Democratic Russia

[RaisedFistRebel]

It seems like Russia was much more powerful and prosperous in their USSR years than now in their democratic years. What do you guys know?

[Zingu]

Now that we talk about it, I was in St.Petersburg last summer!

Leningrad is a beautiful city, visited the Winter Palace, the Auroa (the warship that muinitied and joined the Bolsheviks on October 24th), I arrived in the Finland Station on a train, walked down the Neva Prospect, was in the basement where Rasputin was murdered.....a great experince.

The Communist Party of Russia is still fairly strong. But, calling Russia a democracy is worthless, Russia was taken off the list of "Free countries" last year, with Putin arresting his election oppenent and cracking down on the oil oligarchs, as well as putting all the television stations under pro-Putin government control.

[RaisedFistRebel]

o i see. i really dont know much about russia so i can understand that.

[Taiga]

There are a lot of people that are nostalgic about Soviet times in Russia. But the Communist Party is losing its power, although it's rather big and active. First of all, the main supporters of CP are the pensioners and their number is decreasing constantly. They simply die. And their leader Ghennadiy Zyuganov is frankly unpleasant guy. No signs of charisma. And this does matter.
But the president Putin is also losing his popularity, although state TV channels show him as a good wise leader (like it was in Soviet times -- rivers of syrup. I can't stand it and don't watch news on state channels -- it's unbearable).
About USSR prosperity..............
Well, it was a really great country, but pretty much was just a show. You know, they sold a lot of grain to the capitalistic countries while there was a real lack of bread in the country. But what was more important -- is to show the power and prosperity.

[SpeCtrE]

Man, Definetly USSR was stronger than Russia. Isn't it obvious, Russia only inherited the vestiges of the system that held a United SOviet.

[Scumcat Esq.]

Hello, friends. I'm from Russia and I can tell, you are not mistaken when you say that from the political point of view Russia was much more powerful and prosperous in its USSR years than now - in its democratic years. As for the Communist Party... Actually Mr. Zyuganov and Co. (KPRF) are not the only communist party here...
Also I would never call the thing we've got here "a democracy"... it's not a democracy at all. And these days there's the proof to it when there're everyday manifestations 'dedicated' to the recent steps of our governement.

[Taiga]

Originally posted by Scumcat [email protected] 26 2005, 02:03 PM
Also I would never call the thing we've got here "a democracy"... it's not a democracy at all. And these days there's the proof to it when there're everyday manifestations 'dedicated' to the recent steps of our governement.
I agree. The so-called "democracy" is pretty ambiguous. Mr. Putin isn't so simple as he seems to be.
And about these manifestations............the law was unfinished. The minister said that they didn't have even the list of those who has еру right to the priviledge while preparing the law.... :lol:

Придурки, одним словом........

:hammer:

[h&s]

Important questions: what is the labour movement like in Russia at the moment? Is it strong, or pretty much non-existent? And to what extent are left-wing policies (not USSR ones) popular?

[October Revolution]

The USSR will rise again soon you watch. With President Putin hiring ex-KGB agents into his government and putting many wealthy business men into prison or exile he's slowly building the USSR back up :hammer: and theres just been a new statue of Lenin erected in St. Petersburg, roll on the good times :hammer:

Ofcourse this is all just speculation on my part but a man can dream.

[Yazman]

Agreed in full, October Revolution!

[Non-Sectarian Bastard!]

Not really.

First off. The USSR wasn't even heading to Communism nor was it a "dreamstate".

Second. Putin is simply doing what all power hungy bastards are doing. Surrounding himself by trustees and using dead historical figures/events to for propaganda porpuses. Nothing special or to be cheerfull on that.

[October Revolution]

Well yes i don't actually think that he will resurect the USSR especially with the global climate now but it would be nice just to annoy the yanks. :hammer:

[h&s]

Originally posted by October [email protected] 26 2005, 11:29 PM
The USSR will rise again soon you watch. With President Putin hiring ex-KGB agents into his government and putting many wealthy business men into prison or exile he's slowly building the USSR back up :hammer: and theres just been a new statue of Lenin erected in St. Petersburg, roll on the good times :hammer:

Ofcourse this is all just speculation on my part but a man can dream.
This is probably the worst thing that Putin could do. Why on earth would you seriously want that?

