The World's #1 Russian, Ukrainian & Eastern European Discussion & Information Forum - RUA!

This Is the Premier Discussion Forum on the Net for Information and Discussion about Russia, Ukraine, Eastern Europe and the Former Soviet Union. Discuss Culture, Politics, Travelling, Language, International Relationships and More. Chat with Travellers, Locals, Residents and Expats. Ask and Answer Questions about Travel, Culture, Relationships, Applying for Visas, Translators, Interpreters, and More. Give Advice, Read Trip Reports, Share Experiences and Make Friends.

Author Topic: The Non-Invasion of the Baltic States  (Read 19279 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Online msmoby

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 6573
  • Country: gb
  • Gender: Male
  • Spouses Country: Russia
  • Status: Committed
  • Trips: 20+
Re: The Non-Invasion of the Baltic States
« Reply #30 on: July 24, 2015, 03:37:26 AM »
I would be interested to  see froid's invisible friend

'invisible' - the inference I perceive from such a comment is that Froid was 'fibbing' about his friend...  a not untypical  'style' of afi ...

Remember, this is a guy who simply repeats lies - he know he could check the veracity of .. NOT to be trusted

Currently, there is no threat of invasion - just headline news that the Baltic States never legally left the USSR .

You'll note [derogatory term removed] fail to respond to this....

Offline Manny

  • Moderator
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 15251
  • Country: gb
  • Gender: Male
  • Spouses Country: Russia
  • Status: Married
  • Trips: 20+
Re: The Non-Invasion of the Baltic States
« Reply #31 on: July 24, 2015, 03:49:54 AM »
Currently, there is no threat of invasion -

Among the waffle, you do occasionally demonstrate that you get it.

Online msmoby

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 6573
  • Country: gb
  • Gender: Male
  • Spouses Country: Russia
  • Status: Committed
  • Trips: 20+
Re: The Non-Invasion of the Baltic States
« Reply #32 on: July 24, 2015, 04:02:36 AM »

Among the waffle, you do occasionally demonstrate that you get it.

I suppose you keep missing the point in my 'waffle' questioning the need for RUSSIAN NEWS to dwell on the prosecutor generals investigation - suggesting that the B.States never 'legally' left the USSR... :chuckle:


Offline Manny

  • Moderator
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 15251
  • Country: gb
  • Gender: Male
  • Spouses Country: Russia
  • Status: Married
  • Trips: 20+
Re: The Non-Invasion of the Baltic States
« Reply #33 on: July 24, 2015, 04:18:24 AM »
Actually, I have read those items, and it is an unusual thing for them to be talking about now. But as the USSR is no more, even if they didn't split legally, it would be moot anyway.

Online andrewfi

  • Supporting Member
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 16297
  • Country: gb
  • Gender: Male
    • Articles About Almost Anything!
Re: The Non-Invasion of the Baltic States
« Reply #34 on: July 24, 2015, 04:36:40 AM »
Alfy, you can't control yourself can you?

Froid's friend is invisible because he is not here, not posting on his behalf and therefore hardly a representative sample of anything - he is not visible.

In English a thing not seen, that cannot be seen, that is not visible, is invisible.

There is no 'headline news' that The Baltics never left the USSR. You may have missed the relevant headlines - there is no USSR.
You have managed to 'forget' often enough to make your continued repetitions, after reminders and corrections, purposeful untruths, or as we say in English, lies. To repeat once again: an investigation has been requested and agreed to in order to clarify the legal situation with regard to the Baltic states and their move to independence when the USSR dissolved itself.

The investigation is connected to the procedure and not the outcome and will become a matter of record; a clarification of history - that is a good thing. Clarification and better understanding is rarely a bad thing, except for the habitually dishonest who depend upon obfuscation and confusion - as you do.

As you also know, it has already been made clear that the current status of these countries will not be affected by the outcome the investigation, whatever the results may be.

So, how many more times do you intend on lying to the world about this topic?

"For what else is the life of man but a kind of play in which men in various costumes perform until the director motions them offstage?" -Erasmus

Online msmoby

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 6573
  • Country: gb
  • Gender: Male
  • Spouses Country: Russia
  • Status: Committed
  • Trips: 20+
Re: The Non-Invasion of the Baltic States
« Reply #35 on: July 24, 2015, 04:37:17 AM »
Actually, I have read those items, and it is an unusual thing for them to be talking about now. But as the USSR is no more, even if they didn't split legally, it would be moot anyway.

I think making such a 'Legal investigation' - which is moot - as you say - was provocative and mischief making - designed to make the B.States ask for protection - then the Kremlin will speak of 'Aggression' by NATO.




