International Politics Thread

[sputnik monroe 102]

Georgia didn't invade any one. South Ossestia is Georgia. Russia on the other hand helped secessionist in hopes of destroying Georgia so it could be divided up. Georgia had the right to try and restore contol of it's own land.

Talking about a Georgian invasion of South Ossetia sounds as absurd as a Russian invasion of Moscow or a US invasion of New York. For the last time South Ossetia is Georgian. Maybe we should just give European and US passports to a dissatisfied minority in Russia and play by the same rules?

[Baff1 0]

South Ossetia was Georgian.

Now it's South Ossetian.

We've been giving out pasports to Russian dissidents for years. Russia just sends assasins to poison them if they get out of line.

When Russia decides it owns people, there isn't a whole lot you can do.

[Q1184 0]

I wonder how many people actually take time to study and analyze the history of this conflict before posting "opinions" on these boards. By the looks of it the majority just transfers what they see and hear on TV/in papers directly onto the forums without any critical thinking. Reality is always much more complex than your favourite channel tells you. I am not going to try and impose my point of view on the conflict, I'm simply reminding that sometimes you should use the round thing you have on your shoulders and think for yourselves.

[USSRsniper 0]

For the people that rely on TV for their information....

[baddo 0]

In your dreams they joined voluntarily.

[Dwarden 1125]

Quote[/b] ]Wait, when did your "peacekeeping operation" become a world war?

That has no significance. It's the same situation. It has happened in a lot of wars, but this one is much more known.

The defenders push the attackers back into their own territory. That doesn't make them aggressors.

You have to destroy airbases, military bases, radars, artillery and all kinds of things that can be used against the defenders.

And you might call that unjust. It's war. It isn't supposed to be just. It's no game of chess.

[Mehman]

SO isn't their territory, but they had troops there legally. I think there's a rule that you shoot back when fired upon.

Quote[/b] ]Russian military isnt that good and well upgraded.

How do you know that? A discovery comparison of GDR migs and some modern US plane?

it would be nice to mention Spokersperson that Russian 'peacekeepers' joined the SO 'peacekeepers' while shooting at Georgian 'peacekeepers' in past 10 years ...

it would be nice to mention it was Russia who provided the SO and Abchazia 'separatist' forces with heavy weapons starting from AT/AA should weapons to tanks, mounted AA, rocket artilery, howitzers and airplanes same as normal weapons

then there were daily or weekly incidents of 'shooting' accross the 'peace' lines into georgian territory of SO or even georgia (shelling villages, sniper attacks etc)

ofcourse i'm sure the Georgia millitary or even their's version fo south SO guerilla done same ...

imho the problem was because of russia and in favor of russia giving russia option to (re)open the conflict anytime they want and this option still exit even now but now they already control more land mass ...

if you don't see it i call this tactic 'trojan peacekeeping'

[Baff1 0]

Isreal just withdrew it's forces from Georgia.

Russia-threatens-to-supply-Iran-with-top-new-missile-system-as-cold-war-escalates

[Panda-PL- 0]

The balts voluntarily joined the USSR. But there were big fascist elements, and still are. Thousands of jews were killed with the help of balts. And minorities were oppressed just like today.

Uhhh.... WHAT?

No. Stalin had his armies stationed in those states, had NKVD supress opposing fractions, established puppet regimes and then these regimes decided for the people against their will.

These governments were not elected in free elections in the first place. Election results were since then always faked (99% support for the party, all the time).

Minorities were oppressed only after communists came to power.

Hard for you to believe but it was Soviets who decided they want to get rid of the Jews. Word "Zionist" was spelled thousands of times on communist party meetings in my country. The tapes are there for everyone to watch.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dRZ9nuQys6A

And at the culmination moment the communist government just confiscated their possessions and told all the Jews to pack and go to Israel, where they supposedly belonged.

The freedom fighters of WW2 were trailed under charges of collaboration in communist-controlled courts. Many of them died in prisons or were killed. Talk about irony.

[Spokesperson 0]

Quote[/b] ]No. Stalin had his armies stationed in those states, had NKVD supress opposing fractions, established puppet regimes and then these regimes decided for the people against their will.

These governments were not elected in free elections in the first place. Election results were since then always faked (99% support for the party, all the time).

The parliaments voted, and the governments decided to join the USSR. That's all. Earlier there were no elections, just fascist-rule.

Almost like in CZ where the communists won the elections.

Quote[/b] ]Minorities were oppressed only after communists came to power.