[SpeCtrE]

The USSR will rise again soon........

How in the hell?

[Zingu]

Putin has his own agenda, that guy will stop at nothing to get it fullfilled.


At the Holocast memorial he mentioned how many members of the parliament signed a petition to ban Jewish organizations and make it illegal to practice Judaism (Which is true). Which is half good and half bad; he is going to use this as a excuse to crush the far right wing oppisition and soldify his power base.

Putin is no means nostalgic for Soviet times, he is perfectly happy with his new role as a imperialist and corporate gangster with his ex-KGB buddies.

[Scumcat Esq.]

Originally posted by [email protected] 26 2005, 07:56 PM
Ïðèäóðêè, îäíèì ñëîâîì........

:hammer:
Yup! That's the point! ;)

2Zingu: d'you really believe that Putin is an imperialist? I don't see any imperialistic tendencies in his course... He's just trying to maintain his power and his image of a strong politician though he's not at all...

[h&s]

d'you really believe that Putin is an imperialist? I don't see any imperialistic tendencies in his course... He's just trying to maintain his power and his image of a strong politician though he's not at all...
Errr, how can think that Putin's not imperialistic? Russia's imperialist influence is only too apparent in the Causcaus and the Eastern European states, not to mention Chechnya.

[Zingu]

Originally posted by Scumcat [email protected] 29 2005, 10:23 AM


2Zingu: d'you really believe that Putin is an imperialist? I don't see any imperialistic tendencies in his course... He's just trying to maintain his power and his image of a strong politician though he's not at all...
Yes.

He is trying to sink his claws back into Eastern Europe before the EU gobbles up those countries. He wants to expand the Russian sphere of infulence. As an other member stated before, he is only hanging on to Chechneya since of an important oil pipeline that runs through the country.

[SpeCtrE]

well, I won't accuse Putin of being an Imperialist. But he sure has imperialist policies.....Chechnya is an example.

[__ca va?]

First off. The USSR wasn't even heading to Communism nor was it a "dreamstate".

Second. Putin is simply doing what all power hungy bastards are doing. Surrounding himself by trustees and using dead historical figures/events to for propaganda porpuses. Nothing special or to be cheerfull on that.

I agree 100%!

Besides, I think Putis is an imperialist, as was the USSR an empire! Think about it: Russia annexed the Baltic states, a large part of the inhabitants were not Russian. Trying to regain this empire is an imperialist attempt. And I think he is trying to regain it. His policies in Georgia, Ukraine and Belarussia... There is a war going on between Russia and the US and EU for the former Russian territories. They have managed to take away Russia's satellites, now they are trying to take former USSR members too.

[Scumcat Esq.]

Originally posted by [email protected] 29 2005, 08:58 PM
He is trying to sink his claws back into Eastern Europe before the EU gobbles up those countries. He wants to expand the Russian sphere of infulence.
Gimme the examples of Putin's steps which prove he's trying to expand the Russian sphere of influence the way you see it.