Online msmoby

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 6573
  • Country: gb
  • Gender: Male
  • Spouses Country: Russia
  • Status: Committed
  • Trips: 20+
Re: The Non-Invasion of the Baltic States
« Reply #36 on: July 24, 2015, 04:49:15 AM »
Alfy, you can't control yourself can you?

says the fibber - who repeats his fibs and won't take up the offer of checking them out and apologising .. the very continued use of 'alfy' - bearing in mind your explanation proves my point. AGAIN.

There is rarely a day passes when you insult a poster rather than dealing with what they say - or you try to belittle the poster's ability / veracity.


Froid's friend is invisible because he is not here, not posting on his behalf and therefore hardly a representative sample of anything - he is not visible.

In English a thing not seen, that cannot be seen, that is not visible, is invisible.

 :chuckle: Knew you would try that 'excuse'  .. explain the need for the parenthesis ...  ?  You are caught 'at it', again ....


There is no 'headline news' that The Baltics never left the USSR. You may have missed the relevant headlines - there is no USSR.



IF you had bothered to check, first - the inference was that what was that failing to legally leave the USSR  - meant that their 'independence' was not legal  - for someone who professes to know stuff - you sure are posting daft, today.


You call me a liar and I try to show why you are 'mistaken' ... you just ignore the chance to prove you've lied.. 

If you wish for your posts to be respected - it is time to demonstrate you actually seek the truth .. not seek to hide your fibs


Offline Anteros

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 7208
  • Country: us
  • Gender: Male
  • Status: Just Looking
  • Trips: 1-5
Re: The Non-Invasion of the Baltic States
« Reply #37 on: July 24, 2015, 07:18:05 AM »
Absent the official Russian connections?  You must be smoking something other than cigarettes.   :Zzzzsleep:
No, I have real-life relatives living there, who own their own shit mortgage-free, a strange concept to americans, I know.

Nice attempt to deflect and dodge the real issue. 

Let me break it down for you.  Ukraine snubbed Russia by not paying their gas bill and throwing out the Russian puppet Yanukonvict.  Uncle Vlad wanted to be sure Russia got paid so he seized Crimea.  Mission accomplished. 

Uncle Vlad and associates profit.  Any Westerner (without deep ties to the regime in Moscow) and any Ukrainian owning land there kissed it goodbye.   :smokin:
Be careful what you wish for, you might get it.

Online Markje

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 5834
  • Country: nl
  • Gender: Male
  • MCMLXXIV
    • Mark's unix pages
  • Spouses Country: Crimea
  • Status: Married
  • Trips: 20+
Re: The Non-Invasion of the Baltic States
« Reply #38 on: July 24, 2015, 08:39:37 AM »

Uncle Vlad and associates profit.  Any Westerner (without deep ties to the regime in Moscow) and any Ukrainian owning land there kissed it goodbye.   :smokin:
And I am telling you, I never heard of any westerner being disowned. Russia also has no law forbidding foreigners to own land (afaik ianal).

And if you were on friendly terms with the town clerks in Crimea, nothing will change for 100%, as none of them have been replaced.

Quote
Who Can Buy a Property in Russia?

There are no restrictions on foreigners purchasing property in Russia. Some restrictions may apply in case of purchase of agricultural land; however, this article is mostly concerned with the issues of purchasing a residential property.
Since foreigners also didn't get to own argicultural land, thats no issue.

Mark.
You can change anything in life, but a BMW only for a BMW
My first trip to my wife: To Evpatoria!
My road trip to Crimea: Roadtrip to Evpatoria

Offline bagalia

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1193
  • Country: us
  • Gender: Male
  • Spouses Country: Ukraine/USA
  • Status: Married
  • Trips: 20+
Re: The Non-Invasion of the Baltic States
« Reply #39 on: July 25, 2015, 12:47:54 AM »
Yeah, here is an original full length version of something I penned, a condensed version of which will likely appear on Russia Insider in a few days, and which someone at RT has already pinched and reworded. It managed 40 re-tweets already in virgin form, and pretty much covers the reality.


One objection and one dissagreement.

First off, The Baltic countries offer nothing to the EU. I know you feel strongly about what countries bring to the EU but if you have nothing to offer then are you worthless? Is a country or its people not worth anything?

Moscow ceded these countries peacefully in the early 90's.

Moscow did not cede the Baltics over so peacefully as you make it look. You ignore the Lietuva bloody Sunday where 14 died and hundreds were wounded. And, Russia did not leave without a little skirmish or two in each country even after they decided to pull out.

Why do that if you wanted them back, as some now claim? Well, the answer is Russia doesn't want these places back.

