country’s conflict with Russia over South Ossetia August 2008.
According to Lyashenko, 45% have a negative opinion of Saakashvili,
and only 11% a positive opinion.
According to an opinion poll published in Polish daily Rzeczpospolita
in March 2009, 56% of Polish respondents fear Vladimir Putin, and 58%
believe that Russia is conducting a foreign policy that endangers
Poland’s national security. This despite the fact that Poland has no
border with Russia, excluding Kaliningrad, and is a member of both
NATO and the EU.
The Black Monk
<ostap_bender_1...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Nov 25, 7:09 pm, The Black Monk <ch....@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Nov 25, 8:31 pm, "Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr."
>
> > > > > Why does a prospect of the three Rus peoples re-uniting make **you**
> > > > > so uncomfortable?
>
> > > > Um, because the last time this happened a few million
> > > > Ukrainians,including some of my relatives, died. That's rather
> > > > reasonable, don't you think?
>
> > > That was due to Communists, not due to Russians.
>
> > True, but it was a "Ukrainian Belarus Russia Union."
>
> So what? Shit happens. Ukraine, Belarus and Russia were in a union
> when the Mongols came and destroyed everything. But you don’t blame
> that on the fact that they were united, do you? Communists could have
> come to power in Ukraine and/or Russia even if they were separate
> countries.
Actually communists tried but failed to come to power in Ukraine (a
commie uprising in Kiev was easily put down in a couple of days by
Petliura's forces). They were attained power in Ukraine thanks to an
invasion from Russia.
Only when they had Galicia and Volynia.
>
>
> > > Are you sure that by 16
> > > September 1658, Poles had finally learned their lesson and never again
> > > mistreated Ukes?
>
> > Not all Poles.
>
> Exactly. Just like not all Germans learned their lesson in 1918.
???
>
> > > > The Poles and Lithuanians are trying to create something not seen
> > > > since 1795 - a fighting unit that also includes Ukrainians.
>
> > > There have never been any fighting units that included both Poles and
> > > Ukes together since 1795?!
>
> > This is incorrect, actually. I just posted it, I didn't write it.
> > Poles and Ukrainians fought together here:
>
> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet-Polish_War#The_tide_turns:_Operat...
>
> > And, I believe, in Iraq.
>
> Didn’t they fight together many times as part of the Austrian (and
> Russian) imperial forces?
Okay. So?
>
>
> > > > Poles no longer try to enslave Ukrainians as they did in the mid 16th
> > > > century. When they did so, the Commonwealth fell apart quite
> > > > quickly.
>
> > > > The point is that Ukraine and Poland have moved like,
> > > > much like eternally-warring Germany and France.
>
> > > Which year exactly marks the time of this “moving on”? 1658? 1795?
>
> > In the 19th century in the parts of Ukraine belonged to the Russian
> > Empire, Ukrainians and Poles were allied against Russians. When Gogol
> > was in an anti-Russian mood he was quite comfortable hanging out with
> > anti-Russian Polish exiles in Paris, such as Mickiewicz.
>
> How about what happened between Poles and Ukes when Poland became an
> independent country after WW1, kept Galicia and even occupied parts of
> formerly Russian Ukraine?
I described that.
>
>
> > In Austria, OTOH, the relations were quite bitter. In fact, when
> > Poles from Kiev (often exiles) came to Lviv before 1914 they werre
> > shocked to see how the two communities hated each other there, given
> > the close relationships between Poles and UKrainians in Ukraine.
>
> In Kiev, didn’t Ukes and Poles also have good relations with
> Russians?
Both were persecuted by Russians. Remember Shevchenko's holiday?
> Aren’t you saying that under the Russian rule, different Slavic
> ethnicities got along with each other infinitely better than under
> Poles and Austrians? So, why re-unite with Poland and not with Russia?
> Would you rather live in hatred like they did in Lviv or in peace like
> they did in Kiev?
No, you are saying that based on yor false statement that Poles and
Ukrainians had good relations with Russsia during the Russian
occupation.
> > So during the 19th century there were already two quite different
> > trends within Polish society with respect to Ukraine.
>
> > During and after the Revolution the nobleman Pilsudski represented the
> > pro-Ukrainian trend while his rival Dmowski, a modern nationalist of
> > the middle classes, the latter. Unfortunately democratic elections in
> > Poland brought Dmowski to power, and Ukrainians within Poland were
> > persecuted (along with Jews, because while Pilsudski like the Polish
> > king was the protetor of Jews Dmowski, the man of the people, was a
> > vicious antisemite).
>
> So, who is in charge in modern Poland? The King or the people?
The people, whose elite have uniformly accepted Pilsudski's views.
You would be shocked how much of the Pol;ish elite have noble origins
and how (justly) proud they are of that. Dmowski's populism has been
largely disgarded.
> > After the mass Polish-Ukrainian slaughter of the 1940's there is
> > practically no Ukrainian minority in Poland (nor Polish minority in
> > western Ukraine).
>
> Exactly my point. So, Poland didn’t learn any lessons in 1658,
> Ukrianians continued to be persecuted well into the 20th century. And
> even then, the Poles didn’t stop voluntarily. Thee persecution of
> Ukrainians stopped simply because USSR took Western Ukraine away from
> Poland.
I said, there were two trends - pro and anti-Ukrainian. The anti-
Ukrainian is now thoroughly discredited and gone.
>
>
> > > Haven’t there been lots of hostilities between Poles and Ukes since
> > > 1795? Hasn’t there been lots of repression and exploitation of
> > > Ukrainians by Polish governing authorities, Polish persecution of
> > > Ukrainians, mass arrests, and armed struggle of Ukrainian patriots
> > > against Poland?
>
> > Ukrainain middle class nationalists initiated a slaughter of up to
> > 100,000 Poles. Polish communists deported almost all Ukrainians from
> > what is now Poland. Ironically these actions removed the competing
> > claims to territories of mixed ethnicities and enabled the two
> > countries to have peaceful relations. No Ukrainian parties, even
> > nationalist ones, have issues against Poles currently. Likewise, none
> > of the main Polish political parties has problems with Ukrainians. In
> > contrast many Russian politicans such as Moscow's mayor agitate to
> > have Crimea taken from Ukraine.
>
> > > Let’s face it: the Polish promise in 1658 to stop oppressing and
> > > persecuting Ukes was no more sincere or lasting than all their
> > > previous promises. As long as Poland has power over Ukes, it abused
> > > this power.
>
> > Who will abuse Ukrainians when nobody expresses the wish to do so?
>
> Who ever expresses the wish to abuse anybody? Did USA say that it
> wanted to invade Iraq to abuse Iraqis? All conquests are made in the
> name of improving the life of the conquered people.
Many Russian politicians issue anti-Ukrainian statements.
No Polish politicians do so. There is no call in the Polish press for
any significant anti-Ukrainian stuff. Etc.
> Did the Russians, who enforced the re-unification of Ukraine and
> Russia in the 17th and early 18th centuries, express the wish to abuse
> Ukrainians?
They did so.
>
>
> > Moreover Poles could not do so even if they wanted. Poland, unlike
> > Russia, is not 3 times larger by population than is Ukraine.
>
> So, if Poland grabbed not all of Ukraine but a small part of it – say,
> Galicia – it would have an easier time abusing Ukrainians?
No Polish will for it. Poles are emphasizing the cooperative aspects
of Ukrainian-Polish history.
> > > So, why do you want to return to this arrangement?
>
> > It would not be a return to the old arrangement but something
> > comparable to the current Franco-German partnership.
>
> Maybe Ukraine should form a partnership with its other historical
> enemy: Turkey? Nobody in Turkey expresses the wish to abuse Ukrainians
> and the Turks are also part of NATO .
How about Russia then, if Turkey?
BM
> How does it sound: “a Turko-Ukrainian Commonwealth” or “a Turko-
> Ukrainian partnership”? Or even better: “a Turko-Polish-Ukrainian
> Commonwealth”.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
J. Anderson
"The Black Monk" <ch....@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1bb0508e-6b07-43fa...@j19g2000yqk.googlegroups.com...
> You would be shocked how much of the Pol;ish
> elite have noble origins and how (justly) proud
> they are of that.
Proud of what? Proud of the Polish nobility inflation?
Knowing what szlachta nobility mainly was based on, it's hard to understand
what there is to be proud of. If we had had the same criteria in
Sweden(-Finland), 15-20% of our population would have 'noble origins' too.
Besides, normal people may be proud of their own achievements. You have to
be quite a good-for-nothing loser to pride yourself upon something a distant
ancestor was rewarded for centuries ago.
Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr.
As you like to say, figure it out. Here is a hint:
>
> > > > Once all the Germans were warlike and mean,
> > > > But that couldn't happen again.
> > > > We taught them a lesson in 1918
> > > > And they've hardly bothered us since then.
>
>
> > > > > Poles no longer try to enslave Ukrainians as they did in the mid 16th
> > > > > century. When they did so, the Commonwealth fell apart quite
> > > > > quickly.
>
> > > > > The point is that Ukraine and Poland have moved like,
> > > > > much like eternally-warring Germany and France.
>
> > > > Which year exactly marks the time of this “moving on”? 1658? 1795?
>
> > > In the 19th century in the parts of Ukraine belonged to the Russian
> > > Empire, Ukrainians and Poles were allied against Russians. When Gogol
> > > was in an anti-Russian mood he was quite comfortable hanging out with
> > > anti-Russian Polish exiles in Paris, such as Mickiewicz.
>
> > How about what happened between Poles and Ukes when Poland became an
> > independent country after WW1, kept Galicia and even occupied parts of
> > formerly Russian Ukraine?
>
> I described that.
>
Yes, you did. A horrifying picture of fratricidal genocides of
hundreds of thousands of civilians, which makes your original claim
that the Poles learned their lesson in 1658 and stopped mistreating
Ukes, sound like a very bad joke.
>
>
> > > In Austria, OTOH, the relations were quite bitter. In fact, when
> > > Poles from Kiev (often exiles) came to Lviv before 1914 they werre
> > > shocked to see how the two communities hated each other there, given
> > > the close relationships between Poles and UKrainians in Ukraine.
>
> > In Kiev, didn’t Ukes and Poles also have good relations with
> > Russians?
>
> Both were persecuted by Russians. Remember Shevchenko's holiday?
>
> > Aren’t you saying that under the Russian rule, different Slavic
> > ethnicities got along with each other infinitely better than under
> > Poles and Austrians? So, why re-unite with Poland and not with Russia?
> > Would you rather live in hatred like they did in Lviv or in peace like
> > they did in Kiev?
>
> No, you are saying that based on yor false statement that Poles and
> Ukrainians had good relations with Russsia during the Russian
> occupation.
>
My point is that under the Russian rule over Eastern and Central, all
Slavic civilians - Ukes, Russians, Poles - lived in peace, harmony
and deep friendship with their neighbours. But in Western Ukraine,
which was ruled by the Catholic Austria and Poland, there was not only
incredible hostilities among average Uke and Polish civilians, but
even wholesale genocides between them.
As a Uke, would you have rather lived in 19th century Kiev, where your
Polish and Russian neighbours loved you, or in Lviv where your Polish
neighbours hated you?
Why would Slavic civilians live in friendship under the Russian Czar
rule in Kiev, but live in hate and fear of each other under Catholic
Austrian and Polish rule in Lviv?
>
> > > So during the 19th century there were already two quite different
> > > trends within Polish society with respect to Ukraine.
>
> > > During and after the Revolution the nobleman Pilsudski represented the
> > > pro-Ukrainian trend while his rival Dmowski, a modern nationalist of
> > > the middle classes, the latter. Unfortunately democratic elections in
> > > Poland brought Dmowski to power, and Ukrainians within Poland were
> > > persecuted (along with Jews, because while Pilsudski like the Polish
> > > king was the protetor of Jews Dmowski, the man of the people, was a
> > > vicious antisemite).
>
> > So, who is in charge in modern Poland? The King or the people?
>
> The people, whose elite have uniformly accepted Pilsudski's views.
>
> You would be shocked how much of the Pol;ish elite have noble origins
> and how (justly) proud they are of that. Dmowski's populism has been
> largely disgarded.
>
> > > After the mass Polish-Ukrainian slaughter of the 1940's there is
> > > practically no Ukrainian minority in Poland (nor Polish minority in
> > > western Ukraine).
>
> > Exactly my point. So, Poland didn’t learn any lessons in 1658,
> > Ukrianians continued to be persecuted well into the 20th century. And
> > even then, the Poles didn’t stop voluntarily. Thee persecution of
> > Ukrainians stopped simply because USSR took Western Ukraine away from
> > Poland.
>
> I said, there were two trends - pro and anti-Ukrainian. The anti-
> Ukrainian is now thoroughly discredited and gone.
>
Just like in 1658?
>
>
>
>
> > > > Haven’t there been lots of hostilities between Poles and Ukes since
> > > > 1795? Hasn’t there been lots of repression and exploitation of
> > > > Ukrainians by Polish governing authorities, Polish persecution of
> > > > Ukrainians, mass arrests, and armed struggle of Ukrainian patriots
> > > > against Poland?
>
> > > Ukrainain middle class nationalists initiated a slaughter of up to
> > > 100,000 Poles. Polish communists deported almost all Ukrainians from
> > > what is now Poland. Ironically these actions removed the competing
> > > claims to territories of mixed ethnicities and enabled the two
> > > countries to have peaceful relations. No Ukrainian parties, even
> > > nationalist ones, have issues against Poles currently. Likewise, none
> > > of the main Polish political parties has problems with Ukrainians. In
> > > contrast many Russian politicans such as Moscow's mayor agitate to
> > > have Crimea taken from Ukraine.
>
> > > > Let’s face it: the Polish promise in 1658 to stop oppressing and
> > > > persecuting Ukes was no more sincere or lasting than all their
> > > > previous promises. As long as Poland has power over Ukes, it abused
> > > > this power.
>
> > > Who will abuse Ukrainians when nobody expresses the wish to do so?
>
> > Who ever expresses the wish to abuse anybody? Did USA say that it
> > wanted to invade Iraq to abuse Iraqis? All conquests are made in the
> > name of improving the life of the conquered people.
>
> Many Russian politicians issue anti-Ukrainian statements.
>
Bull. Whatever anti-Ukrainian statements made by Russian politicians,
are against the actions of the current Ukrainian government, not
against the Ukrainian people.
Many Polish politicians have issued an even stronger criticism of the
Belorusan government. Are you saying that Poles hate Belorusan people?
Let's, for example, look at the most notorious anti-Ukrainian act ever
done in modern Russia. It was committed by a fringe right wing party,
almost forgotten by now:
http://www.igpi.ru/monitoring/1047645476/apr_95/patriot.html
In early April 1995, Nikolay Lysenko again managed to attract
attention when at a meeting of the State Duma he tore up the Ukrainian
flag, for which he was deprived of the right to vote till the end of
April. On April 7 Lysenko sent an open letter to the Chairman
explaining the reasons for his action, which were "the anti-Russian
policy of the Russian government and parliament" on the fate of Crimea
and on Russia's relations with Ukraine, as well as the systematic
denial of the right of speech to Lysenko at the meetings of the State
Duma [20]. Supreme Soviet of Ukraine adopted a decision to ban Lysenko
entry into the territory of Ukraine [21].