As for Chechnya... well once Russia stopped war there... it had happened before Putin became the president. So what did we get then? A holy terrorist war: blown up buildings, killed citizens and many Russians started feeling fear of accidental death by the hands of an invisible enemy which says Russian church is wrong in order to cover his crimes. And have you ever heard about slave-trade? When a human being is just an article of trade, stored in the cellar, sometimes getting some water to quench his thirst and almost never a piece of food to eat. If a person punches you in the face would you turn another cheek, smile and start talking to him like nothing has happened? I would kick 'a person' back, at least. I don't think it was a kind of provocation initiated by Federal Security Service (former KGB). Yes there's oil and what's funny they don't have developped oil-producing industry and yes, some pipe-lines run across Chechnya. But believe me Russia pays for it. Also, you might have heard there's a region of Russia called Siberia. So, it's much more rich in oil and gas. Before the United States of America ruined the economy of the Soviet Union completely, there was a project of supplying oil&gas to Europe from Siberia. But our overseas neighbour didn't let us improve the situation with our economy.
May be the U.S.S.R. was an empire (though we didn't conquer the Republics) - Russia's not. If the western massmedia tells you Russia's gonna take back Ukraine and 'Belarussia' - it's a bull-sh*t, neither it's gonna take back any of Baltic states (but these ones are from another story which they're trying to rewrite doing their best). Ukraine is a sovereign country as well as Belarus. Russia is trying to develop relations based on partnership, since Russia's their neighbouring state. None made Lukashenko talking about uniting with Russia. And Ukraine - believe me they're doing fine.
Well, now about the Caucasus. Why do they come to Russia to do their business can you explain me? Look, Russia's bad and trying to capture them. Have you talked to those people? I have talked. And why they told me that it's better in Russia than in their motherlands. Why they told me that before the collapse of the U.S.S.R. we had been like brothers and though it wasn't easy it was great to live in the U.S.S.R.? Why did they say all that? I'm not that ugly and scary to be afraid of me and tell me anything just to please me.
Never the end of story.

[bolshevik butcher]

The KGB is no better than the gestapo (i know it's spelt wrong) and just because someones rich doesn't mean that they don't have rights. Putin's turning into a dictator.

[CommieDuK]

USSR was really stronger!!!! Today i hope Russia will be stronger !! I want that russia could face USA today!! specially in the middle east! USSR said in the past that the soviet will attack paris and london if they dont stop their war in egypt!! I wish that if some ex soviet countries join EU , that Venezuella and cuba and some arab and muslim countries create a UNION with Russia!!! but thats just a dream...

[bolshevik butcher]

What's people got this fetish for the ussr for? It was just a police state.

[PatinhoDoCommunista]

the national bolsheviks are gaining a significant amount of support throughout the youth :unsure:

[__ca va?]

USSR was really stronger!!!! Today i hope Russia will be stronger !! I want that russia could face USA today!! specially in the middle east! USSR said in the past that the soviet will attack paris and london if they dont stop their war in egypt!! I wish that if some ex soviet countries join EU , that Venezuella and cuba and some arab and muslim countries create a UNION with Russia!!! but thats just a dream...

I can tell you that for me it doesn't make much difference whether an American or a Russian soldier shoots the sh*t out of me! I don't want two superpowers facing eachother and I don't want to be in constant fear of being nuked! But of course I don't want a single superpower either. It would be the best if there was a balance of power on Earth between the independent countries. And it is this that is only a dream.

And I don't want to let you down but the USSR had interests in the Suez-canal (the canal was a key element in trading with countries surrounding the Indian ocean). And in fact while marching to Suez in 1956, the red army had the time even to crush the Hungarian revolution, so depicting the USSR as a protector of the suppressed people is quite irrelevant.


A holy terrorist war: blown up buildings, killed citizens and many Russians started feeling fear of accidental death by the hands of an invisible enemy which says Russian church is wrong in order to cover his crimes.

I don't want to offfend you but I think constant fear is much more bearable than being bombed to the ground. In fact more than 100.000 chechens have been killed and though I hate comparing death tolls, this is much more than the Russian casulties of chechen terrorism. What I think is that if Chechnya seceded from Russia, other territories (like Ingushland -i think it's not written like this:huh: ) would want to do so and that is what Putin tries to prevent.


And why they told me that it's better in Russia than in their motherlands. Why they told me that before the collapse of the U.S.S.R. we had been like brothers and though it wasn't easy it was great to live in the U.S.S.R.? Why did they say all that?

I don't know why they said that but on a referendum which gave them independence) in 1990 they voted othervise.

[Scumcat Esq.]

Originally posted by __ca [email protected] 2 2005, 01:07 AM
I don't know why they said that but on a referendum which gave them independence) in 1990 they voted othervise.
Since then they've had enough time to think over it and to feel what it's to be separate. Those days we all thought about some phantasmal freedom of democracy. I didn't run outdoors right after they had voted asking "Hey, dudes, how's it feel to live separately? :blink:" I've been meeting them accidentaly now and then, here or there...


