"N. Korea claims nuke"

[Boroda]

Originally posted by Kieran
Baloney. When was Yalta? When did Russia declare war? That's right, three days before Japan's surrender. Thanks for the "help".

Are you sure you are literate? I already said: ""no later then 3 months after the war in Europe is over".  War in Europe ended on May, 9th. USSR declared war on Japan and Manchou-Go on August 8th. You have to visit not only history class, but reading and arithmetics too.

BTW, I can imagine your propaganda howling about "russian bastrds" in case we didn't declare war on August 8th.

Originally posted by Kieran
Remember the B-29's that had to land in Russia after bombing Japan? Thanks for giving them back... oh, wait, you had a non-aggression pact with Japan, right? That's why you kept the B-29s of your allies, copied them, renamed them, and then flew them as your own in the post-war Russia. Go ahead, spin that, baby. [/B]

The crews had a nice option of landing in Japan.

Any country studies any example of military equipment of it's ally when possible. Just like you examined T-34 and KV tanks.

AFAIK US still uses war-time Soviet weapon designs, like pontoon parks that you had to copy exactly. So what?

Your move, please. What will it be this time?

[Sikboy]

Originally posted by Boroda
"13 days" is a nice movie, but I was enraged by the fact that trading Jupiters for Cuban missiles is declared "unfair" and "impossible". How else did you expect Nikita to persuade you to remove the missiles threatening European part of the USSR?

The idea that reciprication would be impossible was simply following the argument against appeasment. "If we give them this, they will be encouraged to try this nonsense again and again" This goes right back to my "Dane Geld" comment form ealier.  It's really funny though, when you think about the tactical nuclear situation in Europe twenty years after the events in Cuba. What did either side really get out of that, except a delay in the inevitable?

The whole Cold War was a game of countermeasures from both sides.

Agreed.

-Sik

(BTW, if anyone is unfamiliar with Dane-Geld, check out http://www.geocities.com/~spanoudi/poems/kipli05.html
There's a copy of the Kipling Poem there.)

[Boroda]

Originally posted by straffo
from a technical/juridical stand point you are perhaps right Boroda

but from a ethical point you are compleltly wrong ...

to make my point clearer : the Nazi use the exact same trick to defend their act why do you rely on such a disgusting technique ?

I'm the first to say that french are far from perfect and made lot of error in the past and will likely do some in the future ...

What can't you say something like : we screwed ?

For exemple do you seriouly thaink that the chechen are the only guilty of the current situation in chechenia ?

Having studied a bit the Algerian war I see exact  same propaganda used by both side of the chechen war but almost 30 year later . ...

A reasonable answer, Straffo.

From my POV the responsibility for Chechen war lays on Russian administration of 1991, both political and military. They withdrew the troops from Chechnya and left all the weapons and stocks for the gangsters. The problem is too complicated to describe it here. Yeltsyn and Grachev wanted to use Chechens as a sword of Damocles over Caucasus. A good example: Basayev's gang fought against Georgians in Abkhazia. But the situation went out of control and we faced a dangerous gangster state that couldn't be controlled by anyone

As for ethical point of view - Russia faced an enemy that was it's ally in WWII, and it was not USSR who started discussing war in Europe after 1945. German troops preserved in POW camps in Western occupation zones with all their weapons in stock to turn them against Russians is only one sign of what former "allies" prepared for us. The main reason was to protect USSR from the well-prepared agression.

Was "Charioter" the name of the first plan of nuclear attack against USSR? Correct me if I am wrong.

[Thrawn]

Originally posted by AKS\/\/ulfe
Maybe, but that's the what-if... What if Canada became Communist... would they have even made it?

What if indeed.
-SW [/B]

I thought Canada was communist, I thought the question was about what would happen if Canada joined the USSR.  



"The US treats its socialism like a Catholic priest treats masturbation, it does it very rarely, with a great amount of guilt, and trie its very hardest to ignore the relief that it brings."

[Boroda]

Originally posted by Sikboy
The idea that reciprication would be impossible was simply following the argument against appeasment. "If we give them this, they will be encouraged to try this nonsense again and again" This goes right back to my "Dane Geld" comment form ealier.  It's really funny though, when you think about the tactical nuclear situation in Europe twenty years after the events in Cuba. What did either side really get out of that, except a delay in the inevitable?

I know what Dane Geld means

I think that Cuban crisis was a major Soviet victory.