Are you sure that even this Russian nationalist extremist (with the
classical Ukrainian name of Lysenko) hates average Ukrainians and
wants to treat them as slaves?!
I assure you that modern Russian politicians are at least as nice
towards average Ukrainians as are modern Polish politicians.
>
> No Polish politicians do so.
>
How come so many Polish politicians say bad things about Belarus?
>
> There is no call in the Polish press for
> any significant anti-Ukrainian stuff. Etc.
>
How come so so much of the Polish press has "anti-Belarusan stuff"?
I repeat: Whatever anti-Ukrainian statements made by Russian
politicians and press, are against the actions of the current
Ukrainian government, not against the Ukrainian people.
>
> > Did the Russians, who enforced the re-unification of Ukraine and
> > Russia in the 17th and early 18th centuries, express the wish to abuse
> > Ukrainians?
>
> They did so.
>
Please provide the quotes from their expressed wishes.
>
>
> > > Moreover Poles could not do so even if they wanted. Poland, unlike
> > > Russia, is not 3 times larger by population than is Ukraine.
>
> > So, if Poland grabbed not all of Ukraine but a small part of it – say,
> > Galicia – it would have an easier time abusing Ukrainians?
>
> No Polish will for it. Poles are emphasizing the cooperative aspects
> of Ukrainian-Polish history.
>
> > > > So, why do you want to return to this arrangement?
>
> > > It would not be a return to the old arrangement but something
> > > comparable to the current Franco-German partnership.
>
> > Maybe Ukraine should form a partnership with its other historical
> > enemy: Turkey? Nobody in Turkey expresses the wish to abuse Ukrainians
> > and the Turks are also part of NATO .
>
> How about Russia then, if Turkey?
>
> BM
>
> > How does it sound: “a Turko-Ukrainian Commonwealth” or “a Turko-
> > Ukrainian partnership”? Or even better: “a Turko-Polish-Ukrainian
> > Commonwealth”.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> ...
>
> read more »
Anton
I wonder: Do the Polish nobility also hold "Upper Class Twit Of The
Year" contests?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TSqkdcT25ss
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Upper_Class_Twit_of_the_Year
--
Anton
Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr.
> J. Anderson kirjoitti:
>
> > "The Black Monk" <ch....@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >news:1bb0508e-6b07-43fa...@j19g2000yqk.googlegroups.com...
>
> >> You would be shocked how much of the Pol;ish
> >> elite have noble origins and how (justly) proud
> >> they are of that.
> > Proud of what? Proud of the Polish nobility inflation?
>
LOL. I wonder if thy are proud of the Polish noblemen that enslaved
and persecuted Ukrainians and of the Father of KGB:
Felix Edmundovich Dzerzhinsky (Polish: Feliks Dzierżyński [ˈfɛliks dʑer
ˈʐɨɲski]) was the founder of the Bolshevik secret police, the Cheka,
later known by many names during the history of the Soviet Union. The
agency became notorious for large-scale human rights abuses, including
torture and mass summary executions, carried out especially during the
Red Terror and the Russian Civil War.[1][2]
Feliks Dzierżyński was born into a Polish szlachta (noble) family of
the Samson coat of arms in the Dziarzhynava estate near Ivyanets and
Rakaw in Western Belarus (in present-day Minsk Voblast). В детстве
мечтал стать ксёндзом.In childhood wanted to become a Catholic
priest.
He wrote:
"As a boy I dreamed I had a cap of invisibility so that I could kill
all Moskals (Russians)."
http://kadry.viperson.ru/wind.php?ID=385259&soch=1
One of the most famous political figures of Soviet history - Felix
Dzerzhinsky - was familiar with heartfelt passion, strong attachment,
and the pain of parting and separation. Thus it appears from the pages
of a recently published in Moscow book "I love you ... Letters of
Felix Dzerzhinsky to Margarita Nikolaeva".
Hereditary nobleman who belonged to an old Polish family, Felix
Dzerzhinsky was brought up in his parents' house in the spirit of
strict Catholicism and Polish patriotism. He later recalled: "As a
boy, I dreamed of a cap of invisibility and the destruction of all
Moskals." The fact that hatred of the "Moskal power" had become an
important factor in his plunging with his head in the revolutionary
work from a young age, no doubt.
Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr.
Paranoia is a big factor in all Balkan politics. Evidently, the
Turkish rule fostered paranoia in the subjugated nations.
Dmitry
> > most rediculous.
>
> Paranoia is a big factor in all Balkan politics. Evidently, the
> Turkish rule fostered paranoia in the subjugated nations.
In deed. Empires always leave their "footprint".
Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr.
If so - could it be that Baltic and West Ukrainian attitudes towards
Russia today are also driven by paranoia?
Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr.
> http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/2009/11/16/2009-11-16_poland_li...
>
> Poland, Lithuania and Ukraine to form brigade for UN, EU and NATO
> peacekeeping missions
> By Corky Siemaszko
> DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER
>
> The Poles and Lithuanians are trying to create something not seen
> since 1795 - a fighting unit that also includes Ukrainians.
>
> take part in United Nations and European Union-sponsored peacekeeping
> missions.
>
> It would also serve under the auspices of NATO.
>
> "This reflects our support for Ukraine," Polish deputy defense
> minister Stanislaw Komorowski said after signing a letter of intent to
> form the unit. "We want to tie Ukraine closer to Western structures,
> including military ones."
>
> Poland and Lithuania are in NATO and have been pushing to bring
> Ukraine into the fold. NATO's pledge to some day admit the former
> Soviet republic outraged the Russians.
>
> A NATO spokesman said Moscow has no reason to be miffed by the Polish/
> Lithuanian overture to Ukraine.
>
> "There is absolutely no reason why cooperation between individual
> allies and Ukraine should not be stepped up," said the spokesman,
> James Appathurai.
>
> There are, however, historic reasons why this could rankle the
> Russians.
>
> Poland was a great European power when it forged a union with
> Lithuania and incorporated much of what is now Ukraine.
>
Here is the map of your dream of The Greater Poland:
http://engforum.pravda.ru/showpost.php?p=2981171&postcount=14
Polska "od morza do morza" / Poland from Sea to Sea / Pol'sha ot
morzha i do morzha/
Interestingly, this Greater Poland will be almost bordering the other
great European superpower - the Greater Albania:
http://strangemaps.files.wordpress.com/2006/09/galbania.jpg
Dmitry
What attitudes towards Russia do you mean? The largest footprints
that Soviet occupation left in Latvia are economic "impotence" and
high level of corruption within governmental structures.
vello
>
As you see from the text on map, it's not some Greater Albania - it's
just area albanians were living before more violent newcomers arrive
and take the land.
Dmitry
> just area albanians were living before more violent newcomers arrive
> and take the land.
Slavs settled in Kosovo in 6th/7th century. There is very little
evidence of how violent Slavs were at that time. Dardani were
populating that territory at the time of arrival of Slavs. The
Albanians first appear in the historical record in the late 11th
century.
The idea of Grater Albania is not exactly based on restoration of the
country occupied by newcomers. The proposed entity is based on
majority or sizable minority of the territories of countries outside
Albania.
J. Anderson
"Dmitry" <dmitrijs...@inbox.lv> wrote in message
news:a48a913b-ca12-478f...@j14g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
This is what Wikipedia says
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albanian_language):
"While it is considered established that the Albanians originated in the
Balkans, the exact location from which they spread out is hard to pinpoint.
Traditionally scholars have seen the Albanians as descended from Illyrians,
however, from time to time this view has been challenged, very frequently
for modern nationalistic reasons." [Guess by whom!]
"The theory that Albanians were related to the Illyrians was proposed for
the first time by a German historian in 1774. The scholars who advocate an
Illyrian origin are numerous. There are two variants of the theory: one is
that the Albanian language represents a survival of an indigenous Illyrian
language spoken in what is now Albania.The other is that the Albanian
language is the descendant of an Illyrian language that was spoken north of
the Jirecek Line and probably north or northeast of Albania."
'Northeast of Albania' actually points to Kosovo.
I'm afraid the Balkans are full of those 'nationalistic reasons'. I wouldn't
trust any source originating in that area. Or leading to someone with
origins in that area.
Dmitry
And Greeks can dig down even deeper when it comes to Macedonia -))
As far as I understand Albanians and Slavs lived together OK until
occupied by Ottoman empire. It is a shame that some people try to
feed on negative historical events instead of positive and think
forward instead of backward.
The Black Monk
The consensus is that the high rating for Putin do not mean that
Ukrainians want THE Putin to be their president, rather that they want
a Putin to appear in Ukraine and to clean up the place, as Putin is
seen to have done in Russia. A lot of pro-Orange Ukrainians had hoped
that Timoshenko would be their Putin.
> R&B’s survey also finds that 35% of Ukrainians would like to see
> Ukraine united with Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan, compared to 22%
> who wished to join the EU, and 10% who wanted a restored Soviet Union.
Roughly corresponding to the 45% or so Russian/Russophone population
in Ukraine. Why is this surprising?
> These results were confirmed by a poll published June 17 by the Kyiv
> International Institute of Sociology (KIIS). According to KIIS
> president Valery Khmelko, 23% of Ukrainians desire full unification
> with Russia – compared to only 12% of Russians wishing the same.
>
> Doubtlessly due to the 2008-2009 political and economic crisis
> wracking Ukraine, the number of Ukrainians desiring ‘reunification’
> has risen over the last year from 20% to 23%, and the number of
> Russians in favour has fallen from 19% to 12%.
>
> “These findings also indicate that the ‘prevailing willingness of
> Russians to append Ukraine to their country forming one state’ is an
> erroneous idea as the overwhelming majority of Russians do not want
> such a union,” notes KIIS president Khmelko.
>
> While only a quarter of Ukrainian respondents want full unification
> with Russia, 68% want an EU-style border-free regime with Russia, with
> Russia and Ukraine being ‘independent but friendly states’ without a
> visa regime or custom controls.
This idea isn't even unpopular in western Ukraine.
> Only 7.8% of respondents were in favour of Ukraine’s relations with
> Russia becoming the same as relations with other countries, i.e. with
> border controls, customs and visas.
Sure.
>
> This in fact contrasts even with sentiment in Russia, where
> respondents are far more cautious about union with Ukraine. Perhaps
> due to the Ukrainian leadership’s antagonistic policies towards
> Russia, amplified by the Russian state-controlled media, only 50% of
> Russian respondents want to see a border-free regime between the
> countries. 29.1% want relations with Ukraine to be the same as for
> other countries.
>
> “Ukrainians’ attitude to Russia is much better than Russians’ attitude
> to Ukraine; over 90% of people in Ukraine have a positive attitude to
> Russia – and it has become even better over the past year,” points out
> Khmelko.
Of course. Russian propaganda paints Ukrainians as rabid Russophobes,
antisemties, etc. when in fact Russians are far more unfriendly and
xenophobic than are easy-going Ukrainians.
BM
> Surprisingly, in contrast to geography, age group does not influence
> the attitude towards Russia and its leaders, according to the polls.
>
> None of the current Ukrainian leaders can compete with Putin and
> Medvedev in terms of popularity. Pro-Russian head of opposition Party
> of Regions Viktor Yanukovych currently enjoys a 25% rating, Prime
> Minister Yulia Tymoshenko 14%, and new face Arsenyi Yatsenyuk 13%.
>
> Only 2% of Ukrainians would vote for President Yushchenko, the most
> anti-Russian top Ukrainian official, in upcoming elections January
> 2010.
>
> Neither do Ukrainians have much sympathy for Georgian President
> Mikheil Sakhashvili, whom Yushchenko vocally supported during the
> country’s conflict with Russia over South Ossetia August 2008.
> According to Lyashenko, 45% have a negative opinion of Saakashvili,
> and only 11% a positive opinion.
>
> According to an opinion poll published in Polish daily Rzeczpospolita
> in March 2009, 56% of Polish respondents fear Vladimir Putin, and 58%
> believe that Russia is conducting a foreign policy that endangers
> Poland’s national security. This despite the fact that Poland has no
> border with Russia, excluding Kaliningrad, and is a member of both
> NATO and the EU.- Hide quoted text -
The Black Monk
> "The Black Monk" <ch....@hotmail.com> wrote in messagenews:1bb0508e-6b07-43fa...@j19g2000yqk.googlegroups.com...
>
> > You would be shocked how much of the Pol;ish
> > elite have noble origins and how (justly) proud
> > they are of that.
>
> Proud of what? Proud of the Polish nobility inflation?
Proud of their ancestors' role in history (including having relatives
who were murdered at Katyn), family traditions such as 500 year old
recipes and winter sleigh rides in the forested estates, etc. etc.
>
> Knowing what szlachta nobility mainly was based on, it's hard to understand
> what there is to be proud of. If we had had the same criteria in
> Sweden(-Finland), 15-20% of our population would have 'noble origins' too.
>
> Besides, normal people may be proud of their own achievements. You have to
> be quite a good-for-nothing loser to pride yourself upon something a distant
> ancestor was rewarded for centuries ago.
What a nasty comment, sorry. So are those Finns who are proud of
their ancestors' achievements in the Winter War also "good-for-nothing
losers" or does this only apply to the descendents of nobles?
Why the anti-noble bigotry?
regards,
BM
The Black Monk
Germans were not the aggressors in World War I, unlike in World War
II. So what kind of lesson are you talking about?
> > > > > Once all the Germans were warlike and mean,
> > > > > But that couldn't happen again.
> > > > > We taught them a lesson in 1918
> > > > > And they've hardly bothered us since then.
>
> > > > > > Poles no longer try to enslave Ukrainians as they did in the mid 16th
> > > > > > century. When they did so, the Commonwealth fell apart quite
> > > > > > quickly.
>
> > > > > > The point is that Ukraine and Poland have moved like,
> > > > > > much like eternally-warring Germany and France.
>
> > > > > Which year exactly marks the time of this “moving on”? 1658? 1795?
>
> > > > In the 19th century in the parts of Ukraine belonged to the Russian
> > > > Empire, Ukrainians and Poles were allied against Russians. When Gogol
> > > > was in an anti-Russian mood he was quite comfortable hanging out with
> > > > anti-Russian Polish exiles in Paris, such as Mickiewicz.
>
> > > How about what happened between Poles and Ukes when Poland became an
> > > independent country after WW1, kept Galicia and even occupied parts of
> > > formerly Russian Ukraine?
>
> > I described that.
>
> Yes, you did. A horrifying picture of fratricidal genocides of
> hundreds of thousands of civilians, which makes your original claim
> that the Poles learned their lesson in 1658 and stopped mistreating
> Ukes, sound like a very bad joke.
As I described, after the 17th century some Poles supported pro-
Ukrainian policy and understood that an alliance was necessary for
Poland's well-being (i.e., those who had learned their lessson) and
others continued to seek to assimlate Ukrainians. Nowadays, most
Poles fall into the former category.
> > > > In Austria, OTOH, the relations were quite bitter. In fact, when
> > > > Poles from Kiev (often exiles) came to Lviv before 1914 they werre
> > > > shocked to see how the two communities hated each other there, given
> > > > the close relationships between Poles and UKrainians in Ukraine.
>
> > > In Kiev, didn’t Ukes and Poles also have good relations with
> > > Russians?
>
> > Both were persecuted by Russians. Remember Shevchenko's holiday?
