It is sad that when confronted with an opossing opinion you decide that it is either somebody unifnormed or malicious.
Had you stated I was misinformed and tried to probe this, then I would have been more appreciative of your efforts (not that it would matter to you I guess), but any way.
Now lets see:
Bollocks. Russia had an imperialistic streak even when they did not call themselves USSR. The snake changes the skin but it bites just the same.
May I just say I never wish to have you as minister of foreign relations of Poland (or any country for that matter). That view is far too simplistic, attributing to nations traits found on individuals is not very sound.
USSR was centrally controlled from Moscow which as you're well aware is the capital of Russia. USSR was essentially Russia + smaller enslaved nations. Their expansionist policy was directed from Russia. We can therefore safely assume that Russia on its own would pursue the exact same foreign policy even if it wasn't called Soviet Union at the time.
This is utter nonsense.
The fact that Moscow was capital of the former USSR and of Russia does not necessarily imply that a Russian state, specialy if it had not been a communist one, would have pursued expansionist policies. It may or may had not, we will never know, but to be so forceful about what is not more than especulation is silly IMHO.
Todays Russia is a completely different thing from the USSR in many aspects, which for anybody that has seen the news during the last 20 years is to say the obvious, so to equate today's Russia with the former USSR is to ignore with one sweeping brush the contributions of many Russian pro-democracy personalities as well as the contributions of people like Gorbachev and Yeltsin.
Chechnya WAS an independent nation in the 19th century (conquered by Russians around 1857 IIRC). Do you sire think that 150 years is long enough for a nation to forget its own identity? You are either very uninformed or just lying!
You are prone to qualify people in a gratuitous and unecesary way. I said two things, one is fact: Chechnya is part of Russia. Deal with it (I did not say that it was a good thing, a fair thing, or a just thing, but the fact stands to scrutiny in all legal and practical terms, not in moral terms perhaps, but international law and hard real policy facts are what regulate modern relationships between nations). The second was clearly an explicit declaration of my own ignorance regarding how Chechnya became part of Russia. So your "you are uninformed or just lying" is unecessary and unwelcomed.
Russia does have imperial ambitions. They were strongly opposed to the central Europe countries' joining of NATO. Eventually the deal was struck when the US threatened to cut off some of the aid.
They are now protesting further expansion of NATO.
And what is Russia supposed to do? To be all happiness and cooperation? Give me a break! Why Russia is not invited to join NATO? Would not you be unhappy if they had invited all your neighbour countries to join NATO but not Poland? I guess Poland (or any other country for that matter) would have a sneaky feeling about it. But Russia, being Russia, should be all compliments and colaboration to isolate itself I guess. What nonsense. Please let us know what would be the correct Russian attitude.
Don't you see that Russia could have genuine feelings and fears of being isolated? I have still to see any statements from the current Russian goverment threateaning to invade Poland or sending the army to the borders. So please explain what those imperialistic threats are to the uninformed like me, please.
Let me tell you how these things work. It is governments' main role to attract investment into the country and to maintiain enough stability to keep that investment from moving elswhere. There is nothing inherently wrong with private investment. Russia just failed the part about maintaining stability.
What you forget is that first a goverment needs to exist and work. For all practical purposes, the Russian goverment dissapeared from many areas of Russian life (due mostly to lack or resources to keep the goverment running). That is why Russia needed foreign help: to keep a workable goverment structure. All those voids left in the power structure where filled by corrupt people or outhright criminals. An stock market and normal capitalism can't work under those circumstances.
To prove my point I will cite a Russian proverb to you: "A hen is not a bird and Poland is not a foreign land".
That proves nothing, it is at most anecdotal folklor. Where are the hard facts about Russia pursuing expansionist policies?
Until Russia becomes a better neighbour
I'm not going to shed a tear after their demise. Actually I'm going to sit back and enjoy the show.
Enjoy the show? You know what, those people suffering are real people. Russia is just an artificial creation, like Poland or any other country, they are entities we have created with the intention of somehow organize our human endeavours. Russia does not suffer, russians do. If you enjoy that, so be it, I don't, and in a more selfish tone, it is not convenient. If you think the demisse of Russia will not affect Poland or other countries in that area then I believe you could be for an ugly surprise, which I truly hope no country in that area will need to experience.
Might is right
Freedom? Which freedom?
[ Parent ]