Moscow had little choice in the matter. We are talking about the breakup of the USSR. At that time there was not the power or money to do much of anything. Its choices were to fire on hundreds of thousands of civilians and risk a larger war or pull out.

Crimea was another area that was given up peacefully and you now see where that has gone. Moscow seems to want Odessa also.

Last year Russia's border with Georgia was temporarily expanded as a security reason for the winter Olympics. Do you suppose they will ever move it back and how legal was that anyway.

If the Baltic states are worried, as the hysterical western media and American Neocons claim, shouldn't Finland be worried too?

Finland beat the crap out of Russia already once. There is very little to compare between it and the Baltics. Finland is a neutral country and took a different road. Whatever, the subject is the Baltics and theirs is a different history with Moscow.

Russia's Neighbors are worried! Are they really?

Yes, worried. Not worried for the reasons you seem to allude to. Do not muddy the water with western media. There is not likely to be a Russian invasion.

Baltic countries do not hate Russians, at least not all of them but there is a good amount of hate still left over for Moscow. There is still history between the Baltics and Moscow. The Baltics do not require western media to understand Moscow. They understand it much better than many others.

The Baltics see Moscow get involved in neighboring countries. They saw it in Georgia and they see it now in Ukraine. They have seen it in other countries. This involvement tends to tear countries apart. There is a genuine fear of such a thing happening in the Baltics.

There is also a fear that NATO will not be able or willing to defend them if needed. These two simple fears are enough to cause the problems you are whining about.

It was a nice enough read for Russian propaganda. I just wanted to add my two bits on those few little points.
Misery is the river of the world; everybody row, everybody row.

Offline Manny

  • Moderator
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 15251
  • Country: gb
  • Gender: Male
  • Spouses Country: Russia
  • Status: Married
  • Trips: 20+
Re: The Non-Invasion of the Baltic States
« Reply #40 on: July 25, 2015, 02:53:10 AM »
First off, The Baltic countries offer nothing to the EU. I know you feel strongly about what countries bring to the EU but if you have nothing to offer then are you worthless? Is a country or its people not worth anything?

The countries were just fine outside of the EU. But to join any club, you either pay or bring something to the party. The Baltics cost the affluent countries of the EU money. Germans, Brits and Dutch don't want to pay for roads and infrastructure in half the world. There is no benefit to it.

You ignore the Lietuva bloody Sunday where 14 died and hundreds were wounded. And, Russia did not leave without a little skirmish or two in each country even after they decided to pull out.

In terms of changing ownership of countries, I would still regard 14 as peaceful.

Crimea was another area that was given up peacefully and you now see where that has gone. Moscow seems to want Odessa also.

Not quite. Crimea was transferred to Ukraine when Ukraine was in the USSR, so no real transfer at all. Only after the USSR was Crimea trapped outside Russia in the ownership of Ukraine.

Finland beat the crap out of Russia already once. There is very little to compare between it and the Baltics. Finland is a neutral country and took a different road. Whatever, the subject is the Baltics and theirs is a different history with Moscow.

Beat the "crap" out of them when? 1917?  :rolleye0009:  Finland has about as many people as Greater Manchester. It would be easier than Crimea. However, we seem to agree there is no risk to Finland, ergo the statement that not all of Russia's neighbours are worried is quite correct.

The Baltics see Moscow get involved in neighboring countries. They saw it in Georgia and they see it now in Ukraine. They have seen it in other countries. This involvement tends to tear countries apart. There is a genuine fear of such a thing happening in the Baltics.

An overly simplistic view as used by the western media.

There is also a fear that NATO will not be able or willing to defend them if needed.

Ahh yes, the continual NATO eastward expansion without thought.

It was a nice enough read for Russian propaganda.

I love how any opinion that differs to the Washington narrative to you lot is 'propaganda'.

Offline Wiz

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 2090
  • Country: gb
  • Gender: Male
    • Greek Home Cookery
  • Spouses Country: Russia
  • Status: Married
  • Trips: 20+
Re: The Non-Invasion of the Baltic States
« Reply #41 on: July 25, 2015, 10:23:22 AM »
Nice attempt to deflect and dodge the real issue. 

Let me break it down for you.  Ukraine snubbed Russia by not paying their gas bill and throwing out the Russian puppet Yanukonvict.  Uncle Vlad wanted to be sure Russia got paid so he seized Crimea.  Mission accomplished. 

Uncle Vlad and associates profit.  Any Westerner (without deep ties to the regime in Moscow) and any Ukrainian owning land there kissed it goodbye.   :smokin:

With comments like this one ..... This thread touches on something, I have wanted to discuss for a while but I find my time is limited due to other engagements and priorities. Today, I will have a go, because I noticed nobody paid attention to my previous post on this thread and I understand posting objective and neutral comments does not go down well with certain people and as G.W. Bush said: ‘’you are either with us or …….”