>
> > > Aren’t you saying that under the Russian rule, different Slavic
> > > ethnicities got along with each other infinitely better than under
> > > Poles and Austrians? So, why re-unite with Poland and not with Russia?
> > > Would you rather live in hatred like they did in Lviv or in peace like
> > > they did in Kiev?
>
> > No, you are saying that based on yor false statement that Poles and
> > Ukrainians had good relations with Russsia during the Russian
> > occupation.
>
> My point is that under the Russian rule over Eastern and Central, all
> Slavic civilians - Ukes, Russians, Poles - lived in peace, harmony
> and deep friendship with their neighbours.
Sure, just as there was peace under Stalin, there was no war in the
Balkans under Tito, and there is less unrest in Tibet after the
central authorities have asserted themselves.
> But in Western Ukraine,
> which was ruled by the Catholic Austria and Poland, there was not only
> incredible hostilities among average Uke and Polish civilians, but
> even wholesale genocides between them.
Actually Austrian rule did not result on genocides. The government of
the Western UKrainian Republic granted all rights to its national
minorities and set up quotas for parliamentary representation
proportional to population. The war between post-Austrian Ukrainians
and Poles was generally civilized, with very few civilian casualties.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish-Ukrainian_War
Approximately 10,000 Poles and 15,000 Ukrainians, mostly soldiers,
died during this war[11].
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Lw%C3%B3w_(1918)#Aftermath
It is to be noted that the Polish-Ukrainian fight for Lwów is
sometimes referred to as the last civilized conflict by Polish
historians. Because both sides were too weak to create regular front
lines and lacked heavy weapons, the civilian casualties were low and
did not exceed 400. Also, both sides tried to avoid destroying the
city's facilities and the most important buildings were declared de-
militarized zone. Among them were the hospitals, the water works, gas
plant and the energy plant. Local cease-fire agreements were signed on
a daily basis and there were even numerous situations where both
Polish and Ukrainian soldiers played football or partied during cease
fires. In his memoirs, Polish Lieutenant (later Colonel) Bolesław
Szwarcenberg-Czerny noted, that during one of the cease-fires
Lieutenant Levsky, the Ukrainian commander of an outpost fighting with
his unit, got so drunk with the Poles that he overslept and woke up
late for the cease-fire. Immediately another cease-fire was signed to
allow the Ukrainian officer to return to his unit.
The hatred fueling subsequent genocides happened only after western
Ukraine was ruled by democratic middle-class dominated nationalist
Poland.
> As a Uke, would you have rather lived in 19th century Kiev, where your
> Polish and Russian neighbours loved you, or in Lviv where your Polish
> neighbours hated you?
>
> Why would Slavic civilians live in friendship under the Russian Czar
> rule in Kiev, but live in hate and fear of each other under Catholic
> Austrian and Polish rule in Lviv?
Well, in Russia they both hated Russia and not each other.
No, like in 2009.
Oops.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/world_agenda/article6365122.ece
Sometimes you can say too much with flowers. When Vladimir Putin made
a visit to lay roses on the grave of Anton Denikin, a Tsarist army
officer who fought the Bolsheviks in Russia's civil war after the 1917
revolution, he chose to talk about Ukraine.
General Denikin, he told reporters at Moscow's Donskoi Cemetery, had
written in his diaries about "Big Russia and Little Russia — Ukraine".
Mr Putin went on: "He says that nobody should be permitted to
interfere in relations between us, they have always been the business
of Russia itself."
http://www.pcmoldovann.com/archives/2008/04/09/254/
Russian president Vladimir Putin, during a private meeting with US
President George W. Bush at the NATO Summit, is reported as saying
“Don’t you understand, George - Ukraine is not even a nation! What is
Ukraine? Part of her territory is Eastern Europe, and part, a
considerable part, was given by us!”
This was reported first in this Kommersant article (RUS), which is
referenced in this Ukrayinska Pravda article (UKR). This UNIAN article
(ENG), interestingly, doesn’t quote Putin’s purported inflammatory
statement, although it does include his outright threat: “Russia may
consider forcefully incorporating the eastern part of Ukraine and the
Crimea into its territory.”
> Many Polish politicians have issued an even stronger criticism of the
> Belorusan government. Are you saying that Poles hate Belorusan people?
How many have described Belorus as "Litle Poland" and that only Poland
has a right to deal with it?
> Let's, for example, look at the most notorious anti-Ukrainian act ever
> done in modern Russia. It was committed by a fringe right wing party,
> almost forgotten by now:
>
> http://www.igpi.ru/monitoring/1047645476/apr_95/patriot.html
> In early April 1995, Nikolay Lysenko again managed to attract
> attention when at a meeting of the State Duma he tore up the Ukrainian
> flag, for which he was deprived of the right to vote till the end of
> April. On April 7 Lysenko sent an open letter to the Chairman
> explaining the reasons for his action, which were "the anti-Russian
> policy of the Russian government and parliament" on the fate of Crimea
> and on Russia's relations with Ukraine, as well as the systematic
> denial of the right of speech to Lysenko at the meetings of the State
> Duma [20]. Supreme Soviet of Ukraine adopted a decision to ban Lysenko
> entry into the territory of Ukraine [21].
>
> Are you sure that even this Russian nationalist extremist (with the
> classical Ukrainian name of Lysenko) hates average Ukrainians and
> wants to treat them as slaves?!
>
> I assure you that modern Russian politicians are at least as nice
> towards average Ukrainians as are modern Polish politicians.
I wasn't talking about personal bigotry but anti-Ukrainian in the
political sense, of course. Here is the mayor of Moscow:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/26/world/europe/26mayor.html
Mr. Luzhkov, who declined to be interviewed for this article, has also
called for Russia to reclaim Crimea from Ukraine. Many Russians
consider Crimea, which has an ethnic Russian majority and a Russian
naval base on the Black Sea, an integral part of Russia.
If it becomes the next flash point between Russia and the West, Mr.
Luzhkov will in no small part be responsible. He has nurtured
separatist groups in Crimea that since the Georgia conflict have a new
battle cry: we will be next.
> > No Polish politicians do so.
>
> How come so many Polish politicians say bad things about Belarus?
So how many major Polish politicans state that Poland ought to annex
Belarussian territory?
> > There is no call in the Polish press for
> > any significant anti-Ukrainian stuff. Etc.
>
> How come so so much of the Polish press has "anti-Belarusan stuff"?
>
> I repeat: Whatever anti-Ukrainian statements made by Russian
> politicians and press, are against the actions of the current
> Ukrainian government, not against the Ukrainian people.
So openly declaring that pieces of territory be annexed, or referring
to the country by its insulting colonial-era nickname, is "against the
actions of the current Ukrainian government, not against the Ukrainian
people?" Really? So if Ukrainians die if, as Putn threatned, Russia
forcefully annexes Crimea and part of eastern Ukraine, it's nothing
personal and no big deal, right?
> > > Did the Russians, who enforced the re-unification of Ukraine and
> > > Russia in the 17th and early 18th centuries, express the wish to abuse
> > > Ukrainians?
>
> > They did so.
>
> Please provide the quotes from their expressed wishes.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valuyev%27s_circular
The Circular has put the reason for the growing number of textbooks in
Ukrainian, and beginner-level books in Ukrainian with "the Poles'
political interests" and the "separatist intentions of some of the
Little Russians". The Circular also stated that "no separate Little
Russian language ever existed, doesn't exist, and couldn't exist", and
that the Little Russian is nothing more than the "General Russian"
spoiled by Polish influence.
The Circular ordered the Censorship Committees to ban the publication
of religious texts, educational texts, and beginner-level books in
Ukrainian, but permitted publication of literature in that language.
The situation with Ukrainian language was later resolved in such a way
that the usage of the language in open print was completely prohibited
with the Ems Ukaz in 1876.
Denying the existence of a people's language and banning its use by
those enforcing the "reunification" of Ukraine and Russia is abusive,
no?
BM
J. Anderson
> Why the anti-noble bigotry?
Why the 80%-of-the-population bigotry?
The Black Monk
> "The Black Monk" <ch....@hotmail.com> wrote in messagenews:dfc9627c-0899-4247...@r5g2000yqb.googlegroups.com...
>
> > Why the anti-noble bigotry?
>
> Why the 80%-of-the-population bigotry?
I like how you cut out most of the post to remove the context. Here
it is again:
> > You would be shocked how much of the Polish
> > elite have noble origins and how (justly) proud
> > they are of that.
> Proud of what? Proud of the Polish nobility inflation?
Proud of their ancestors' role in history (including having relatives
who were murdered at Katyn), family traditions such as 500 year old
recipes and winter sleigh rides in the forested estates, etc. etc.
> Knowing what szlachta nobility mainly was based on, it's hard to understand
> what there is to be proud of. If we had had the same criteria in
> Sweden(-Finland), 15-20% of our population would have 'noble origins' too.
> Besides, normal people may be proud of their own achievements. You have to
> be quite a good-for-nothing loser to pride yourself upon something a distant
> ancestor was rewarded for centuries ago.
What a nasty comment, sorry. So are those Finns who are proud of
their ancestors' achievements in the Winter War also "good-for-
nothing
losers" or does this only apply to the descendents of nobles?
Why the anti-noble bigotry?
------
Now for your comment:
> > Why the anti-noble bigotry?
>
> Why the 80%-of-the-population bigotry?
1. Is bigotry better if directed towards a small minority rather than
towards a larger group? You have not denied being a bigot, instead
you chose to contrast what I said with "80% of the population."
2. Of course I am not a bigot. Not wanting 10 year olds to drive or
vote does not make one a bigot against 10 year-olds. Not wanting the
middle classes to determine world politics and world culture does not
make one a bigot against the middle classes. Stating a fact that the
middle classes do not produce culture but degrade it is no more
bigotry than saying that if I attempted to, for example, build a car I
would build an awful one or if I attempted to fix a car I would
probably break it further. On the other hand, you have stated being
proud of one's noble ancestors makes one a " good-for-nothing loser."
regards,
BM
Anton
> On Nov 26, 5:41 pm, "J. Anderson" <anderso...@inbox.lv> wrote:
>> "The Black Monk" <ch....@hotmail.com> wrote in messagenews:1bb0508e-6b07-43fa...@j19g2000yqk.googlegroups.com...
>>> You would be shocked how much of the Pol;ish
>>> elite have noble origins and how (justly) proud
>>> they are of that.
>> Proud of what? Proud of the Polish nobility inflation?
> Proud of their ancestors' role in history (including having relatives
> who were murdered at Katyn), family traditions such as 500 year old
> recipes and winter sleigh rides in the forested estates, etc. etc.
Proud of sitting on their behinds in a sleigh horses are pulling? Are
you serious? Sounds more like Monty Pythonesque parody of snobbery of
the so called nobility.
--
Anton
J. Anderson
> On Dec 1, 11:26 am, "J. Anderson" <anderso...@inbox.lv> wrote:
>> "The Black Monk" <ch....@hotmail.com> wrote in messagenews:dfc9627c-0899-4247...@r5g2000yqb.googlegroups.com...
>>
>>> Why the anti-noble bigotry?
>> Why the 80%-of-the-population bigotry?
>
> I like how you cut out most of the post to remove the context. Here
> it is again:
I take it for granted that the reader is familiar with earlier posts in
a thread. If not, he can open and read them. I'm strongly in favour of
cropping and concentrating only on the parts I want to debate.
>>> You would be shocked how much of the Polish
>>> elite have noble origins and how (justly) proud
>>> they are of that.
>
>> Proud of what? Proud of the Polish nobility inflation?
>
> Proud of their ancestors' role in history (including having relatives
> who were murdered at Katyn), family traditions such as 500 year old
> recipes and winter sleigh rides in the forested estates, etc. etc.
>
>> Knowing what szlachta nobility mainly was based on, it's hard to understand
>> what there is to be proud of. If we had had the same criteria in
>> Sweden(-Finland), 15-20% of our population would have 'noble origins' too.
>
>
>> Besides, normal people may be proud of their own achievements. You have to
>> be quite a good-for-nothing loser to pride yourself upon something a distant
>> ancestor was rewarded for centuries ago.
>
> What a nasty comment, sorry. So are those Finns who are proud of
> their ancestors' achievements in the Winter War also "good-for-
> nothing
> losers" or does this only apply to the descendents of nobles?
>
> Why the anti-noble bigotry?
>
> ------
>
> Now for your comment:
>
>>> Why the anti-noble bigotry?
>> Why the 80%-of-the-population bigotry?
Naturally I meant to say: Why the anti-80%-of-the-population bigotry.
> 1. Is bigotry better if directed towards a small minority rather than
> towards a larger group? You have not denied being a bigot, instead
> you chose to contrast what I said with "80% of the population."
I don't participate in calling-each-other-bigot exchanges. Bigot is
obviously the most misused word in the newsgroup world.
> 2. Of course I am not a bigot. Not wanting 10 year olds to drive or
> vote does not make one a bigot against 10 year-olds. Not wanting the
> middle classes to determine world politics and world culture does not
> make one a bigot against the middle classes. Stating a fact that the
> middle classes do not produce culture but degrade it is no more
> bigotry than saying that if I attempted to, for example, build a car I
> would build an awful one or if I attempted to fix a car I would
> probably break it further.
Four times 'bigot/ry' in as many sentences.
> On the other hand, you have stated being
> proud of one's noble ancestors makes one a " good-for-nothing loser."
Where's the rest of my statement? I wrote: "Besides, normal people may
be proud of their own achievements. You have to be quite a
good-for-nothing loser to pride yourself upon something a distant
ancestor was rewarded for centuries ago."
Let me put it as simple as possible: "You're a good-for-nothing loser if
you have nothing else to be proud of than your ancestors." That goes for
Finns too in relation to their Winter War.
But back to the main topic. There is a grain of truth in what you are
saying: the cultural level in the western world is really miserable
nowadays. That has nothing to do with any genetic inferiority of the
'middle classes', however. Put the blame where it belongs, not on
democracy but on general commercialization. The traces actually lead to
the United States of America. Culturally we were doing just fine in
Europe until the 1950's. That's when America took over.
Dmitry
> you serious? Sounds more like Monty Pythonesque parody of snobbery of
> the so called nobility.
>
> --
> Anton
In this country some of them enterntain themselves by chasing up and
killing foxes.
Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr.
As much as I hate explaining jokes, I will do so now. Tom Lehrer's
joke is funny precisely because were not so bad in WWI, and what they
did later, in WWII, was much worse.
The same here: the worst tragedies in the mutual hatred between Ukes
and Poles happened several centuries after 1658.
Thus, it is just as ridiculous to say that Poles "learned their lesson
in 1658" as to say that Germans "learned their lesson in 1918".
First of all, I am talking about friendship, not absence of wars.
Second, I am not knowledgeable enough to pass judgment on Tibet.
Third, why do you find the inter-ethnic relations under Tito's rule to
be bad? They were amazingly good, and certainly infinitely better than
before Tito and after Tito.
And under Khruschev and Brezhnev, they were infinitely better than
they are now. Of course, Stalin's rule was an exception, as Stalin
was insane.
So, "mob rule" (as you call communist authoritarianism) is very good
for inter-ethnic relations.
But they liked average Russians; whereas in West Ukraine, average
Poles hated average Ukes.