And in fact while marching to Suez in 1956, the red army had the time even to crush the Hungarian revolution, so depicting the USSR as a protector of the suppressed people is quite irrelevant.

Do you think that the U.S.A. could bear presence of a strong block of eastern socialist countries in Europe? (FYI to think about the sources of all those "hungrian revolutions"....) And what do you propose to do with an enemy? To present him with flowers?


I don't want to offfend you but I think constant fear is much more bearable than being bombed to the ground.

Can not agree. Constant fear leads to paranoia.


In fact more than 100.000 chechens have been killed and though I hate comparing death tolls, this is much more than the Russian casulties of chechen terrorism.

"The Russian casulties of chechen terrorism" are all who were killed during the war in Chechnya (not only the Russians, man) and all who were killed by the acts of terrorism.

[__ca va?]

Anyway, Chechens want to be free, so why won't Russia let them be? If they'll regret it afterwards, then it's their problem. But why is it good for Russia to threat its residents for such a small territory? Yes, maybe other territories would want to become independent too, but I don't think that risking Russian lives by oppressing these peoples is worth it all.


Do you think that the U.S.A. could bear presence of a strong block of eastern socialist countries in Europe? (FYI to think about the sources of all those "hungrian revolutions"....) And what do you propose to do with an enemy? To present him with flowers?

I don't think the US would like the idea but what does this have to do with what I have said? Sorry, I don't understand the second sentence either, because I don't know what "FYI" means :blink: But I don't think a people struggling for independence is an "enemy". Only for the oppressor.


"The Russian casulties of chechen terrorism" are all who were killed during the war in Chechnya

Does this mean that the German soldiers killed in the great patriotic war were "casualties of Russian terrorism"?

[Scumcat Esq.]

FYI means For Your Information, man. ;) (it can be found in any list of the abbreviations used for Internet communication. but it's ok)


Anyway, Chechens want to be free, so why won't Russia let them be? If they'll regret it afterwards, then it's their problem. But why is it good for Russia to threat its residents for such a small territory? Yes, maybe other territories would want to become independent too, but I don't think that risking Russian lives by oppressing these peoples is worth it all.


Chechnya's free. If you speak Russian visit www.chechnya.gov.ru - the official website of Chechnya. There you can learn their constitution. The first point is "Chechen Republic (Nohchijn Republic) - is the democratic social jural state with the republican government. Sovereignity of the Chechen Republic is expressed in full authority (legislative, executive and judicial) outside the jurisdiction of the RF and the subjects of shared jurisdiction of the RF and Chechen Republic and it is the essential substance of the Chehen Republic. The territory of the Chechen Republic is entire and indivisble and it's an essential part of the territory of the RF." And further "The only source of power in the Chechen Republic within the jurisdiction of the Republic are its multinational people" and so on and so forth. They're living their life on their own. Russia sponsors (not sure if it's the right word) the republic. And it has its own president who was elected on the 1st of September, 2004. And that's the law. Risking anyone for the sake of justice is worth anything.


I don't think the US would like the idea but what does this have to do with what I have said? Sorry, I don't understand the second sentence either, because I don't know what "FYI" means But I don't think a people struggling for independence is an "enemy". Only for the oppressor.


Well the U.S.A. was slowly but constantly furthered destroying of the so called Eastern block of countires and the U.S.S.R. And it's more than just possible that all those "revolutions" in the "Eastern Europe" were provoked by the U.S.A. The provocers are enemies and teh enemy is anyone who has violated the law.


Does this mean that the German soldiers killed in the great patriotic war were "casualties of Russian terrorism"?

The German soldiers killed in the Great Patriotic War (the war of terrorists is not patriotic, many of them are not even from Chechnya) were the German casualties of the Soviet (Liberation) Army and of their own stupidity. They were fascists and it served them right.

[__ca va?]