Manny, I read the article in your other outlet “The real Deal”, “Russian thread to Baltic states” and I have to say it is very good, perceptive and in my humble view objective. BTW, I bought and read the book, “Frontline Ukraine” by Richard Sakwa but I don’t think many over the pond and here bother with such endeavours.  I can make several comments about the “orange revolution”, the US first try, I was there at the time and the current Ukrainian crisis but I maybe bore to tears some people. All I would say is: “Popular uprising is spontaneous and Revolutions are organised by the CIA”.

I am, as usual, fascinated by the 'contributions' from the ardent US lovers, whom, I take to be either Americans per se' or some other brainwashed anti Russian/communist/socialist individual. I have never quite understood what any balanced person could find to object to about the principles of collectivism, but it is here I wish to draw the comparison.

Here is an example from a poster in the Guardian Newspaper:

"Russia is currently a technologically and economically backward country. It has lost its homemade industry of the Soviet era. Capitalism did not create Silcon Valley in Russia - it consisted in robbery and corporate raids assisted by the judicial and fiscal authorities. Russia's military power is 1/8 of the EU's military resources. Russia plays the card of a senile imperial power. While China is projecting its economical power to the entire world Russia relies on land grab, on sending tanks to the neighbouring countries and inciting ethnic hate. Russia is mentally akin to North Corea. The only product of Russia - gas and oil - flow thru rusty pipes, 20 percent of it leaks into the taiga polluting the environment and destroying the livelyhood of local populations reindeer in Siberia. This is due to the fact that Russian companies were only interested in taking over the Soviet pipelines and making easy bucks. An impending catastrophe at home forced Putin to look for new land. But the new acquisitions cost Russia dearly. They spend billions on subsidizing corrupt political systems in South Ossetia, Abkhasia (essentially, a country for retired people) and Transnistria. Another diversion from an economical crisis is a gulag system for dissidents and the defense of traditional values - gay bashing, racism, heavy drinking and beating women. In this respect Russia is close to Uganda."

I am sure that Manny and others can write pages in reply to this cretin and ignorant, as I did, but for now, I will stick with my narrative.

Let us imagine a new “Evil Empire”. One that has spread it's tentacles through virtually the entire civilised world. Wherever this new Evil Empire doctrine is initiated, the vast majority of the population are plunged into abject poverty, while those small few who facilitated the imposition, invariably grow vastly wealthy. Following the takeover of the country, the countries assets are sold off for peanuts to members of the 'inner circle' and any trade regulations or welfare benefits are swept away.

In order to further their long-term aims and to lay siege to the actual bastions of power within some of the more democratised countries, precisely as the Soviet Union did, potential future servants of the Empire are recruited from the best universities as future political leaders or as economists. Invariably the recruited political candidates are given a fast-track rise through their political party hierarchy and often assume prime positions in government.

Frightening?

I have just described what has been going on in the world since 1973 when an active programme of world domination was hatched, in Washington, and expressly designed to impose the economic policies of one Milton Friedman and free market, monetarist dogma on the whole world. One of the biggest obstacles in the plan was the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933.
 
Fifteen years ago, in November 1999, the US government reversed one of the key elements of the Depression-era banking laws, knocking down the firewall between commercial banks, which take deposits and make loans, and investment banks, which underwrite securities. The repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933 was seen at the time as a way to help American banks grow larger and better competes on the world stage. The Treasury Secretary Lawrence H. Summers said at the time. “This historic legislation will better enable American companies to compete in the new economy.”

Mr. Obama said in a speech on the economy at Cooper Union in New York in March 2008. “Instead of establishing a 21st century regulatory framework, we simply dismantled the old one,” thereby encouraging “a winner take all, anything goes environment that helped foster devastating dislocations in our economy.”

Today, President Obama seems to have softened his views a bit when it comes to Glass-Steagall Act of 1933. The administration’s proposal for overhauling financial regulatory system makes no mention of resurrecting the firewall between commercial banks and investment banks and still allows insurance companies to deal in securities. The change of heart may have something to do with the fact that one of his senior economic advisers is Mr. Summers.

The programme actually works best where the target country has suffered (or been made to suffer) a major upheaval (Ukraine is a perfect and topical example) but where a country may have some semblance of democracy' (like the US and UK) the recruitment of political candidates is initiated.