> http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/world_agenda/article63651...
>
> Sometimes you can say too much with flowers. When Vladimir Putin made
> a visit to lay roses on the grave of Anton Denikin, a Tsarist army
> officer who fought the Bolsheviks in Russia's civil war after the 1917
> revolution, he chose to talk about Ukraine.
>
> General Denikin, he told reporters at Moscow's Donskoi Cemetery, had
> written in his diaries about "Big Russia and Little Russia — Ukraine".
> Mr Putin went on: "He says that nobody should be permitted to
> interfere in relations between us, they have always been the business
> of Russia itself."
>
First of all, notice that these are the words of Denikin, not Putin.
Putin's own words were: "it is a crime when somebody tries to pull
Russia and Ukraine apart".
http://kp.ua/daily/230509/180937/
Do you consider this to be hate speech against average Ukrainians?
Isn't the worst that Putin can be accused of is the desire to see
Russia and Ukraine re-unified?
>
> http://www.pcmoldovann.com/archives/2008/04/09/254/
>
> Russian president Vladimir Putin, during a private meeting with US
> President George W. Bush at the NATO Summit, is reported as saying
> “Don’t you understand, George - Ukraine is not even a nation! What is
> Ukraine? Part of her territory is Eastern Europe, and part, a
> considerable part, was given by us!”
>
Who is this idiotic MoldovAnn, and why are you quoting her fantasies
as facts?
>
> This was reported first in this Kommersant article (RUS),
>
Really? Here is this Kommersant article. Show me what it actually
says.
http://www.kommersant.ru/doc.aspx?DocsID=877224&NodesID=5
>
> which is
> referenced in this Ukrayinska Pravda article (UKR). This UNIAN article
> (ENG), interestingly, doesn’t quote Putin’s purported inflammatory
> statement, although it does include his outright threat: “Russia may
> consider forcefully incorporating the eastern part of Ukraine and the
> Crimea into its territory.”
>
As I said, Kommersant never said anything of this sort. These are all
russophobic lies about what Kommersant said, which is:
http://www.kommersant.ru/doc.aspx?DocsID=877224&NodesID=5
Vladimir Putin, according to information obtained by Kommersant,
during a closed meeting of NATO-Russia Council, hinted that in the
case of Ukraine joining the NATO Alliance, it may cease to exist as a
unified state.
The danger that if Ukraine joins NATO, eastern and southern Ukraine
may secede is real, and not only Putin but many others fear it. For
example, here is what the most Yuschenko-like viable presidential
candidate Arseniy Yatsenyuk says:
http://www.evangelie.ru/forum/t60346.html
"If we follow the lead of those who raise issues of language, NATO,
EU, Russia, Black Sea Fleet, the OUN-UPA, the Second World War - we
are going to live like this: Western Ukraine will be separate, and
Eastern Ukraine and Central Ukraine - separate. It will be three
different states "- said Yatsenyuk.
Arseniy Petrovych Yatsenyuk (Ukrainian: Арсеній Петрович Яценюк) (born
May 22, 1974 in Chernivtsi) is a Ukrainian politician, economist and
lawyer. He is a former Chairman of the Verkhovna Rada (parliament) and
a former Foreign Minister of Ukraine.
Chairman of the Verkhovna Rada - December 4, 2007 – November 12, 2008
Minister of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine - March 21, 2007 – December 4,
2007
Minister of Economy of Ukraine - September 27, 2005 – August 4, 2006
On December 16, 2008, Yatsenyuk announced plans to create a political
party on basis of the Front of Changes public initiative.[21] In an
interview with Den of February 4, 2009 he claimed to have no allies
among the current politicians.[22] He has often been referred to as a
political clone lacking differentiating policies of Ukraine's
President, Viktor Yushchenko.
> > Many Polish politicians have issued an even stronger criticism of the
> > Belorusan government. Are you saying that Poles hate Belorusan people?
>
> How many have described Belorus as "Litle Poland"
>
I don't know. Has there ever been such a term "lilttle poland" in
reference to Belarus? Certainly, Denikin's use of "Little
Rus" ("Malorossia") was standard in Czarist Russia. Ukrainians
themselves, including Taras Shevcehnko and Gogol , used it all the
time:
http://funeral-spb.narod.ru/necropols/smolenskoep/tombs/shevchenko/shevchenko.html
>
> and that only Poland
> has a right to deal with it?
>
In false rumours about "private conversations"? Probably the time. In
a private meeting with Bush, Kacinski told him: 'We plan to annex
Belarus and to kill all Belarusan chess players and cyclists".
That's the beauty of false rumours. Everything can happen.
That's correct: the mistreatment of Crimeans in Ukraine is of grave
concern not only to Crimeans themselves but to all Russian-speakers.
But Luzhkov goes further than others.
So what? US Senator Ted Kennedy was a staunch supporter of Irish
independence from UK:
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/edwest/100007596/ira-sympathiser-ted-kennedy-was-no-friend-of-britain/.
IRA sympathiser Ted Kennedy was no friend of Britain
But does that prove that US politicians hate average Englishmen and
that USA and UK should not be closest allies?
>
> > > No Polish politicians do so.
>
> > How come so many Polish politicians say bad things about Belarus?
>
> So how many major Polish politicans state that Poland ought to annex
> Belarussian territory?
>
> > > There is no call in the Polish press for
> > > any significant anti-Ukrainian stuff. Etc.
>
> > How come so so much of the Polish press has "anti-Belarusan stuff"?
>
> > I repeat: Whatever anti-Ukrainian statements made by Russian
> > politicians and press, are against the actions of the current
> > Ukrainian government, not against the Ukrainian people.
>
> So openly declaring that pieces of territory be annexed, or referring
> to the country by its insulting colonial-era nickname,
>
Putin did no such thing. He provided a direct quote from Denikin.
That's how Ukraine was often called in the past: Malorossia.
>
> is "against the
> actions of the current Ukrainian government, not against the Ukrainian
> people?" Really? So if Ukrainians die if, as Putn threatned, Russia
> forcefully annexes Crimea and part of eastern Ukraine, it's nothing
> personal and no big deal, right?
>
Really? Putin threatened that Russia may "forcefully annex Crimea and
part of eastern Ukraine"? Please remind me when he said so.
>
> > > > Did the Russians, who enforced the re-unification of Ukraine and
> > > > Russia in the 17th and early 18th centuries, express the wish to abuse
> > > > Ukrainians?
>
> > > They did so.
>
> > Please provide the quotes from their expressed wishes.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valuyev%27s_circular
>
> The Circular has put the reason for the growing number of textbooks in
> Ukrainian, and beginner-level books in Ukrainian with "the Poles'
> political interests" and the "separatist intentions of some of the
> Little Russians". The Circular also stated that "no separate Little
> Russian language ever existed, doesn't exist, and couldn't exist", and
> that the Little Russian is nothing more than the "General Russian"
> spoiled by Polish influence.
>
> The Circular ordered the Censorship Committees to ban the publication
> of religious texts, educational texts, and beginner-level books in
> Ukrainian, but permitted publication of literature in that language.
>
> The situation with Ukrainian language was later resolved in such a way
> that the usage of the language in open print was completely prohibited
> with the Ems Ukaz in 1876.
>
> Denying the existence of a people's language and banning its use by
> those enforcing the "reunification" of Ukraine and Russia is abusive,
> no?
>
I meant physical abuse. Is your point that the mutual physical abuse
and genocides between Ukrainians and Poles are comparable in their
tragedy to some circular "denying the existence of a people's
language"?
Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr.
> On Nov 26, 5:41 pm, "J. Anderson" <anderso...@inbox.lv> wrote:
>
> > "The Black Monk" <ch....@hotmail.com> wrote in messagenews:1bb0508e-6b07-43fa...@j19g2000yqk.googlegroups.com...
>
> > > You would be shocked how much of the Pol;ish
> > > elite have noble origins and how (justly) proud
> > > they are of that.
>
> > Proud of what? Proud of the Polish nobility inflation?
>
> Proud of their ancestors' role in history (including having relatives
> who were murdered at Katyn), family traditions such as 500 year old
> recipes and winter sleigh rides in the forested estates, etc. etc.
>
>
>
> > Knowing what szlachta nobility mainly was based on, it's hard to understand
> > what there is to be proud of. If we had had the same criteria in
> > Sweden(-Finland), 15-20% of our population would have 'noble origins' too.
>
> > Besides, normal people may be proud of their own achievements. You have to
> > be quite a good-for-nothing loser to pride yourself upon something a distant
> > ancestor was rewarded for centuries ago.
>
> What a nasty comment, sorry.
>
Not nearly as nasty as what you wrote about me in the Solzehenitsyn
thread.
>
> So are those Finns who are proud of
> their ancestors' achievements in the Winter War also "good-for-nothing
> losers" or does this only apply to the descendents of nobles?
>
I don't quite see the analogy between leisurely "winter sleigh rides
in the forested estates", taken by the idle classes, and the heroic
death of soldiers defending their country from a homicidal foreign
despot.
Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr.
> The Black Monk kirjoitti:
>
> > On Nov 26, 5:41 pm, "J. Anderson" <anderso...@inbox.lv> wrote:
> >> "The Black Monk" <ch....@hotmail.com> wrote in messagenews:1bb0508e-6b07-43fa...@j19g2000yqk.googlegroups.com...
> >>> You would be shocked how much of the Pol;ish
> >>> elite have noble origins and how (justly) proud
> >>> they are of that.
> >> Proud of what? Proud of the Polish nobility inflation?
> > Proud of their ancestors' role in history (including having relatives
> > who were murdered at Katyn), family traditions such as 500 year old
> > recipes and winter sleigh rides in the forested estates, etc. etc.
>
> Proud of sitting on their behinds in a sleigh horses are pulling? Are
> you serious?
>
Well, while this activity may seem simple to the peasants and the
middle class, to most aristocrats, riding on their behinds in a sleigh
was by far the most demanding and difficult activity in their idle
lives.
And passing food recipes to their hard-working middle-class cooks and
asking them to cook - that was truly heroic and selfless!
The Black Monk
<ostap_bender_1...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Dec 1, 6:43 am, The Black Monk <ch....@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Nov 26, 5:41 pm, "J. Anderson" <anderso...@inbox.lv> wrote:
>
> > > "The Black Monk" <ch....@hotmail.com> wrote in messagenews:1bb0508e-6b07-43fa...@j19g2000yqk.googlegroups.com...
>
> > > > You would be shocked how much of the Pol;ish
> > > > elite have noble origins and how (justly) proud
> > > > they are of that.
>
> > > Proud of what? Proud of the Polish nobility inflation?
>
> > Proud of their ancestors' role in history (including having relatives
> > who were murdered at Katyn), family traditions such as 500 year old
> > recipes and winter sleigh rides in the forested estates, etc. etc.
>
> > > Knowing what szlachta nobility mainly was based on, it's hard to understand
> > > what there is to be proud of. If we had had the same criteria in
> > > Sweden(-Finland), 15-20% of our population would have 'noble origins' too.
>
> > > Besides, normal people may be proud of their own achievements. You have to
> > > be quite a good-for-nothing loser to pride yourself upon something a distant
> > > ancestor was rewarded for centuries ago.
>
> > What a nasty comment, sorry.
>
> Not nearly as nasty as what you wrote about me in the Solzehenitsyn
> thread.
Which wasn't as nasty as what you wrote (implied) about Solzhenitsyn,
which provoked me.
> > So are those Finns who are proud of
> > their ancestors' achievements in the Winter War also "good-for-nothing
> > losers" or does this only apply to the descendents of nobles?
>
> I don't quite see the analogy between leisurely "winter sleigh rides
> in the forested estates", taken by the idle classes, and the heroic
> death of soldiers defending their country from a homicidal foreign
> despot.
I included Katyn in my comment, also.
BM
The Black Monk
<ostap_bender_1...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Dec 1, 7:25 am, The Black Monk <ch....@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Nov 26, 9:38 pm, "Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr."
...cut...
>
> > > > > Aren’t you saying that under the Russian rule, different Slavic
> > > > > ethnicities got along with each other infinitely better than under
> > > > > Poles and Austrians? So, why re-unite with Poland and not with Russia?
> > > > > Would you rather live in hatred like they did in Lviv or in peace like
> > > > > they did in Kiev?
>
> > > > No, you are saying that based on yor false statement that Poles and
> > > > Ukrainians had good relations with Russsia during the Russian
> > > > occupation.
>
> > > My point is that under the Russian rule over Eastern and Central, all
> > > Slavic civilians - Ukes, Russians, Poles - lived in peace, harmony
> > > and deep friendship with their neighbours.
>
> > Sure, just as there was peace under Stalin, there was no war in the
> > Balkans under Tito, and there is less unrest in Tibet after the
> > central authorities have asserted themselves.
>
> First of all, I am talking about friendship, not absence of wars.
> Second, I am not knowledgeable enough to pass judgment on Tibet.
> Third, why do you find the inter-ethnic relations under Tito's rule to
> be bad? They were amazingly good, and certainly infinitely better than
> before Tito and after Tito.
They are artificial. People didn't get along because they liked each
other but because they were forced too. Once Tito was gone reality
asserted itself.
NATO is repeating the idiocy in the artificial state of Bosnia.
> And under Khruschev and Brezhnev, they were infinitely better than
> they are now. Of course, Stalin's rule was an exception, as Stalin
> was insane.
>
> So, "mob rule" (as you call communist authoritarianism) is very good
> for inter-ethnic relations.
Only if you consider the fact that various ethnic groups suspend
thjeir tendencies out of fear, to be "good ethnic relationships."
In that case you should be grateful to NATO for reestablishing "good
ethnic relationships" in the Balkans.
No comment?
>
> > > As a Uke, would you have rather lived in 19th century Kiev, where your
> > > Polish and Russian neighbours loved you, or in Lviv where your Polish
> > > neighbours hated you?
>
> > > Why would Slavic civilians live in friendship under the Russian Czar
> > > rule in Kiev, but live in hate and fear of each other under Catholic
> > > Austrian and Polish rule in Lviv?
>
> > Well, in Russia they both hated Russia and not each other.
>
> But they liked average Russians;
Really?
> whereas in West Ukraine, average Poles hated average Ukes.
They were both competing for the same territory. In Russian-ruled
Ukraine they were not. Interethnic hatred did not dissipate under the
tsar's rule in 1914-1915 for after 1939.
If he quoted them he meant them. He did not just choose Denikin's
words randomly. Denikin, btw, was hanging Ukrainian patriots as
traitors to Russia.
> Putin's own words were: "it is a crime when somebody tries to pull
> Russia and Ukraine apart".
>
> http://kp.ua/daily/230509/180937/
>
> Do you consider this to be hate speech against average Ukrainians?
It is hatred for the idea of an independent Ukraine. I agree it is
not *racial* hatred.
> Isn't the worst that Putin can be accused of is the desire to see
> Russia and Ukraine re-unified?
In other words, Putin can be accused of not wanting to annex Ukraine.
>
> >http://www.pcmoldovann.com/archives/2008/04/09/254/
>
> > Russian president Vladimir Putin, during a private meeting with US
> > President George W. Bush at the NATO Summit, is reported as saying
> > “Don’t you understand, George - Ukraine is not even a nation! What is
> > Ukraine? Part of her territory is Eastern Europe, and part, a
> > considerable part, was given by us!”