Thanks for explaining FYI :rolleyes:

I don't speak Russian, so I can't visit chechnya.gov.ru. But I have doubts about the Chechen souvereignity. For instance I wouldn't call a country independent knowing that there are Russian troops in its territory. The constitution may say what it wants, but that won't change reality. I hope you're not that naive! Declaring Chechnya an independent country would be - despite any constitution - like saying that the German Democratic Republic was democratic.



Well the U.S.A. was slowly but constantly furthered destroying of the so called Eastern block of countires and the U.S.S.R. And it's more than just possible that all those "revolutions" in the "Eastern Europe" were provoked by the U.S.A. The provocers are enemies and teh enemy is anyone who has violated the law.

I think it is more possible that "all those revolutions" were provoked by the Stalinist regimes oppressing the people. I don't think my grandparents were American agents or had any connection with Americans. I beleive that the Hungarian, Czech and Polish revolutions were just. Because the government (and a socialist one is especially!) for the people, and if it doesn't fulfill its obligations towards the people, it must fall!


The German soldiers killed in the Great Patriotic War (the war of terrorists is not patriotic, many of them are not even from Chechnya) were the German casualties of the Soviet (Liberation) Army and of their own stupidity. They were fascists and it served them right.

If there were Russian (or any other) troops in my garden, I'd also think of resistance. I think most of the Chechens do the same. Resist.
As for the Germans: not all of the soldiers were fascists, there were many of them who were fathers and husdbands and wanted to get back to their families safe. Things are not black or white as we all know.

[bolshevik butcher]

Originally posted by [email protected] 3 2005, 01:43 PM
You must be crazy if you think Russia is turning in tho the USSR, its exactly the opposite. Putin is become a fascist dicator with no sense of well-being for the people. All Putin cares about is his power plays.
Just like the ussr then.

[Scumcat Esq.]

2 _ca va?

You see, man. I'll never persuade you, neither you'll persuade me. You're from Hungary - you'd rather skip my attitude about the roots of the revolutions in the Eastern Europe and policy of the governments there. But I tell you I saw the CIA and french officers talking about "the way to make a revolt abroad" giving the corresponding examples of actual application. I'm from Russia and Chechnya's its republic, so it's normal that there're some Russian military forces there. I'd never call it occupation - I repeat: they are living on their own. Russian forces helps their government to prevent crimes and secure peace. You said we shouldn't paint it all black and white but you do it talking about the revolutions in the Eastern Europe. And back to Chechnya, don't you assume that not everybody in Chechnya want to live separately, that it's the minority who does? (I don't affirm that - I just give you a tip). Since Chechnya is te republic I don't give a shit about nationality of people who live and die there - they're all citizens of RF.
I'm not naive about laws, constitutions and so on. But I am sure that a country can't be called a jural state unless people follow the law. You say "The constitution may say what it wants, but that won't change reality." So where do we go now? What are we doing here then? I am an idealist, man. So I would die for justice. (Know it's pathetic but I've already wrote about it when I registered here). And I don't believe in honest-minded politicians. And I don't support Putin and never did.
As for the Great Patriotic War - for the things there are painted black and white, and it will never change. Let those German soldiers not all be nazies and fascists, but they were armed and came to destroy my grandparents and parents. They were fathers and husbands... Hitler also had a dog and Eva Brown, so what? Let them be fathers but what example they showed their children then? If they were that good they could resist against fascists at least. Did they think that it's safer to take a gun and go conquer Europe. There's no compromise.

[__ca va?]

You see, man. I'll never persuade you, neither you'll persuade me. You're from Hungary - you'd rather skip my attitude about the roots of the revolutions in the Eastern Europe and policy of the governments there. But I tell you I saw the CIA and french officers talking about "the way to make a revolt abroad" giving the corresponding examples of actual application.