Among those who have been recruited to the cause in the UK, I would have to name Thatcher, Blair, Straw, Mandelson, Major, Cameron Osborne etc. Of course, many minor (but significant) politicians will also be holding key positions within their respective parties under the direction of the corporatists of Wall St or the City of London.

So my question is simply this : how are any of these individuals any different from Philby, Burgess, Maclean or Blunt?

Given that, in all cases, these political harlots have sold their fellow countrymen into the indentured slavery of the global banksters and corporatists (the 1%) both at home and abroad. As such I believe we should call the actions of the majority of the current political class precisely what it is - treason.

I believe that given the damage their actions have inflicted on the populations of numerous countries worldwide they are considerably more loathsome than the aforementioned Cambridge toffs.

Neoliberalism involves the use of the state to funnel wealth from poor to rich, tax revenues being handed to corporations who provide public services which were better performed before privatisation, with the final insult being that these corporations are usually based offshore.

Naomi Klein nailed all this in The Shock Doctrine.

The state still has the potential to be a force for social democracy. In fact, it's difficult, in a world increasingly run by corporations, to see any viable countervailing force to them than the state, properly accountable, representative and careful about the interests of the most vulnerable.

Socialist individualism is meaningless, an oxymoron really. We just need to take the state back from corporate control.

It is my view that when writing any comments about the current world affairs and rolling news to take into consideration the larger puzzle of Geopolitical considerations and circumstances. So in my view the Baltic States/Ukraine/ Georgia etc. are small pones in the big world pond of interests of the new “Evil Empire”. I reiterate my previous comment that:

“It appears that the Yalta agreement, of spheres of influence is still in operation and I noticed that the Russians stick to it and the Americans too, for that matter.

 :hidechair:

PS: Wife is out shopping...  so I had time to play.  :ROFL:
"For every beauty there is an eye to see it. For every truth there is an ear to hear it."


Online msmoby

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 6573
  • Country: gb
  • Gender: Male
  • Spouses Country: Russia
  • Status: Committed
  • Trips: 20+
Re: The Non-Invasion of the Baltic States
« Reply #42 on: July 25, 2015, 10:55:24 AM »
Wiz

remind us how many US Tanks were on European soil - prior to the Kremlin's stunt in Crimea  ?

That would be ZERO

Best accompany the Mrs ...  :chuckle:

Offline Wiz

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 2090
  • Country: gb
  • Gender: Male
    • Greek Home Cookery
  • Spouses Country: Russia
  • Status: Married
  • Trips: 20+
Re: The Non-Invasion of the Baltic States
« Reply #43 on: July 25, 2015, 11:50:04 AM »
Wiz

remind us how many US Tanks were on European soil - prior to the Kremlin's stunt in Crimea  ?

That would be ZERO

Best accompany the Mrs ...  :chuckle:

You are so predictable .... never stop to think for a minute  and always prove me right! :ROFL:  :ROFL: :ROFL:

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

http://militarybases.com/germany/

Now take a look at this very short list......

List of United States Army installations in Germany

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_Army_installations_in_Germany

Did you missed my previous comment that Germany is an occupied country until 2099 to the Americans?????

With your big mouth... you are lucky you escaped...  from Abkhasia but then you had a RW to save you!  :ROFL: :ROFL: :ROFL:

I rest my case your honour!!! :P :P :P
"For every beauty there is an eye to see it. For every truth there is an ear to hear it."


Online Texan77

  • Supporting Member
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1043
  • Country: us
  • Gender: Male
  • Status: Committed
  • Trips: 5-10
Re: The Non-Invasion of the Baltic States
« Reply #44 on: July 25, 2015, 12:19:57 PM »
Russia could of joined NATO instead making NATO the enemy. Just this would not of been good for Putin.  Most of the current problem in Russia is Putin wanting to stay in power but he has done a terrible job up to this point. The Russian economy expanded early 2000's only because of the high price of oil and this was nothing Putin did.  Now Putin's Russia needs enemies that are trying to destroy Russia so Russian will support him and keep it Putin's Russia. He now enjoy a 90 per cent approval rating. Without NATO, Crimea, and the Ukraine he would be out of office.  His support was dropping fast before the Crimea event; down to 50 and a few per cent. With the recent drop in living standards it would way less. This whole war thing is so he can stay in power. In order to stay in power he has passed laws to outlaw protests, he also spends almost as much on secrete police and propaganda outlets as he does on his over sized army. He is so broke he is having to rob the health care system in Russia and lay of Russian government workers. The point is it is not the sanctions which at this point are having little to no effect, it is the dropping price of oil and economy that had nothing else going for it combined with an over size military and police budget.  This is a government that does not care about the Russian people only about Putin and his rich friends and staying in power.