>
> Who is this idiotic MoldovAnn, and why are you quoting her fantasies
> as facts?
Random google hit.
> > This was reported first in this Kommersant article (RUS),
>
> Really? Here is this Kommersant article. Show me what it actually
> says.
>
> http://www.kommersant.ru/doc.aspx?DocsID=877224&NodesID=5
>
>
>
> > which is
> > referenced in this Ukrayinska Pravda article (UKR). This UNIAN article
> > (ENG), interestingly, doesn’t quote Putin’s purported inflammatory
> > statement, although it does include his outright threat: “Russia may
> > consider forcefully incorporating the eastern part of Ukraine and the
> > Crimea into its territory.”
>
> As I said, Kommersant never said anything of this sort. These are all
> russophobic lies about what Kommersant said, which is:
>
> http://www.kommersant.ru/doc.aspx?DocsID=877224&NodesID=5
> Vladimir Putin, according to information obtained by Kommersant,
> during a closed meeting of NATO-Russia Council, hinted that in the
> case of Ukraine joining the NATO Alliance, it may cease to exist as a
> unified state.
Wrong. Here is the kommersant article:
http://www.kommersant.ru/doc.aspx?DocsID=877224&NodesID=5
"Впрочем, о Грузии российский президент говорил совершенно спокойно и
как бы мимоходом,— рассказывает источник "Ъ" в делегации одной из
стран НАТО.— Когда же речь зашла об Украине, Путин вспылил. Обращаясь
к Бушу, он сказал: "Ты же понимаешь, Джордж, что Украина — это даже не
государство! Что такое Украина? Часть ее территорий — это Восточная
Европа, а часть, и значительная, подарена нами!" И тут он очень
прозрачно намекнул, что если Украину все же примут в НАТО, это
государство просто прекратит существование. То есть фактически он
пригрозил, что Россия может начать отторжение Крыма и Восточной
Украины".
> The danger that if Ukraine joins NATO, eastern and southern Ukraine
> may secede is real, and not only Putin but many others fear it. For
> example, here is what the most Yuschenko-like viable presidential
> candidate Arseniy Yatsenyuk says:
>
> http://www.evangelie.ru/forum/t60346.html
> "If we follow the lead of those who raise issues of language, NATO,
> EU, Russia, Black Sea Fleet, the OUN-UPA, the Second World War - we
> are going to live like this: Western Ukraine will be separate, and
> Eastern Ukraine and Central Ukraine - separate. It will be three
> different states "- said Yatsenyuk.
>
> Arseniy Petrovych Yatsenyuk (Ukrainian: Арсеній Петрович Яценюк) (born
> May 22, 1974 in Chernivtsi) is a Ukrainian politician, economist and
> lawyer. He is a former Chairman of the Verkhovna Rada (parliament) and
> a former Foreign Minister of Ukraine.
>
> Chairman of the Verkhovna Rada - December 4, 2007 – November 12, 2008
> Minister of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine - March 21, 2007 – December 4,
> 2007
> Minister of Economy of Ukraine - September 27, 2005 – August 4, 2006
>
> On December 16, 2008, Yatsenyuk announced plans to create a political
> party on basis of the Front of Changes public initiative.[21] In an
> interview with Den of February 4, 2009 he claimed to have no allies
> among the current politicians.[22] He has often been referred to as a
> political clone lacking differentiating policies of Ukraine's
> President, Viktor Yushchenko.
The difference is that Yatsenuk didn't threaten to do so, he said it
might happen. With Putin it's quite different.
Here is the difference: Yatsenuk's statement is comparable to one
business partner says to the other, "if we don't pay the mafia
something bad might happen to our business, we might lose half of
it." what you claim to be Putin's statement, on the other hand, is
comparable to a mafia boss telling someone else, "if they don't pay
the mafia something bad might happen to their business, they might
lose half of it."
Understand the difference?
But Putin was more direct than what you claim he said, at least
according to Kommersant.
> > > Many Polish politicians have issued an even stronger criticism of the
> > > Belorusan government. Are you saying that Poles hate Belorusan people?
>
> > How many have described Belorus as "Litle Poland"
>
> I don't know. Has there ever been such a term "lilttle poland" in
> reference to Belarus? Certainly, Denikin's use of "Little
> Rus" ("Malorossia") was standard in Czarist Russia.
Yes, it was standard, a reflection of the ideology that denied the
existence of a seperate Ukrainian nation.
> Ukrainians themselves, including Taras Shevcehnko and Gogol , used it all the
> time:
>
> http://funeral-spb.narod.ru/necropols/smolenskoep/tombs/shevchenko/sh...
>
>
>
> > and that only Poland
> > has a right to deal with it?
>
> In false rumours about "private conversations"? Probably the time. In
> a private meeting with Bush, Kacinski told him: 'We plan to annex
> Belarus and to kill all Belarusan chess players and cyclists".
> That's the beauty of false rumours. Everything can happen.
So you accuse Kommersant of spreading lies?
What mistreatment?
> So what? US Senator Ted Kennedy was a staunch supporter of Irish
> independence from UK:
>
> http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/edwest/100007596/ira-sympathiser-te....
> IRA sympathiser Ted Kennedy was no friend of Britain
>
> But does that prove that US politicians hate average Englishmen and
> that USA and UK should not be closest allies?
Let's look at the big picture. Luzhkov, mayor of Russia's biggest and
most important city, repeatedly states that Russia ought to itself
annex part of Ukraine. Russia's president refers to Ukraine by its
insulting colinial name, quoting a notorious hanger of Ukraians, and
has threatened to split the country apart.
So imagine if New York's mayor publicly stated that Northern Ireland
ought to be annexed by the USA. And Obama stated to the head of
another state that Britain wasn't a real country and that Scotland and
Wales can be split off too. Etc.
How should this affect relations?
>
> > > > No Polish politicians do so.
>
> > > How come so many Polish politicians say bad things about Belarus?
>
> > So how many major Polish politicans state that Poland ought to annex
> > Belarussian territory?
>
> > > > There is no call in the Polish press for
> > > > any significant anti-Ukrainian stuff. Etc.
>
> > > How come so so much of the Polish press has "anti-Belarusan stuff"?
>
> > > I repeat: Whatever anti-Ukrainian statements made by Russian
> > > politicians and press, are against the actions of the current
> > > Ukrainian government, not against the Ukrainian people.
>
> > So openly declaring that pieces of territory be annexed, or referring
> > to the country by its insulting colonial-era nickname,
>
> Putin did no such thing. He provided a direct quote from Denikin.
> That's how Ukraine was often called in the past: Malorossia.
So if a Ukrainian politician chose to publicly quote Stepan Bandera
about Moskals or Zhyds this would be acceptable to you, because he
would merely be quoting someone else?
> > is "against the
> > actions of the current Ukrainian government, not against the Ukrainian
> > people?" Really? So if Ukrainians die if, as Putn threatned, Russia
> > forcefully annexes Crimea and part of eastern Ukraine, it's nothing
> > personal and no big deal, right?
>
> Really? Putin threatened that Russia may "forcefully annex Crimea and
> part of eastern Ukraine"? Please remind me when he said so.
"Впрочем, о Грузии российский президент говорил совершенно спокойно и
как бы мимоходом,— рассказывает источник "Ъ" в делегации одной из
стран НАТО.— Когда же речь зашла об Украине, Путин вспылил. Обращаясь
к Бушу, он сказал: "Ты же понимаешь, Джордж, что Украина — это даже не
государство! Что такое Украина? Часть ее территорий — это Восточная
Европа, а часть, и значительная, подарена нами!" И тут он очень
прозрачно намекнул, что если Украину все же примут в НАТО, это
государство просто прекратит существование. То есть фактически он
пригрозил, что Россия может начать отторжение Крыма и Восточной
Украины".
>
> > > > > Did the Russians, who enforced the re-unification of Ukraine and
> > > > > Russia in the 17th and early 18th centuries, express the wish to abuse
> > > > > Ukrainians?
>
> > > > They did so.
>
> > > Please provide the quotes from their expressed wishes.
>
> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valuyev%27s_circular
>
> > The Circular has put the reason for the growing number of textbooks in
> > Ukrainian, and beginner-level books in Ukrainian with "the Poles'
> > political interests" and the "separatist intentions of some of the
> > Little Russians". The Circular also stated that "no separate Little
> > Russian language ever existed, doesn't exist, and couldn't exist", and
> > that the Little Russian is nothing more than the "General Russian"
> > spoiled by Polish influence.
>
> > The Circular ordered the Censorship Committees to ban the publication
> > of religious texts, educational texts, and beginner-level books in
> > Ukrainian, but permitted publication of literature in that language.
>
> > The situation with Ukrainian language was later resolved in such a way
> > that the usage of the language in open print was completely prohibited
> > with the Ems Ukaz in 1876.
>
> > Denying the existence of a people's language and banning its use by
> > those enforcing the "reunification" of Ukraine and Russia is abusive,
> > no?
>
> I meant physical abuse.
Such as the massacre of the entire town of Baturyn?
http://www.encyclopediaofukraine.com/pages/B/A/Baturyn.htm
After Mazepa and his Cossack troops sided with the Swedish king
Charles XII on 29 October 1708, the Russian tsar Peter I ordered his
field marshal Aleksandr Menshikov to destroy the hetman capital. A
Russian force of 10,000 men tried to seize the town on 1 November. But
only after Colonel Ivan Nis of the Pryluky regiment disclosed the
location of a secret passageway into the fortress were the Russians
able to break into Baturyn on 2 November and to rout the Cossack
garrison of 6,000–7,000, killing an equal number of its residents with
no mercy given to women, children, or the elderly. Many corpses were
dumped into the Seim River to float downstream alongside rafts
carrying crucified or impaled Cossack officers. The Russian soldiers
looted the town and its outlying settlements and razed the buildings
there, including churches and the Krupytskyi Monastery. Thus this
punitive action against the rebellious Mazepa and his supporters was
used to terrify and pacify the insurgent population of the Hetman
state.
Historians have estimated the total number of victims of the
annihilation of Baturyn to be between 11,000 and 14,000. Archeological
research has corroborated and substantively supplemented the written
sources and oral accounts of this tragedy.
http://www.day.kiev.ua/265052/
The residents of the Hetman State were terrified and overwhelmed by
fear, not the kind of fear that mysteriously comes out of nowhere,
without any rational reason. This was the fear whose origins are easy
to understand now — there was a real danger to lives of every
disobedient Ukrainian; everybody felt upon themselves the tsar’s
heavy hand that brought death. The memories of the Menshikov-or
chestrated November 1708 massacre in Baturyn were still painfully
fresh. The famous Hetman’s capital was burned down and razed to the
ground; all women and little children were killed.
It is an interesting, albeit little-known, fact that at that time the
news of the crimes committed by tsar’s cutthroats very quickly reached
Europe. Periodicals in France, a very powerful country in the Old
World at that time, abounded in headlines such as “Women and Children
on Points of Sabers,” “Ukraine in Ruins,” “Dreadful Massacre,” etc.
The newspapers of King Louis XIV of France wrote about the events in
Baturyn: “The entire Ukraine is bathing in blood. Menshikov has
resorted to Muscovite barbarity. According to the inhuman habits of
Muscovites, all the residents of Baturyn were slaughtered regardless
of their age or sex.” This was the point of view of Gazette de Fran
ce’s correspondents, which was shared by periodicals Lettres
historique, Mercure historique, and La clef du cabinet. However, the
French government of old Louis XIV was busy with a difficult and
unsuccessful war with Spain for the legacy and was neither able nor
willing to interfere with battles that were crucial for the distant
and still mysterious country of Ukraine.
The stake, breaking on the wheel, quartering, rack, whip, and, as the
mildest punishment, gallows or ax — these were the arguments used by
the tsar and his henchmen to persuade secret followers of Mazepa.
Anyone could be pronounced one of them if he was suspected of
sympathizing with the cursed hetman or his cause. Peter I’s terrible
“secret chancellery,” aka “tsar’s room of suffering,” was located in
Lebedyn in Sloboda Ukraine. (We come across a great number of similar
chancelleries run by Russian tsars in the course of history.)
No one knew and probably no one will ever know how many people were
tortured to death there. The barbarous methods used by Genghis Khan
and Caligula pale in comparison to the bloody entertainment of Peter I
the Reformer. The business-like and pragmatic tsar, who did not like
wasting time, ordered his satrap Menshikov to use a four-framed wheel
that could tear a human body into four peaces after breaking it, as
well as stakes, red-hot iron, and needles, which were driven under
people’s nails. One of Peter I’s favorite torturers liked to say: “A
whip is not an angel; it does not take the soul away — rather, it
makes people tell the truth.” At least 900 people died in Lebedyn at
the hands of that “witty” croaker in January through March 1708...
-----------
BM
The Black Monk
Which it is not, anyways.
>
> > 1. Is bigotry better if directed towards a small minority rather than
> > towards a larger group? You have not denied being a bigot, instead
> > you chose to contrast what I said with "80% of the population."
>
> I don't participate in calling-each-other-bigot exchanges. Bigot is
> obviously the most misused word in the newsgroup world.
>
> > 2. Of course I am not a bigot. Not wanting 10 year olds to drive or
> > vote does not make one a bigot against 10 year-olds. Not wanting the
> > middle classes to determine world politics and world culture does not
> > make one a bigot against the middle classes. Stating a fact that the
> > middle classes do not produce culture but degrade it is no more
> > bigotry than saying that if I attempted to, for example, build a car I
> > would build an awful one or if I attempted to fix a car I would
> > probably break it further.
>
> Four times 'bigot/ry' in as many sentences.
Good counting. But anything subtantive to say about it?
> > On the other hand, you have stated being
> > proud of one's noble ancestors makes one a " good-for-nothing loser."
>
> Where's the rest of my statement? I wrote: "Besides, normal people may
> be proud of their own achievements. You have to be quite a
> good-for-nothing loser to pride yourself upon something a distant
> ancestor was rewarded for centuries ago."
>
> Let me put it as simple as possible: "You're a good-for-nothing loser if
> you have nothing else to be proud of than your ancestors." That goes for
> Finns too in relation to their Winter War.
Agreed, and I never claimed otherwise.
> But back to the main topic. There is a grain of truth in what you are
> saying: the cultural level in the western world is really miserable
> nowadays. That has nothing to do with any genetic inferiority of the
> 'middle classes', however.
Who claimed it was "genetic inferiority"?
> Put the blame where it belongs, not on democracy but on general commercialization.
Which goes hand-in-hand with the rise and culturasl/social dominance
of the middle classes.
> The traces actually lead to the United States of America.
The latest and most extreme example, but the same trends were being
condemned in the 19th century
> Culturally we were doing just fine in Europe until the 1950's.
And someone could say the same in the 1920's, and the 1880's....