Hard for you to believe but it was Soviets who decided they want to get rid of the Jews. Word "Zionist" was spelled thousands of times on communist party meetings in my country. The tapes are there for everyone to watch.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dRZ9nuQys6A

And at the culmination moment the communist government just confiscated their possessions and told all the Jews to pack and go to Israel, where they supposedly belonged.

The freedom fighters of WW2 were trailed under charges of collaboration in communist-controlled courts. Many of them died in prisons or were killed. Talk about irony.

No, before the USSR times the russian minorities were oppressed just like today. Two-digit % of the adult population aren't allowed to work or vote. If that's what you call freedom then I understand you. Your freedom fighters are those who fight for the freedom to oppress, while mine fight for the freedom from oppression.

Zionism and semitism are different things. Zionism is as awful as nazism.

[echo1 0]

Earlier there were no elections, just fascist-rule.

And they were replaced with more facist-rule, just backed up with fake elections. Wow, glory to the revolution

[baddo 0]

For Finland this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terijoki_Government puppet of the USSR was created when they totally illegally attacked us in 1939.

It has to be noticed that the creation of this puppet government happened at the same time with the start of the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winter_War What a nice coincidence!

It was the government the USSR recognized as the 'official' government of Finland. They created it and then said it is the official government of Finland.

Quote[/b] ]The Finnish Democratic Republic (Finnish: Suomen kansanvaltainen tasavalta) was a short-lived unrecognised Soviet puppet state in those parts of Finnish Karelia that were occupied by the Soviet Union during the Winter War. Its government was known under the name of the Terijoki Government. The Soviet Union argued that it was the only rightful government for all of Finland that was capable of ending the Winter War and restoring peace. However, before the end of the war the Soviets gave up this interpretation to make peace with the Finnish government.

So when they started to think they maybe don't win the war they quickly forgot about this 'official' government of Finland and signed a peace with the *real* government of Finland.

What a joke! They created a puppet government so they could have a government in Finland which agrees with them and wants to join them. And then they refused to negotiate with the real government of Finland.

Of course the real government of Finland was unsuitable for the negotiations because they didn't want to join the USSR or give a lot of land to them. So that real government was simply not recognized by the USSR. A simple way to solve a problem: don't even recognize the other side of the argument. Which didn't work in the case of Finland, because we had just enough resources and manpower to fight back for just long enough, unlike the Baltic states whose very unfortunate fate was to be swallowed by the USSR.

That's how the Soviets behaved in the WW II. If Finland would have lost its independence to the USSR in the WW II, Spokesperson could argue here that Finland joined voluntarily the USSR because that is what the puppet government wanted. "The people of Finland" wanted to join voluntarily because that's what the USSR propaganda machine was saying.

Here in Finland opinions have been presented in our newspapers that what Russia is doing politically now, isn't actually far from what the Soviet Union did in the WW II. They are using the same strategies, are said.

It is not a surprise to me that the Estonians think the same. They have the same reasons as we do.

Estonians referred to the Shelling of Mainila http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shelling_of_Mainila when they saw what happened between Georgia and Russia. Think about it, seriously. I would not be surprised at all if about the same thing happened this year between Georgia and Russia.

[Spokesperson 0]

Quote[/b] ]when they totally illegally attacked us in 1939

Illegally? What's that bullshit.

The USSR did the right thing when it attacked mannerheimist Finland to secure Leningrad, and then some years later defeated the nazi-collaborators there. The finns refused to cooperate, so the USSR had to take what was needed by force.

I wonder what the finns did to tens of thousands of people in their civil war? And how they treated prisoners, and how the country was infested by pro-fascist capitalism.

[Hitman 10]

Quote[/b] ]Illegally? What's that bullshit.

What was the reasons? The Mainila shots right?

Quote[/b] ]The USSR did the right thing when it attacked mannerheimist Finland to secure Leningrad, and then some years later defeated the nazi-collaborators there.

The Nazis told us to attack leningrad and Mannerheim resufed. He stayed on the old borders that finland took from the USSR back in the continuation war.

Quote[/b] ]The finns refused to cooperate, so the USSR had to take what was needed by force.

True. They took land, but at what cost?

Quote[/b] ]I wonder what the finns did to tens of thousands of people in their civil war?

We shot them. One of our saddest moments in our history to be honest. Shot our countrymen just because they were commies. Hell, could have used them to kill more russians in WW2 than we did!

Quote[/b] ]And how they treated prisoners, and how the country was infested by pro-fascist capitalism.

Wow, we were pro-fascist capitalist? In 1918? Really?

Your gonna get alot of hate from the finns now man.

[baddo 0]

Quote[/b] ]when they totally illegally attacked us in 1939

Illegally? What's that bullshit.