I think debates are not for persuading eachother but rather for presenting many point of views for people reading our posts.
And I think that the CIA couldn't have influence on Hungary because of the extensive monitoring of the people. In 1956 the Stalinist leader, Rákosi was made to resign and therefore the atmosphere became more free. After the party attempted to make the leader of ÁVH (the Hungarian KGB) the first secretary, the people realized that it wouldn't change anything, Stalinists would be back. So they protested and demanded that the former prime minister -a reformer- became 1st secretary. When the ÁVH shot in the crowd from the balconies of the Parliament, tha revolution broke out.

I've written all this to show you that the CIA didn't really have to do anything, things came one after another. I don't know if the CIA had a role in the Czech and Polish revolutions.


You said we shouldn't paint it all black and white but you do it talking about the revolutions in the Eastern Europe.

Why? Because I don't accept that the American intelligence provoked them? That the revolters were "enemies" and fascists? I won't accept these because they are not true.


And back to Chechnya, don't you assume that not everybody in Chechnya want to live separately, that it's the minority who does?

Ok, then let's hold another referendum to find out their ideas. Do you think they would vote against separation?


You say "The constitution may say what it wants, but that won't change reality." So where do we go now? What are we doing here then? I am an idealist, man. So I would die for justice.

I didn't say that constitutions are worthless. In a constitutional state they work. But there are occasions (when there are terrorists blowing themselves up under your window, when there are tanks on every other corner), when they are not really making a difference. And by the way, constitutions not necessarily represent justice (I'm not talking about Chechnya now).


As for the Great Patriotic War - for the things there are painted black and white, and it will never change. Let those German soldiers not all be nazies and fascists, but they were armed and came to destroy my grandparents and parents.

Now that's exactly what I'm laking about. Those soldiers didn't go to Russia because they were nazis but because the nazi leadership ordered them to go there. Of course there were nazis among them but not everybody. The war was between the politicians, but it were the soldiers who died. Have you seen the musical "Hair"? It's the same situation!

And as for myself, I would have to be a bit confused if I had to regard things in two coloures. Because in WWII Hungary fought on the side of the fascists, we had been fascists ourselves, and for I'm a leftist I would have to say that we were the evil. But the problem is that it were not the fascists (they were working for the fascist party in the cities, so they didn't go to the war) who died in the frontlines. The 250.000 Hungarians killed at the Don curve were mainly peasants and ordinary people recruited in the villages.
So in this respedt I would have to say that the Russians were the "evil" who killed my forefathers. And when they reached Hungary, the Red Army raped the women and took away everything that the Germans hadn't already taken.
But meanwhile doing so, they liberated my country from fascist rule, in this respect they were the "good". There no things painted in blck and white. Not even in the war.

[Scumcat Esq.]

Thank you for your description of the Hungrian revolution events in 1956, _ca va?. Though I didn&#39;t mention that the revolters were fascists. For the Soviet Army they were depicted as the enemy and counter-revolutionaries that&#39;s why I said that. I don&#39;t justify the army actions. But thank <I-don&#39;t-know-who> we&#39;ve got mistakes in the past to avoid them in the future and present.

Chechnya... Ok let&#39;s hold another referendum. I don&#39;t think they&#39;ll vote for separation as it will change their life radically with all corresponding consequences. But still we gotta ask them to learn. As soon as I have such opportunity I&#39;ll do that.

Probably constitutions don&#39;t always represent justice but they represent law which implies order - and this is very valuable. Constitutions form the basis for justice.

Certainly I know that you&#39;d have to be confused if you had to regard things concerning the role of Hungary in the second WW. The germans still apologize to the world for what happened 60 years ago. As for the crimes the Red Army soldiers commited when they reached Hungary. (I&#39;m very surprised that the Germans took something away from the country which represented their ally.) Well it was not total and it always happens at war as there&#39;re always a few bastards who think they have a right to do so. There was not an order:"Soldiers of the Red Army, go and fuck everything that moves and everything that doesn&#39;t&#33; You won&#39;t ever be punished for that." These people were despised by the rest of soldiers and as soon as someone happened to know what they had done the bastards were punished. Either by their commanders, either by other soldiers themselves.

[__ca va?]

For the Soviet Army they were depicted as the enemy and counter-revolutionaries that&#39;s why I said that.