A nice line from Bulgakov about a similar process:
'What do you mean by ruin? An old woman with a broomstick? A witch
who smashes all the windows and puts out all the lights? No such
thing. What do you mean by that word?' Philip Philipovich angrily
enquired of an unfortunate cardboard duck hanging upside down by
the sideboard, then answered the question himself. 'I'll tell you
what it is: if instead of operating every evening I were to start a
glee club in my apartment, that would mean that I was on the road to
ruin. If when I go to the lavatory I don't pee, if you'll
excuse the expression, into the bowl but on to the floor instead and
if Zina and Darya Petrovna were to do the same thing, the lavatory
would be ruined. Ruin, therefore, is not caused by lavatories but
it's something that starts in people's heads. So when these clowns
start shouting "Stop the ruin!" - I laugh!' (Philip Philipovich's
face became so distorted that the doctor's mouth fell open.) 'I
swear to you, I find it laughable! Every one of them needs to hit
himself on the back of the head and then when he has knocked all
the hallucinations out of himself and gets on with sweeping
out backyards - which is his real job - all this "ruin" will
automatically disappear. You can't serve two gods! You can't sweep
the dirt out of the tram tracks and settle the fate of the Spanish
beggars at the same time! ----------
'I quite agree with you. This, doctor, is what happens when
a researcher, instead of keeping in step with nature, tries to force
the pace and lift the veil. Result - Sharikov. We have made our bed
and now we must lie on it.'
'Supposing the brain had been Spinoza's, Philip Philipovich?'
'Yes!' bellowed Philip Philipovich. 'Yes! Provided the wretched
dog didn't die under the knife - and you saw how tricky the
operation was. In short - I, Philip Preobrazhensky would perform the
most difficult feat of my whole career by transplanting Spinoza's,
or anyone else's pituitary and turning a dog into a highly
intelligent being. But what in heaven's name for? That's the point.
Will you kindly tell me why one has to manufacture artificial
Spinozas when some peasant woman may produce a real one any day of
the week? After all, the great Lomonosov was the son of a peasant
woman from Kholmogory. Mankind, doctor, takes care of that. Every
year evolution ruthlessly casts aside the mass of dross and creates
a few dozen men of genius who become an ornament to the whole world.
Now I hope you understand why I condemned the deductions you made
from Sharikov's case history. My discovery, which you are so
concerned about, is worth about as much as a bent penny...
-----------
regards,
BM
>That's when America took over.- Hide quoted text -
Anton
>> Proud of sitting on their behinds in a sleigh horses are pulling? Are
>> you serious? Sounds more like Monty Pythonesque parody of snobbery of
>> the so called nobility.
> In this country some of them enterntain themselves by chasing up and
> killing foxes.
I thought they had fox hunting already banned by now?
--
Anton
Dmitry
Labor government did, but it is still going on. I've seen the
gatherings with my own eyes. I visit New Forest (South of England)
every year. Lots of 4WD cars parked on forest roads/tracks, lots of
people on horses dressed up in traditional costumes looking like this
http://www.missionvalleyhunt.com/images/2009-3-18_fran_hunt_007.jpg
and lots of dogs.
From wiki:
After the ban on fox hunting, hunts say that they follow artificially
laid trails, although the League Against Cruel Sports has alleged
widespread law breaking.[29] Supporters of fox hunting claim that the
number of foxes killed by dogs has increased since the ban, that hunts
have reported an increase in membership [30] and that around 320,000
people (their highest recorded number) turned up to fox hunts on
Boxing Day 2006.[31] The Master of Foxhounds association lists 184
active hunts as of November 2008.
They still do it.
To me, killing the animals as a sport or recreational activity suggest
that these people have very primitive minds. Due to their activities
many foxes have moved to cities, which is not part of their natural
environment. I would understand if BM's "nobs" were hungry and had to
do it to save their lives...people hunted rats,cats and dogs during
German blocade of Leningrad (they also practiced cannibalism), but
these guys have no excuse. They are just blood thirsty people similar
to those Romans who fed Christians to animals as part of their
enterntaiment.
The Black Monk
> On 2 Dec, 11:53, Anton <anton.use...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Dmitry kirjoitti:
>
> > >> Proud of sitting on their behinds in a sleigh horses are pulling? Are
> > >> you serious? Sounds more like Monty Pythonesque parody of snobbery of
> > >> the so called nobility.
> > > In this country some of them enterntain themselves by chasing up and
> > > killing foxes.
>
> > I thought they had fox hunting already banned by now?
>
> > --
> > Anton
>
> Labor government did, but it is still going on. I've seen the
> gatherings with my own eyes. I visit New Forest (South of England)
> every year. Lots of 4WD cars parked on forest roads/tracks, lots of
> and lots of dogs.
>
> From wiki:
> After the ban on fox hunting, hunts say that they follow artificially
> laid trails, although the League Against Cruel Sports has alleged
> widespread law breaking.[29] Supporters of fox hunting claim that the
> number of foxes killed by dogs has increased since the ban, that hunts
> have reported an increase in membership [30] and that around 320,000
> people (their highest recorded number) turned up to fox hunts on
> Boxing Day 2006.[31] The Master of Foxhounds association lists 184
> active hunts as of November 2008.
>
> They still do it.
>
> To me, killing the animals as a sport or recreational activity suggest
> that these people have very primitive minds. Due to their activities
> many foxes have moved to cities, which is not part of their natural
> environment. I would understand if BM's "nobs" were hungry and had to
> do it to save their lives...people hunted rats,cats and dogs during
> German blocade of Leningrad (they also practiced cannibalism), but
> these guys have no excuse. They are just blood thirsty people similar
> to those Romans who fed Christians to animals as part of their
> enterntaiment.
So you don't like hunting in general or fox hunting in particular?
This fox hunting reminds me of the recent Pelevin book about the fox
who unts English aristocrats....
regards,
BM
Dmitry
> On Nov 17, 3:46 pm, Dmitry <dmitrijsfedot...@inbox.lv> wrote:
>
>
>
> > > The Poles and Lithuanians are trying to create something not seen
> > > since 1795 - a fighting unit that also includes Ukrainians.
>
> > Lithuanian Kingdom's fighting force.
>
> > > Under the plan, the three countries would form a brigade that would
> > > take part in United Nations and European Union-sponsored peacekeeping
> > > missions.
>
>
> > > It would also serve under the auspices of NATO.
>
> > > "This reflects our support for Ukraine," Polish deputy defense
> > > minister Stanislaw Komorowski said after signing a letter of intent to
> > > form the unit. "We want to tie Ukraine closer to Western structures,
> > > including military ones."
>
> > Poland from and why he is in such desperate need of Ukrainians
> > conscripts. Is Slovakia planning to invade Poland or what is this
> > that is theatening Poland? In recent years many Polish nationals
> > found their economic refuge in UK and Ireland. The focuss should be
> > on economy, not defence from immagionary enemy. Besides, it is hard
> > to predict that Supreme Commander-in-chief of Ukrainian army will
> > remain in his post for the rest of his life.
>
> > > Poland and Lithuania are in NATO and have been pushing to bring
> > > Ukraine into the fold. NATO's pledge to some day admit the former
> > > Soviet republic outraged the Russians.
>
> > Polish and Lithuanian governments think that this can improve the life
> > quality of their citizens they are making a mistake.
>
> > > A NATO spokesman said Moscow has no reason to be miffed by the Polish/
> > > Lithuanian overture to Ukraine.
>
> > > "There is absolutely no reason why cooperation between individual
> > > allies and Ukraine should not be stepped up," said the spokesman,
> > > James Appathurai.
>
> > > There are, however, historic reasons why this could rankle the
> > > Russians.
>
> > > Poland was a great European power when it forged a union with
> > > Lithuania and incorporated much of what is now Ukraine.
>
>
> > > BM
>
> I think Ukraine is torn between two 'poles' - Russia and the EU/NATO.
It is torn because because its borders were artificially drawn by
Iosif Stalin.
> Poland and Lithuania want to help it to move closer to NATO. Russians
> of course view this as a 'zero sum game' and consider that if Ukraine
> moves closer to the NATO then it is bad for Russia. I am not sure that
> this is a zero sum game though.
Kremlin is very territorial and they will challenge any Polish
attempts. I doubt that Poland will win this battle.
>
> On the other hand, IMHO Poland/Lithuania are too much influenced by
> their history. As Shimon Peres once said to a Lithuanian newspaper
> "history is above us". Same here - what ideas people have grown with,
> they tend to stick with them and they tend to have little control over
> those ideas. Poland - because of its proximity and language similarity
> wants to have Ukraine on its side. Is this a realistic goal though?
>
> Best regards,
> EZ
>
> http://tautietis.blogspot.com
The Black Monk
No, because the pre-Stalin added territories around Kiev and the post-
Stalin added territories around Lviv are both drawn towards the EU and
away from Moscow. Here is a map from the last elections:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ukrainian_parliamentary_election_2007_(HighestVote).PNG
As you can see there is no clear divide seperating the post-1939
territories from recent ones.
Actually the current electoral patterns in Ukraine most closely
resemble the old Polish-Russian border of 1648, prior to
Khmelnytsky's uprising:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Polish-Lithuanian_Commonwealth_in_1648.PNG
Specifically the part of the Commonwealth that was part of Poland,
which as seen here corresponds almost exactly to the divide between
Orange and Blue Ukraine:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Rzeczpospolita265.png
The reason Ukraine is torn between two poles is because over the
centuries a lot of Russian settlers came to the industrializing cities
in eastern Ukraine and southern and gave those areas a Russian
cultural character. Of course the ethnic Russian and Russian speaking
people from, say Donetsk, would prefer Russia over the EU.
> > Poland and Lithuania want to help it to move closer to NATO. Russians
> > of course view this as a 'zero sum game' and consider that if Ukraine
> > moves closer to the NATO then it is bad for Russia. I am not sure that
> > this is a zero sum game though.
>
> Kremlin is very territorial and they will challenge any Polish
> attempts. I doubt that Poland will win this battle.
Who knows? The western parts have the edge in terms of population and
territory, the eastern in terms of economy (although I suspect the
economic crash has affected steel-dependant eastern Ukraine much more
than agricultural western Ukraine).
regards,
BM
>
>
>
>
> > On the other hand, IMHO Poland/Lithuania are too much influenced by
> > their history. As Shimon Peres once said to a Lithuanian newspaper
> > "history is above us". Same here - what ideas people have grown with,
> > they tend to stick with them and they tend to have little control over
> > those ideas. Poland - because of its proximity and language similarity
> > wants to have Ukraine on its side. Is this a realistic goal though?
>
> > Best regards,
> > EZ
>
> >http://tautietis.blogspot.com- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
Dmitry
>
> > It is torn because because its borders were artificially drawn by
> > Iosif Stalin.
>
> No, because the pre-Stalin added territories around Kiev and the post-
> Stalin added territories around Lviv are both drawn towards the EU and
> away from Moscow. Here is a map from the last elections:
>
>
> As you can see there is no clear divide seperating the post-1939
> territories from recent ones.
Whichever way you prefer to look at this map, the current territory of
Ukraine is not organic.
>
> Actually the current electoral patterns in Ukraine most closely
> resemble the old Polish-Russian border of 1648, prior to
> Khmelnytsky's uprising:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Polish-Lithuanian_Commonwealth_in_1...
>
> Specifically the part of the Commonwealth that was part of Poland,
> which as seen here corresponds almost exactly to the divide between
> Orange and Blue Ukraine:
Well, if they are devided, shouldn't they split in order to satisfy
all parts?
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Rzeczpospolita265.png
>
> The reason Ukraine is torn between two poles is because over the
> centuries a lot of Russian settlers came to the industrializing cities
> in eastern Ukraine and southern and gave those areas a Russian
> cultural character. Of course the ethnic Russian and Russian speaking
> people from, say Donetsk, would prefer Russia over the EU.
I don't know anything about Ukrainian State prior 1922 when it emerged
as a Soviet republic. Let me know if you do.
> > Kremlin is very territorial and they will challenge any Polish
> > attempts. I doubt that Poland will win this battle.
>
> Who knows? The western parts have the edge in terms of population and
> territory, the eastern in terms of economy (although I suspect the
> economic crash has affected steel-dependant eastern Ukraine much more
> than agricultural western Ukraine).
Nobody knows what will happen, but I doubt that Poland is capable of
swallowing the Ukraine "pill".
The Black Monk
> > > > I think Ukraine is torn between two 'poles' - Russia and the EU/NATO.
>
> > > It is torn because because its borders were artificially drawn by
> > > Iosif Stalin.
>
> > No, because the pre-Stalin added territories around Kiev and the post-
> > Stalin added territories around Lviv are both drawn towards the EU and
> > away from Moscow. Here is a map from the last elections:
>
> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ukrainian_parliamentary_election_20...
>
> > As you can see there is no clear divide seperating the post-1939
> > territories from recent ones.
>
> Whichever way you prefer to look at this map, the current territory of
> Ukraine is not organic.
Neither is that of many countries.
>
> > Actually the current electoral patterns in Ukraine most closely
> > resemble the old Polish-Russian border of 1648, prior to
> > Khmelnytsky's uprising:
>
> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Polish-Lithuanian_Commonwealth_in_1...
>
> > Specifically the part of the Commonwealth that was part of Poland,
> > which as seen here corresponds almost exactly to the divide between
> > Orange and Blue Ukraine:
>
> Well, if they are devided, shouldn't they split in order to satisfy
> all parts?
There are resons on both sides to keep them together. Western Ukraine
considers the East - even if inhabited by Russians - to be "Ukrainian"
territory. The East is also the center for Ukrainian industry.
Eastern Ukraine (or its economic rulers), on the other hand, would
rather deal with Kiev which is relatively weaker, than Moscow.
Eastern Ukrainian oligarchs are much more of a big fish in a small
pond within Ukraine than they would be in Russia.
>
>
> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Rzeczpospolita265.png
>
> > The reason Ukraine is torn between two poles is because over the
> > centuries a lot of Russian settlers came to the industrializing cities
> > in eastern Ukraine and southern and gave those areas a Russian
> > cultural character. Of course the ethnic Russian and Russian speaking
> > people from, say Donetsk, would prefer Russia over the EU.
>
> I don't know anything about Ukrainian State prior 1922 when it emerged
> as a Soviet republic. Let me know if you do.
I do.
The Russians came to Easyern Ukraine in large numbers with
industrialization, in the 19th century.
> > > Kremlin is very territorial and they will challenge any Polish
> > > attempts. I doubt that Poland will win this battle.
>
> > Who knows? The western parts have the edge in terms of population and
> > territory, the eastern in terms of economy (although I suspect the
> > economic crash has affected steel-dependant eastern Ukraine much more
> > than agricultural western Ukraine).
>
> Nobody knows what will happen, but I doubt that Poland is capable of
> swallowing the Ukraine "pill".
Nobody is talking about "swallowing," any more than France or West
Germany starting swallowing one or the other starting in the 1950's.
regards,
BM
Anton
> On 2 Dec, 11:53, Anton <anton.use...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I thought they had fox hunting already banned by now?
> They still do it.
No big surprise really. Traditions die hard - also the ugly ones. The
only way to stop it is to seriously enforce the ban. Maybe fines won't
do it, but if fines don't help, then confiscate the equipment, the dogs
and the horses and if that doesn't help, hand suspended jail sentences.
It all of course depends on the attitudes of the authorities also, and
if people are willing to tell about illegal hunting.
> To me, killing the animals as a sport or recreational activity suggest
> that these people have very primitive minds. Due to their activities
> many foxes have moved to cities, which is not part of their natural
> environment. I would understand if BM's "nobs" were hungry and had to
> do it to save their lives...people hunted rats,cats and dogs during
> German blocade of Leningrad (they also practiced cannibalism), but
> these guys have no excuse. They are just blood thirsty people similar
> to those Romans who fed Christians to animals as part of their
> enterntaiment.