The USSR did the right thing when it attacked mannerheimist Finland to secure Leningrad, and then some years later defeated the nazi-collaborators there. The finns refused to cooperate, so the USSR had to take what was needed by force.

I wonder what the finns did to tens of thousands of people in their civil war? And how they treated prisoners, and how the country was infested by pro-fascist capitalism.

I'm now totally convinced that you are a complete idiot. I really tried to avoid calling you an idiot, but now it can't be avoided anymore - you certainly are worth it with your continuous excellence at writing idiotic comments.

What the international community declared as an illegal attack, you call it bullshit. All the theater the USSR arranged which lead to the war did not help to fool others (maybe people like you were fooled, though), it was certainly an illegal attack and the international community saw it as such.

Then what happened in the Continuation War was a direct consequence of the Winter War. Do you not see the link? And who are we going to ally with, if our enemy is an "allied" USSR? We can't ally with the "allied", if one of the "allied" is our enemy number one which attacked us in the first place. Is this hard to understand? For you it seems to be very hard to understand.

I don't have to and I am not going to apologize to anyone that the Whites of Finland killed some of the Reds who started a violent war against their own countrymen. If you don't want to get shot by your own countrymen, then don't start a war against them. It is as simple as that. No, spreading socialism is not an acceptable reason for starting a war. Spreading socialism has to be done peacefully, then it has a much greater chance to succeed, don't you think.

Does it make you that angry when someone calls an attack made by the Soviet Union illegal? That is what ticks you off? You have to argue against even the most obvious things? Is your life so pathetic?

[Spokesperson 0]

Quote[/b] ]The Nazis told us to attack leningrad and Mannerheim resufed. He stayed on the old borders that finland took from the USSR back in the continuation war

The finns were part of the German blockade of Leningrad that lasted 900 days and cost 1 million lives. That just shows the importance of having a good margin of defence for that city. The germans helped the finns to kill the reds in the civil war. The Soviets knew that a german invasion could be launched through Finland (and it more or less was).

Quote[/b] ]Your gonna get alot of hate from the finns now man

I don't care about nations. I see people. I support the red finns, but oppose the whites. I support the oppressed against the oppressors.

Quote[/b] ]What the international community declared as an illegal attack, you call it bullshit.

Based on what law? You can't just say something is illegal because you don't like it.

Quote[/b] ]Then what happened in the Continuation War was a direct consequence of the Winter War. Do you not see the link? And who are we going to ally with, if our enemy is an "allied" USSR? We can't ally with the "allied", if one of the "allied" is our enemy number one which attacked us in the first place. Is this hard to understand? For you it seems to be very hard to understand.

You don't have to ally anyone. And besides, you picked sides. You fought for nazis because your imaginary borders were moved some km to protect an internationalist worker state. Sure you lost a lot of trees, but you fought the enemies of nazism, and you had fascistoid leanings. You have some strange idea of supporting your own "country". Whose idea is this nation thing? What about supporting your own class?

People didn't care about nations a few hundred years ago. Now they do. To whose benefit?

Quote[/b] ]I don't have to and I am not going to apologize to anyone that the Whites of Finland killed some of the Reds who started a violent war against their own countrymen. If you don't want to get shot by your own countrymen, then don't start a war against them. It is as simple as that. No, spreading socialism is not an acceptable reason for starting a war. Spreading socialism has to be done peacefully, then it has a much greater chance to succeed, don't you think.

Does it make you that angry when someone calls an attack made by the Soviet Union illegal? That is what ticks you off? You have to argue against even the most obvious things? Is your life so pathetic?

Haha. Sure, that's good. In the end it's just an argument about what's right or wrong. Is it right to oppress or fight oppression? The reds wanted to end the capitalist nightmare and build a better society. But the whites had everything to lose, their churches, their gold, their factories, their land, their mansions and houses they rent for their workers and the shops where they sell their shit to their workers. They would lose all their slaves and power. And if you were a white you wouldn't want that. It would be totally wrong. You would like to retire with some housekeepers and a nice pension fund. All those dreams of freedom would be crushed by those pesky reds. What a shame.

That's why socialism can't be spread peacefully. This is no teletubby world.

[JdB 151]

For the people that rely on TV for their information....

[im]http://www.x-libri.ru/elib/smi02183/smi02000.jpg[/img]

Yeah, why look at other news when you've got your own media, or what's left of it anyway.

Trying to seize a policeman's gun. Now that's one synonym for "execution" that I had never come across before

Oddly enough it's mostly journalists critical of the Kremlin that die in warzones, through accidents or the hands of criminals

[Dwarden 1125]

if spokersperson is sort of showcase of days to come then i'm very happy we have weapons to wipe such threat off the place of this planet ...