And another thing is that the army was heading to Suez when the revolution broke out, so I can also beleive that the soldiers didn&#39;t exactly know where they were. What they saw was a war zone, and what does a soldier have to do in a war zone? Shoot. So I can&#39;t really blame them. I rather blame the Soviet government.


Probably constitutions don&#39;t always represent justice but they represent law which implies order - and this is very valuable. Constitutions form the basis for justice.

100% agree ;)


(I&#39;m very surprised that the Germans took something away from the country which represented their ally.)

In fact on 19 march 1944 the Germans occupied Hungary because the government was unwilling to fulfill their requests and tried to quit the war. So from then on Hungary basically had the status of Czechoslovakia at the same time. So where the Germans were forced by the Red Army to retreat, they took away machinery, fuel, valuables. And when the R.A. arrived they took away what the Germans had left: wristwatches, steel, even boots and other clothes. Why I consider this sad is because the peasantry had been waiting for them as for a Messiah and when liberation eventually occured, the liberators caused a great disappointment :(


There was not an order:"Soldiers of the Red Army, go and fuck everything that moves and everything that doesn&#39;t&#33; You won&#39;t ever be punished for that." These people were despised by the rest of soldiers and as soon as someone happened to know what they had done the bastards were punished. Either by their commanders, either by other soldiers themselves.

I do hope it happened that way ;)

[Non-Sectarian Bastard!]

Originally posted by Scumcat [email protected] 7 2005, 02:20 PM
There was not an order:"Soldiers of the Red Army, go and fuck everything that moves and everything that doesn&#39;t&#33; You won&#39;t ever be punished for that." These people were despised by the rest of soldiers and as soon as someone happened to know what they had done the bastards were punished. Either by their commanders, either by other soldiers themselves.
I don&#39;t know if you talk about Hungary or Germany 1945 here. But rape of German women was widely tolerated and there were even 3 official days, inwhich the Soviet troops were able to do whatever they wanted. From raping, murder, looting, whatever suited them.

And I am sure that rape occured in Hungary unpunished too. The soldiers were angry and in full authority.

[revolutionary comrade]

whenpeople say look how shit russia was under communism, look at it now. its a pathetic country. bring back communism in reussia

[Taiga]

Originally posted by __ca [email protected] 2 2005, 04:58 PM
Anyway, Chechens want to be free, so why won&#39;t Russia let them be? If they&#39;ll regret it afterwards, then it&#39;s their problem. But why is it good for Russia to threat its residents for such a small territory? Yes, maybe other territories would want to become independent too, but I don&#39;t think that risking Russian lives by oppressing these peoples is worth it all.

Are you kidding?
To let Chechnya free? What a stupidity........
The Chechen war isn&#39;t about independence at all. Think a little. The war is a damn expensive thing. Do you think Chechen "rich" people give money to buy AKs etc.?
No. The "rebels" have some very rich sponsors. Guess who. So if Chechnya will be independent, they will turn it into a training camp for terrorists (oops... sorry, "rebels","gunmen" etc). And they won&#39;t stop. Dagestan will be next. And then other south Russian territories. And more and more....
Nice perspective...... <_<

[__ca va?]

So if Chechnya will be independent, they will turn it into a training camp for terrorists

You&#39;re writing as if terrorists didn&#39;t have enough places to train rebels in the present. In Iran, Saudi-Arabia, Northern Africa they can do whatever they want. I think they don&#39;t depend on Chechnya.


whenpeople say look how shit russia was under communism, look at it now. its a pathetic country. bring back communism in reussia

We are learning about Russian history at school and it turned out to me that in fact bolshevism was a lot better for Russians than the former regime (at least before and after Stalin).


I don&#39;t know if you talk about Hungary or Germany 1945 here. But rape of German women was widely tolerated and there were even 3 official days, inwhich the Soviet troops were able to do whatever they wanted. From raping, murder, looting, whatever suited them.

And I am sure that rape occured in Hungary unpunished too. The soldiers were angry and in full authority.

Well, I&#39;m afraid they acted this way in Hungary too. :(