I'm with you here. Killing just for "fun" is indeed primitive. I know
people who are in to that also - unfortunately.
--
Anton
J. Anderson
Obviously, when countries 'grow up', the wish to swallow other countries
goes away.
The Black Monk
> "The Black Monk" <ch....@hotmail.com> wrote in messagenews:89b22f38-d6d1-438c...@r5g2000yqb.googlegroups.com...
> On Dec 2, 8:33 pm, Dmitry <dmitrijsfedot...@inbox.lv> wrote:
>
> >> Nobody knows what will happen, but I doubt
> >> that Poland is capable of swallowing the Ukraine "pill".
> > Nobody is talking about "swallowing," any more
> > than France or West Germany starting swallowing
> > one or the other starting in the 1950's.
>
> Obviously, when countries 'grow up', the wish to swallow other countries
> goes away.
Very true.
regards,
BM
Dmitry
Of course. But what I meant by "split" doesn't neccessarily refer to
joining RF -))
> > >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Rzeczpospolita265.png
>
> > > The reason Ukraine is torn between two poles is because over the
> > > centuries a lot of Russian settlers came to the industrializing cities
> > > in eastern Ukraine and southern and gave those areas a Russian
> > > cultural character. Of course the ethnic Russian and Russian speaking
> > > people from, say Donetsk, would prefer Russia over the EU.
>
> > I don't know anything about Ukrainian State prior 1922 when it emerged
> > as a Soviet republic. Let me know if you do.
>
> I do.
>
> The Russians came to Easyern Ukraine in large numbers with
> industrialization, in the 19th century.
Did Ukrainian government encourage them to come or did cross the
border illegally?
> > > > Kremlin is very territorial and they will challenge any Polish
> > > > attempts. I doubt that Poland will win this battle.
>
> > > Who knows? The western parts have the edge in terms of population and
> > > territory, the eastern in terms of economy (although I suspect the
> > > economic crash has affected steel-dependant eastern Ukraine much more
> > > than agricultural western Ukraine).
>
> > Nobody knows what will happen, but I doubt that Poland is capable of
> > swallowing the Ukraine "pill".
>
> Nobody is talking about "swallowing," any more than France or West
> Germany starting swallowing one or the other starting in the 1950's.
What I meant that in this scenario Poland will have to deal with
Ukraine's problems.
The Black Monk
I'm not sure how or if Donetsk and Luhanks oblasts could survive as an
independent country.
> > > >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Rzeczpospolita265.png
>
> > > > The reason Ukraine is torn between two poles is because over the
> > > > centuries a lot of Russian settlers came to the industrializing cities
> > > > in eastern Ukraine and southern and gave those areas a Russian
> > > > cultural character. Of course the ethnic Russian and Russian speaking
> > > > people from, say Donetsk, would prefer Russia over the EU.
>
> > > I don't know anything about Ukrainian State prior 1922 when it emerged
> > > as a Soviet republic. Let me know if you do.
>
> > I do.
>
> > The Russians came to Easyern Ukraine in large numbers with
> > industrialization, in the 19th century.
>
> Did Ukrainian government encourage them to come or did cross the
> border illegally?
It was all part of the russianEmpire. Interestingly, when
industrialization happened workers from Russia (which industrialized
earlier) came to places such as Donetsk or Khatrkiv in search of
better wages and more opportunities. Ukrainian peaasants from
villages right outside those cities, on the otherhand, preferred
moving to Kazakhstan whwere they got free land and could continue
their peasant lifestyle, than to a factory 20 km, from their village
because they wisely saw working in a dirty factory as a nasty thing to
do.
The problem for Ukraine is that the cities became laergely ethnic
Russian islands (Kiev was 54% Russian at the turn of the 20th century,
Kharkiv 63% Russian, Luhansk 68% Russian) within the territory that
was overall about 70% or so Ukrainian.
> > > > > Kremlin is very territorial and they will challenge any Polish
> > > > > attempts. I doubt that Poland will win this battle.
>
> > > > Who knows? The western parts have the edge in terms of population and
> > > > territory, the eastern in terms of economy (although I suspect the
> > > > economic crash has affected steel-dependant eastern Ukraine much more
> > > > than agricultural western Ukraine).
>
> > > Nobody knows what will happen, but I doubt that Poland is capable of
> > > swallowing the Ukraine "pill".
>
> > Nobody is talking about "swallowing," any more than France or West
> > Germany starting swallowing one or the other starting in the 1950's.
>
> What I meant that in this scenario Poland will have to deal with
> Ukraine's problems.
Not everything about Ukraine is problems:
http://unian.net/eng/news/news-350103.html
Brazil, Ukraine to launch rocket together in 2010
By the end of 2010, Brazil and Ukraine, plan to launch the Cyclone 4
rocket, a satellite launcher produced in Ukraine, from the Alcantara
Center, in the Brazilian Northeastern State of Maranhao, according to
Xinhua.
The commitment is contained in the joint declaration by Ukrainian
President Viktor Yushchenko and his Brazilian counterpart Luiz Inacio
Lula da Silva who was making a visit to Ukraine on December 1 and 2.
At a news conference Lula admitted, however, that several
environmental and social problems, such as the presence of maroon
communities in the region have delayed the schedule for implementing
the project. The Ukrainian president reaffirmed the importance for the
European country that the schedule is met.
"When two presidents meet, complications end. We will make the first
launch in 2010 and take a practical step," said Yushchenko.
Brazil and Ukraine have started on Tuesday a dialogue for a
partnership aimed at nuclear energy generating and military technology
development.
According to President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, the partnership is
important to ensure the protection of pre-salt and of land and
maritime borders of Brazil.
Brazil and Ukraine also signed an agreement to waive visas for
tourists from both countries and negotiate the creation of a direct
commercial flight between Brazil and Ukraine.
From 2003 to 2008, trade between Brazil and Ukraine grew over 350
percent, reaching a record of 1.18 billion dollars at the end of last
year.
------
regards,
BM
Dmitry
I don't know, but it is probably possible if they have industries.
> > > > >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Rzeczpospolita265.png
>
> > > > > The reason Ukraine is torn between two poles is because over the
> > > > > centuries a lot of Russian settlers came to the industrializing cities
> > > > > in eastern Ukraine and southern and gave those areas a Russian
> > > > > cultural character. Of course the ethnic Russian and Russian speaking
> > > > > people from, say Donetsk, would prefer Russia over the EU.
>
> > > > I don't know anything about Ukrainian State prior 1922 when it emerged
> > > > as a Soviet republic. Let me know if you do.
>
> > > I do.
>
> > > The Russians came to Easyern Ukraine in large numbers with
> > > industrialization, in the 19th century.
>
> > Did Ukrainian government encourage them to come or did cross the
> > border illegally?
>
> It was all part of the russianEmpire.
Can you explain what was the Bolshevik's criteria for drawing borders
of Ukrainian SSR?
> Interestingly, when
> industrialization happened workers from Russia (which industrialized
> earlier) came to places such as Donetsk or Khatrkiv in search of
> better wages and more opportunities. Ukrainian peaasants from
> villages right outside those cities, on the otherhand, preferred
> moving to Kazakhstan whwere they got free land and could continue
> their peasant lifestyle, than to a factory 20 km, from their village
> because they wisely saw working in a dirty factory as a nasty thing to
> do.
Why couldn't they stay where they are? Did Russian Tsar take land
from them? Who took the role of producing food for factory workers in
Eastern Ukraine?
>
> The problem for Ukraine is that the cities became laergely ethnic
> Russian islands (Kiev was 54% Russian at the turn of the 20th century,
> Kharkiv 63% Russian, Luhansk 68% Russian) within the territory that
> was overall about 70% or so Ukrainian.
But there are plenty of problems within Ukraine.
The Black Monk
It was loosely based on the territory of the Ukrainian National
Republic, recognized by Lenin as an independent state at Brest-
Litovsk, but which the Bolsheviks later conquered:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Armisticebrestlitovsk.jpg
>
> > Interestingly, when
> > industrialization happened workers from Russia (which industrialized
> > earlier) came to places such as Donetsk or Khatrkiv in search of
> > better wages and more opportunities. Ukrainian peaasants from
> > villages right outside those cities, on the otherhand, preferred
> > moving to Kazakhstan whwere they got free land and could continue
> > their peasant lifestyle, than to a factory 20 km, from their village
> > because they wisely saw working in a dirty factory as a nasty thing to
> > do.
>
> Why couldn't they stay where they are? Did Russian Tsar take land
> from them? Who took the role of producing food for factory workers in
> Eastern Ukraine?
They had opportunities for more land, probably lower taxes, etc. in
the East. So tens of thousands of Ukrainian peasants took those
opportunities:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukrainians_in_Kazakhstan
More significant in terms of their contribution to the Ukrainian
ethnic group in Kazakhstan were a large wave of settlers who beginning
in the late nineteenth century arrived from almost all of the regions
of Ukraine that had been part of the Russian Empire at that time.
Seeking more opportunities and free land, these voluntary emigrants
numbered approximately 100,000 people in Kazakhstan and adjacent
regions of Russia by the turn of the century. This movement escalated
significantly following the agricultural reforms of Russian Prime
Minister Pyotr Stolypin in the early 20th century. Between 1897 and
1917, the proportion of the population of Kazakhstan that was of
Ukrainian ethnicity increased from 1.9% to 10.5%. They tended to
settle in the regions of Kazakhstan that most resembled Ukraine, in
the northern part of Kazakhstan. By 1917, Ukrainians came to make up
approximately 29.5% of the population of Akmola Province and 21.5% of
the popualtion of Turgai province. By 1926, according to the census,
Kazakhstan was home to 860,000 Ukrainians. [2]
A lot of Ukrainians also settled in the fear east:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Ukraine
The Zeleny Klyn (Ukrainian: Зелений клин), Zelena Ukraina or Eastern
Ukraina was an area of land settled by Ukrainians which is a part of
the Russian Far East in the area of the Amur River and the Pacific
Ocean. It was named by the Ukrainian settlers. The territory consists
of over 1,000,000 square kilometres and has a population of 3.1
million (1958). The Ukrainian population in 1926 made up 41%-47% of
the population.
Jan 1918 - Second All-Ukrainian Far Eastern Congress at Khabarovsk.
Green Ukraine was proclaimed as part of Ukrainian State in spite of
the lack of geographical connection.
Apr 1918 - The Third All-Ukrainian Far Eastern Congress asked for
creation of an independent Ukrainian state on the Pacific Ocean.
1918 - Created the Far Eastern Ukrainian troops (more 5000) by general
Khreschatitsky, B.R.
11 Apr 1920 - Order of Hetman G. Semyonov about the right of Far
Eastern Ukrainians for national self-determination and autonomy in the
limits of united Far Eastern state of Cossacks, Buryats, and
Ukrainians
At the same time as Ukrainian peasants were leaving for the East, tens
of thousands of Russian workers came for opportunities in newly
industrializing cities in Ukraine. The old Cossack town of Kharkov,
named after a Ukrainian cossack officer Kharko, went from a mostly
Ukrainian town of 50,000 in 1860 to a 63% Russian industrial city of
350,000 by 1916.
regards,
BM
> But there are plenty of problems within Ukraine.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
Dmitry
> > of Ukrainian SSR?
>
> It was loosely based on the territory of the Ukrainian National
> Republic, recognized by Lenin as an independent state at Brest-
> Litovsk, but which the Bolsheviks later conquered:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Armisticebrestlitovsk.jpg
It's the first time I hear that Latgale and Estonia were part of the
Ukrainian National Republic -))
> > > Interestingly, when
> > > industrialization happened workers from Russia (which industrialized
> > > earlier) came to places such as Donetsk or Khatrkiv in search of
> > > better wages and more opportunities. Ukrainian peaasants from
> > > villages right outside those cities, on the otherhand, preferred
> > > moving to Kazakhstan whwere they got free land and could continue
> > > their peasant lifestyle, than to a factory 20 km, from their village
> > > because they wisely saw working in a dirty factory as a nasty thing to
> > > do.
>
> > Why couldn't they stay where they are? Did Russian Tsar take land
> > from them? Who took the role of producing food for factory workers in
> > Eastern Ukraine?
>
> They had opportunities for more land, probably lower taxes, etc. in
> the East. So tens of thousands of Ukrainian peasants took those
> opportunities:
Can't blame them.
Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr.
That's exactly what they have. If Russian-speaking regions of Ukraine
- Dnepropetrovsk, Kharkov, Odessa, Donetsk, Crimea, Lugansk - formed
their own country - it would be a very successful country, say, by ex-
USSR republics standards: its per capita GDP would be high, much
higher than that of current Ukraine and even higher than Belarus. Of
the 15 ex-USSR republics, only the 3 Baltic states and Russia would
have a higher GDP.
http://helsinki.org.ua/en/index.php?id=1159392030
Regional Aspects of the Human Rights Situation in Ukraine
In only six regions – the Donetsk, Dnipropetrovsk, Luhansk, Zaporozhye
and Kharkiv regions and in Kyiv itself one has 48.4% of the basic
means of the country, 65.4% of industrial production and 49.2% of the
investments in basic capital.[20]
The following examples of the basic areas and extent of socio-economic
disproportion can be given to demonstrate how deep the disproportion
is. In terms of the amount of sold industrial production per person in
2004, there was 14.5 times more in the Donetsk region than in the
Chernivtsi region. If one takes the amount of exported goods, then the
divide between the Donetsk and Chernivtsi regions is 97 times;
business activity in 2003, measured by the number of small businesses
per 10 thousand people shows a difference between the Autonomous
Republic of the Crimea and the Ternopil region of 1.9 times, and with
the city of Kyiv of 4.5 times; tax and other revenue to the local
budgets in 2003 per head of population between the Dnipropetrovsk and
Ternopil regions there was a gap of 2.5 times, and with the city of
Kyiv of 7 times; spending of the local budgets in 2003 per head of
population between the Crimea and the Luhansk region were 1.4 times.
[21]
However at the same time these issues show major differences for the
West and the East of Ukraine. Of regions with a particularly high
poverty level, one should mention the Khmelnytsky, Rivne, Chernihiv
and Volyn regions (with over 37% of the population living in poverty).
The situation is not much better in the Ivano-Frankivsk, Ternopil,
Mykolayiv and Odessa regions. Of the regions where the situation is
much better Kyiv and the Regions of the East of Ukraine stand out.
[24]
After analyzing the level of average wages over the regions it becomes
clear that it is in the western regions of Ukraine that the levels of
pay are the lowest. As an example one can cite the following average
monthly earnings around the regions: Ternopil region – 731 UH, Volyn
region - 815 UH., Khmelnytsky region – 830 UH, Zhytomyr region. – 836
UH., Vinnytsa region. – 836 UH. At the same time, the highest average
monthly earnings were received in the city of Kyiv – 1,784 UH, Donetsk
region – 1,225 грн., Dnipropetrovsk region. – 1,184 грн., Zaporizhye
region. – 1,125 UH., Luhansk region. – 1,055 UH. One thus sees that
the pay in eastern regions and Kyiv is around double that in western
regions.