[USSRsniper 0]

Quote[/b] ]Wait, when did your "peacekeeping operation" become a world war?

That has no significance. It's the same situation. It has happened in a lot of wars, but this one is much more known.

The defenders push the attackers back into their own territory. That doesn't make them aggressors.

You have to destroy airbases, military bases, radars, artillery and all kinds of things that can be used against the defenders.

And you might call that unjust. It's war. It isn't supposed to be just. It's no game of chess.

[Mehman]

SO isn't their territory, but they had troops there legally. I think there's a rule that you shoot back when fired upon.

Quote[/b] ]Russian military isnt that good and well upgraded.

How do you know that? A discovery comparison of GDR migs and some modern US plane?

it would be nice to mention Spokersperson that Russian 'peacekeepers' joined the SO 'peacekeepers' while shooting at Georgian 'peacekeepers' in past 10 years ...

it would be nice to mention it was Russia who provided the SO and Abchazia 'separatist' forces with heavy weapons starting from AT/AA should weapons to tanks, mounted AA, rocket artilery, howitzers and airplanes same as normal weapons

then there were daily or weekly incidents of 'shooting' accross the 'peace' lines into georgian territory of SO or even georgia (shelling villages, sniper attacks etc)

ofcourse i'm sure the Georgia millitary or even their's version fo south SO guerilla done same ...

imho the problem was because of russia and in favor of russia giving russia option to (re)open the conflict anytime they want and this option still exit even now but now they already control more land mass ...

if you don't see it i call this tactic 'trojan peacekeeping'

Abkhazian separatists? they have army

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_of_Abkhazia

I don't see anything wrong... US supplied separatists in cold war, and then they blow up twin towers...

About russian passports, alot of people in crimea have russian passports too, and russians not taking it over. If war in south ossetia was for land, they chose wrong piece of land, Crimea is much better   And US media makes it look like, russians are going to take over all land where people with russian pasports live, for example Kazakhstan, Ukraine and other ex. USSR countries....  

[Panda-PL- 0]

if spokersperson is sort of showcase of days to come then i'm very happy we have weapons to wipe such threat off the place of this planet ...

"He who controls the past, controls the future; and he who controls the present, controls the past."

However in all honesty I cannot understand how a modern man, with acces to internet and many independent sources, who can clearly see the history looks different everywhere else on the world still chooses to stay under his rock.

One would think he would investigate, search for source files... And think on his own. Once would think there is a limit to how close-minded one can be.

Molotov-Ribentropp, for example, is there on wiki, WITH SIGNATURES!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molotov-Ribbentrop_Pact

How come people have the guts to deny the existence of secret protocole while it's official?

Another example would be the mass murder of Katyn:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katyn_Massacre

once again documents prove it was centrally-planned. Despite that the goverment of russia still claims it was a group of unsubordinate officers.

The documents on wiki include execution order SIGNED by Stalin, Vyacheslav Molotov, Kliment Voroshilov, Anastas Mikoyan, Mikhail Kalinin and Lazar Kaganovich.

Catch them by their hand and they'll scream it's not their hand...

This is getting offtopic, so if you, Spokesperson, want to deny Molotov-Ribentropp or Katyn please PM me or don't bother. I have problems beliving you still could with documents shown to you, but you might yet again amaze me.

[Hitman 10]

I had to think twice if I even should reply to your bullshit and this will be the last time I will. You are one sad little fuck and I'm not going to waste my time anymore on you after this.

Quote[/b] ]The finns were part of the German blockade of Leningrad that lasted 900 days and cost 1 million lives. That just shows the importance of having a good margin of defence for that city. The germans helped the finns to kill the reds in the civil war. The Soviets knew that a german invasion could be launched through Finland (and it more or less was).

From wiki: Almost all historians regard the siege as a German operation and do not consider that the Finns effectively participated in the siege.[19] Only Nikolai Baryshnikov has been a strong supporter of the view that active Finnish participation occurred. The main issues which counted in favour of the former view are: (a) the Finns stayed at the pre-winter war border at the Karelian Isthmus, despite German wishes and requests, (b) they did not bombard the city from planes or with artillery and did not allow the Germans to bring their own land forces to Finnish lines, and © political convenience after the war - as all Finnish, Soviet and western historians wanted to distance themselves from Fenno-Soviet conflict[19].

Yes, germany helped to train finnish jaegars when we fought off the reds. Thank god for that, otherwise we could be as brainwashed as you are. But germany was just among other countries that helped us against the reds.