One must also mention the high level of unemployment and the low
number of jobs created in the western regions of Ukraine, the high
percentage of the population of those regions who seek work abroad.
-----------------------------------
Keep in mind that the lingua franca in Kiev is still Russian. Thus,
there is a clear divide: Russian-speaking regions are full of
industrious, educated, hard-working people, while Ukrainian-speaking
regions are full... well, of people who work abroad and of politically
active aristocrats and peasants who, instead of hard work, prefer
taking a train to Crimea and harassing the Russian-speakers there. :-)
The Russian-speaking Ukraine would do well if it were a separate
state, while Western Ukraine would be in economic trouble.
Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr.
> > > Can you explain what was the Bolshevik's criteria for drawing borders
> > > of Ukrainian SSR?
>
> > It was loosely based on the territory of the Ukrainian National
> > Republic, recognized by Lenin as an independent state at Brest-
> > Litovsk, but which the Bolsheviks later conquered:
>
> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Armisticebrestlitovsk.jpg
>
> It's the first time I hear that Latgale and Estonia were part of the
> Ukrainian National Republic -))
>
Haj zhive Vylyka Nezalezhna Ukraina ot Tallina do Vladyvostoka!
The Black Monk
The presence of massive industies in eastern Ukraine boost that
region's income (which btw is not distributed very equally and mostly
ends up in the hands of the oligrachs) and production but in all other
areas it lags far behind. Eastern Ukraine has the highest rates of
HIV, abortion, tuberculosis, heroin use, lowest life extectancy and
lowest birth rate in Ukraine. Yes, the steel mills generate much more
money than do western Ukrainian farms or rural food processing
centers, but Eastern Ukraine is still a social disaster. Ivano-
Frankivsk was recently voted the city with the highest quality of life
in Ukraine.
A detailed breakdown of Ukraine's regional industry:
http://www.feg.org.ua/docs/final_en.pdf
As for Kiev - it is still mostly Russian-speaking (although Kievans
under 20 are largely Ukrainian-speaking) but politically is very pro-
Ukrainian as all election results show. I would compare Kiev to
English-speaking Dublin whose residents probably don't want to link up
with Britain. Remember the signs put up in Kiev metro stations?
"Please do not urinate in the station, this is not Donetsk".
regards,
BM
> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
Dmitry
> HIV, abortion, tuberculosis, heroin use, lowest life extectancy and
> lowest birth rate in Ukraine. Yes, the steel mills generate much more
> money than do western Ukrainian farms or rural food processing
> centers, but Eastern Ukraine is still a social disaster. Ivano-
> Frankivsk was recently voted the city with the highest quality of life
> in Ukraine.
>
> A detailed breakdown of Ukraine's regional industry:
>
> http://www.feg.org.ua/docs/final_en.pdf
>
> As for Kiev - it is still mostly Russian-speaking (although Kievans
> under 20 are largely Ukrainian-speaking) but politically is very pro-
> Ukrainian as all election results show. I would compare Kiev to
> English-speaking Dublin whose residents probably don't want to link up
> with Britain. Remember the signs put up in Kiev metro stations?
> "Please do not urinate in the station, this is not Donetsk".
When I mentioned that this can create problems for Poland, should
"special" relationship with Ukraine establish, you called me a racist
-))
Or I might be completely wrong. It may not be a shock for Poles when
half of Donetsk settles in Krakow??? I had a monthly booklet from
local council through my letterbox 2 days ago. From the article "On-
street drinking":
.... Local authorities have increased the number of signs displayed in
the area in Polish as displayed here [Jestes na obszarze kontrolo
spozywania alkoholu.........aresztowany i otrzymasz mandat w wysokosci
do £500]. .......Voluntary group "signpost to polish success" is also
on board and has agreed to help raise awareness of the alcohol control
area and the penalties people can face.
It looks like my local council doesn't believe in the theory of mass
exodus of Poles from UK -))
As for "linking". It is normal. Riga has something around 50%
Russian speaking population, but not many of them associate themselves
with Russia. Language has little importance - not many Americans,
Australians etc. associate themselves with England.
J. Anderson
> Ivano-Frankivsk was recently voted the city
> with the highest quality of life in Ukraine.
Perhaps thanks to its Polish-Lithuanian and Jewish past?
> Remember the signs put up in Kiev metro stations?
> "Please do not urinate in the station, this is not Donetsk".
I wish Helsinki could put up something similar, but obviously urinating
is less frequent everywhere else.
The Black Monk
> > Eastern Ukraine has the highest rates of
> > HIV, abortion, tuberculosis, heroin use, lowest life extectancy and
> > lowest birth rate in Ukraine. Yes, the steel mills generate much more
> > money than do western Ukrainian farms or rural food processing
> > centers, but Eastern Ukraine is still a social disaster. Ivano-
> > Frankivsk was recently voted the city with the highest quality of life
> > in Ukraine.
>
> > A detailed breakdown of Ukraine's regional industry:
>
> >http://www.feg.org.ua/docs/final_en.pdf
>
> > As for Kiev - it is still mostly Russian-speaking (although Kievans
> > under 20 are largely Ukrainian-speaking) but politically is very pro-
> > Ukrainian as all election results show. I would compare Kiev to
> > English-speaking Dublin whose residents probably don't want to link up
> > with Britain. Remember the signs put up in Kiev metro stations?
> > "Please do not urinate in the station, this is not Donetsk".
>
> When I mentioned that this can create problems for Poland, should
> "special" relationship with Ukraine establish, you called me a racist
> -))
You mentioned that if Ukrainians were let into Poland they would be
stealing cars.
Kievns making fun of people from Donetsk is no more racism than would
be New Yorkers making fun of people from Alabama or even New Jersey.
The point ws that Ostap's comment about the "Russian speaking" parts
of Ukraine kicking out the "Ukrainian speaking" parts was silly
because Russian-speaking Kiev likes Ukrainian-speaking Lviv and
dislikes Russian-speaking Donetsk. During the Orange Revolution
Kievans took protesting western Ukrainians into their homes, brought
food out to them in the tents, etc. Donetsk people brought in to
support Yanukovich didn't get such nice treatment.
> Or I might be completely wrong. It may not be a shock for Poles when
> half of Donetsk settles in Krakow??? I had a monthly booklet from
> local council through my letterbox 2 days ago. From the article "On-
> street drinking":
> .... Local authorities have increased the number of signs displayed in
> the area in Polish as displayed here [Jestes na obszarze kontrolo
> spozywania alkoholu.........aresztowany i otrzymasz mandat w wysokosci
> do £500]. .......Voluntary group "signpost to polish success" is also
> on board and has agreed to help raise awareness of the alcohol control
> area and the penalties people can face.
> It looks like my local council doesn't believe in the theory of mass
> exodus of Poles from UK -))
Or it could be the process involved with translating the signs began a
year or two ago, before the Poles started leaving.
regards,
BM
> As for "linking". It is normal. Riga has something around 50%
> Russian speaking population, but not many of them associate themselves
> with Russia. Language has little importance - not many Americans,
> Australians etc. associate themselves with England.- Hide quoted text -
The Black Monk
> The Black Monk wrote:
> > Ivano-Frankivsk was recently voted the city
>
> > with the highest quality of life in Ukraine.
>
> Perhaps thanks to its Polish-Lithuanian and Jewish past?
Why would the fact that a city was mostly Polish and Jewish 50 years
ago (the actual breakdown in the Polish census of 1931 for the county
was 120,214 Poles, 49,032 Ukrainians, and 26,996 Jews) affect quality
of life today when for 2 generations it has been 80% ethnic Ukrainian?
regards,
BM
J. Anderson
> On Dec 6, 2:27 pm, "J. Anderson" <anderso...@inbox.lv> wrote:
>> The Black Monk wrote:
>>> Ivano-Frankivsk was recently voted the city
>> > with the highest quality of life in Ukraine.
>>
>> Perhaps thanks to its Polish-Lithuanian and Jewish past?
>
> Why would the fact that a city was mostly Polish and Jewish 50 years
> ago (the actual breakdown in the Polish census of 1931 for the county
> was 120,214 Poles, 49,032 Ukrainians, and 26,996 Jews) affect quality
> of life today when for 2 generations it has been 80% ethnic Ukrainian?
Because contrary to the 'kombinat' cities on the steppe old Stanyslaviv
has history, flair and urban culture.
The Black Monk
That's probably right, I was reacting to the specific ethnic element
in your comment. As I've mentioned in the past, the Russophone cities
of Eastern Ukraine are almost unique in terms of their extreme social
problems. Unlike most cities in Russia or on central and western
Ukraine, eastern Ukrainian cities are lack much of a pre-Soviet
history and culture and are basically creations of the Soviet nation.
Donetsk, for example, had a population of about 100,000 in 1926 and
1.1 million in 1989. Although Russian-speaking, Eastern Ukraine is not
really "Russian" but "Soviet." (the ethnic breakdown for Donetsk is
actually 48% Russian, 46% Ukrainian).
Eastern Ukraine's descent into population collapse, drugs, suicide,
etc. is stunning and likely reflects the complete collapse of the
Eastern Ukrainian's (Soviet) society. For this reason, I think, there
are many parallels between the social problems in eastern Ukraine and
those among American natives on their reservations in the USA and
Canada, such as the Inuit, who also have massive problems with drug
abuse, suicide, etc. when one's cultural and social world collapses,
whether that be Soviet or tribal, the people behave in a similar way.
In case you think I am making up claims, here is a list:
Suicide:
http://psycnet.apa.org/index.cfm?fa=buy.optionToBuy&id=2000-07183-006&CFID=4606385&CFTOKEN=36695431
The overall rate of suicide in the Ukraine was relatively high. There
were 19 suicides per 100,000 population in 1988, and 29.6 suicides per
100,000 population in 1998. The frequency of completed suicide
differed in the various regions of the country: Suicides were more
frequent in the industrially developed regions and in the rural areas
of the country than in the cities. In the western part of the Ukraine
the frequency of suicide was relatively low (11.1 per 100,000).
--------------
Abortion:
http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTUKRAINE/Resources/328335-1147812406770/ukr_aids_Chapt3.pdf
Low life expectancy, high death rates among the working-age population
(expecially among males, driven by high rates of accidents, poisoning
and trauma), and very low biorth rates accompanied by the highest
abortion rates in Ukraine, are all found in Dnipropetrovsk and Donetsk
oblasts.
http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/worldbiz/archives/2005/04/18/2003251002
Aborted foetuses from girls and young women are being exported from
Ukraine for use in illegal beauty treatments costing thousands of
pounds.
The fetuses are cryogenically frozen and sold to clinics offering
"youth injections," claiming to rejuvenate skin and cure a raft of
diseases.
It is thought that women in the former Soviet republic are being paid ?
100 a time to persuade them to have abortions and allow their fetuses
to be used in treatments. Most of the fetuses are sold in Russia for
up to ?5,000 each. Some are paid extra to have abortions late in their
pregnancy
Sergei Shorobogatko, a former Kiev policeman who is investigating the
trade, said abortion clinics in the poor eastern regions of Donetsk
and Kharkiv are selling fetuses -- often untested for viruses such as
HIV -- without permission.
--------------
HIV and narcotics:
http://www.khpg.org/en/index.php?id=1160760308
Ukraine is effectively on the verge of a national HIV/AIDS epidemic.
Most disturbing is the fact that over the last five years the number
of cases of HIV infection in Ukraine has risen 20 times, and at
present, according to estimates of experts, approximately 400,000
people have the infection, virtually 1% of the adult population.
Among those who are HIV-positive, the majority are between the ages of
20 and 39, with cases constantly registered as well among teenagers.
People are diagnosed as HIV-positive in all regions. The worst
affected areas are the Donetsk, Dnipropetrovsk, Odessa, Mikolayiv,
Zaporizhye, Kharkiv, Poltava, Luhansk and Cherkasy regions, as well as
the cities of Kyiv and Sevastopol, and the Autonomous Republic of the
Crimea. A particular feature of the epidemic situation in these
regions is the fact that around 75% of all those HIV-positive inject
themselves with narcotic substances.
http://www.docstoc.com/docs/891097/AIDS-epidemic-update-2007
South-eastern Ukraine continues to be the most affected area,
especially the regions of Dnipropetrovsk, Donetsk, Mikolaiv and
Odessa, as well as the Autonomous Republic of Crimea. These regions,
together with the capital city Kiev, represent more than 70% of all
registered cases of HIV currently in Ukraine (Ministry of Health of
Ukraine, 2007).
http://www.kinseyinstitute.org/ccies/ua.php#contracep
In 1997, HIV/AIDS infection reached all regions of the country. By the
end of 2000, the eastern and southern regions of Ukraine were most
affected by the epidemic. The Odessa, Dnipropetrovsk, and Donetsk
regions contained 60% of the entire HIV-positive population of
Ukraine.
--------------
Tuberculosis:
http://www.helsinki.org.ua/en/index.php?id=1159392030
The highest numbers of those suffering from any of the forms of
tuberculosis were seen in the south-eastern regions of Ukraine: in
the
Kherson region – 166.2 per 100 thousand of the population; in the
Mykolayiv region – 114.9; in the Luhansk region – 112.4; in the
Donetsk, Kirovohrad, Kharkiv and Odessa regions the figure exceeds 90
per 100 thousand of the population..
---------------
Crime:
http://www.helsinki.org.ua/en/index.php?id=1159392030
Confirmation of a considerably higher level of crime in the East and
South of the country is also provided by the figures for
consideration
by courts of criminal cases involving crimes committed by organized
groups. The lead here is taken by the Kharkiv region, followed by the
Dnipropetrovsk, Donetsk and Zaporizhye regions. We would note that as
far as this index is concerned, the Luhansk region, when the
population coefficient is taken into consideration, shows a fairly
low
figure. In western regions this.index is at least 5 times lower than
in the above-mentioned eastern regions.
All of the figures given suggest that the crime level is
significantly
higher in eastern and in a part of the southern regions. This cannot
be explained by economic problems since the less economically
developed southern and western regions have lower ratings.
---------------
This goes a long way to explaining the sad, sad situation in Eastern
Ukraine:
http://esr.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/20/5/403
Here is the contrast:
Youth Transitions in East and West Ukraine
Irina Predborska
This paper is based mainly on evidence from 600 interviews during 2002
with 25- to 29-year olds, drawn in equal numbers from coalmining
villages in East Ukraine and rural villages in the country’s west. The
analysis explains how basically the same ‘reforms’ have impacted
differently on young (and older) people in these contrasting regions.
The evidence also reveals how young people’s responses to the changes
have differed from place to place. This has been partly due to
geography: proximity to or distance from richer countries has been
important. However, in rural west Ukraine even economically
unsuccessful young people usually become socially integrated via
religion and village life, and, in some parts of the western regions,
they usually become politically integrated via identification with the
region’s dominant nationalist politics. In the east the situation is
in some ways more quiescent and, at the same time, potentially more
volatile. Young people in the country’s east are less satisfied than
their west Ukraine counterparts about the general course of the
reforms, and they can envisage no acceptable futures for themselves in
their own region. Yet there are no accessible and attractive routes
out. At present these young people are less likely to be politically
active than youth in the country’s western regions, but this could
easily change. In the east they are as yet inactive, but they are more
likely to be organised in trade unions and to belong to political
parties.
---------------
regards,
BM