Here's something for you: In 1932, the Soviet Union signed a non-aggression pact with Finland. The agreement was reaffirmed in 1934 for ten years. However, the Soviet Union violated the Treaty of Tartu in 1937 by blockading Finnish merchant ships navigating between Lake Ladoga and the Gulf of Finland.

That led to the shelling of mainila. But I guess you know all about that. That the evil white finns bombed russia and launched the aggression right?

I've been reading these forums since 2002 and your stories always make me giggle.

[echo1 0]

Abkhazian separatists? they have army

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_of_Abkhazia

Wow, someone wrote a Wikipedia article about the seperatist forces and called them the military. They must be legit! The question is, if I created an article about, lets say, the Mahdi Army, and named it "The Military of Iraq", would that make it so?

[Second 0]

Quote[/b] ]Your gonna get alot of hate from the finns now man

I don't care about nations. I see people. I support the red finns, but oppose the whites. I support the oppressed against the oppressors.

Okay... Would you then be against Soviet union too for red finns? You see "red finns" fought side-by-side with "white finns" during Winter War 1939-40. Seems like they had found their worker's paradise already. Maybe you should consider too  

It's funny what you say about white side being slavers and all... Where are the marks of their whip's? Do you care to explain me?

EDIT: Now you have clearly dropped the ball in my books as well. You speak of things which just are not there. i know the truth enough well, and you doesnt' seem to know it atall.

[Baff1 0]

if spokersperson is sort of showcase of days to come then i'm very happy we have weapons to wipe such threat off the place of this planet ...

Absolutely.

You cannot expect people who are opposed to you to agree with you. To see reason or to even want to see reason.

It is an imperative to maintain physical domination over such people at all times.

Sometimes war and destruction is the ideal solution.

The are differences that cannot be accomodated through reasonable discussion. Through enlightened discussion, diplomacy, education or gentle persuasion.

Some people do not seek enlightenment. Nor do they seek to spread enlightenment. Their goal is opposition alone.

If you seek to be the enemy of my society, you better be strong. Very strong.

[Spokesperson 0]

Quote[/b] ]if spokersperson is sort of showcase of days to come then i'm very happy we have weapons to wipe such threat off the place of this planet ...

It's good that you admit that. Violence is a solution. But liberals never admit that (even if they are the biggest war-mongers and slaughterers).

Quote[/b] ]However in all honesty I cannot understand how a modern man, with acces to internet and many independent sources, who can clearly see the history looks different everywhere else on the world still chooses to stay under his rock.

One would think he would investigate, search for source files... And think on his own. Once would think there is a limit to how close-minded one can be.

"Modern man"? Politics is no trend or fashion. It's about arguments and interests.

Who says I deny the M-R pact? It's a legitimate non-aggression pact between to countries. Countries with friendly relations don't need such pacts.

I don't see anything wrong with the actions in Katyn either. That's what the poles did to their reds for years and to the red army prisoners some years back. Slave owners and their henchmen don't go free.

Quote[/b] ]Okay... Would you then be against Soviet union too for red finns? You see "red finns" fought side-by-side with "white finns" during Winter War 1939-40. Seems like they had found their worker's paradise already. Maybe you should consider too  

It's funny what you say about white side being slavers and all... Where are the marks of their whip's? Do you care to explain me?

EDIT: Now you have clearly dropped the ball in my books as well. You speak of things which just are not there. i know the truth enough well, and you doesnt' seem to know it atall.

Are you really that stupid that you think I talk about whipping slave owners when I talk about slavery? That kind of slavery is long gone. However, wage-slavery is the foundation of capitalism. Look that up if you don't know what it means.

If you fight for "your" nation you cease to be red.

Quote[/b] ]If you seek to be the enemy of my society, you better be strong. Very strong.

Without dissidents and revolutionaries society would never have changed. You support the current order just like a majority of people did at the time they lived, in serfdom or slavery. But then their reasons weren't phony "democracy" but god, king and nation. However, after some while people understood the opium the upper class had been giving them, so they decided to fight their way out to freedom. Spartacus, Jan Hus and the taborites, Robespierre, Luxemburg, Lenin, Castro and Mandela to name a few.

But if you want to keep fighting for the queen, religion, race, nation and now the corporations, then go ahead. It's your choice. Democracy isn't empty words.

[Commando84 0]

Spokesperson can't you stop america from being to capitalistic?

And while your at it try to make a unsurgency and clear out 'em jesus camp founders who try to make kids into fanatics similar to islamic terrorists wich are brainwashed...

search youtube for jesus camp or something... freaky stuff...