Is it common knowlege in the West that USSR had nuclear missiles in East Germany since late-50s? Few years ago I heard that Spiegel magazine had an article about "the recently uncovered facts that USSR deployed nukes in Germany", and it was a "sensational discovery". Damn. My Grandfather was a "Portable Missile-Technical base" commander in East Germany in 1956-65. They were stocking atomic and hydrogen warheads, missile fuel and spare parts...

It seems to me that poor Europe was a chessboard for two superpowers, and in case of major conflict they could simply count it off as "inevitable casualities", while any threat to mother countries was considered a great problem awaiting immediate solution.

[weazel]

Originally posted by Boroda
If you can't read what I posted above - I think it's not a problem of my English.

 

Again I have to answer this roadkill for the twelvth time. Soviet war against Japan was arranged in Teheran and Yalta, "no later then 3 months after the war in Europe is over". Yankees asked Stalin to help them and defeat the Japanese continental army. You asked - we did, killing thousands of Soviet soldiers after the war was over.

[Boroda]

Originally posted by mietla
who needs pissy-cola if you can have the latest in communist refreshments. Ahhh,  yummy soda with or without fruit juice.

This one is from communist Poland, but when I was in Moskaw I saw the same thing.

Mietla, funny, but we didn't have to chain the glasses to the soda machines

[Sikboy]

Originally posted by Boroda
It seems to me that poor Europe was a chessboard for two superpowers, and in case of major conflict they could simply count it off as "inevitable casualities", while any threat to mother countries was considered a great problem awaiting immediate solution.

In a geopolitical sense, I agree (sorry Euros ) But the same principle applies when looking at threats to the Soviet Union and United States soil in 1982. Instead of Intermediate Nuclear Forces though, we are talking about SLBM, and nuclear submarines. Within 20 years the number of deployed warheads and the shear power of those warheads made the SS-4 and Jupiter Missiles look downright silly. By that time our Day-to-day lives were lived with far and away greater tonnage pointing at them.

With regard to the Cuban Missile situation being a major Soviet Victory, the only thing that would offset that, would be if the US were already taking the missiles out of Turkey prior to the "crisis." Discussions had been ongoing since Sept of 1961 (nuclearfiles.org) but I think there is little doubt that the Cuban Missile Crisis hastened their removal.

-Sik

[Kieran]

hehe, I can't believe you, Boroda.

You hold the position the Russians helped the Allies as a result of Yalta, but did absolutely nothing until it was obvious the Japanese were about to surrender. You seem to want me to believe they had picked August 9th as the day to attack, which just happened to coincide with the second atomic bomb (Nagasaki) and Japan's overture to surrender through Russian channels.

Interesting the Japanese should choose the Russians as the path to sue for peace... why would they do that, unless... the non-aggression pact they had with Russia made them believe the Russians might actually honor the intent of the message? Stupid Japanese, eh? And of course, we know the Japanese were a serious threat to Russia by this point, so it was imperative for Russia to defend itself. Hehe.

So the poor Russians had to declare war on a defenseless country because they were afraid of the propagandist Americans scathing criticisms. Oh. And I thought it was an opportunistic land grab attempt...

I read fine. I understand fine.

[straffo]

Originally posted by Boroda
A reasonable answer, Straffo.

From my POV the responsibility for Chechen war lays on Russian administration of 1991, both political and military. They withdrew the troops from Chechnya and left all the weapons and stocks for the gangsters. The problem is too complicated to describe it here. Yeltsyn and Grachev wanted to use Chechens as a sword of Damocles over Caucasus. A good example: Basayev's gang fought against Georgians in Abkhazia. But the situation went out of control and we faced a dangerous gangster state that couldn't be controlled by anyone

As for ethical point of view - Russia faced an enemy that was it's ally in WWII, and it was not USSR who started discussing war in Europe after 1945. German troops preserved in POW camps in Western occupation zones with all their weapons in stock to turn them against Russians is only one sign of what former "allies" prepared for us. The main reason was to protect USSR from the well-prepared agression.

Was "Charioter" the name of the first plan of nuclear attack against USSR? Correct me if I am wrong.

You know that we are more closer each other than I am to the american
Question of culture and education I guess  ...

I guess that it make me a commie suporter for lot of american but they will be as wrong as you saying I'm a capitalist pig

Things are sometime hard to balance ...

As I'm an ultra communistico-anarchist-capitalist-free market  pig


And I guess you will agree with me that using past event to read the future is not the good way things are not that simple in real world ...

Those thinking you are a commie are just wrong I bet you are like me proud of your nation and your people (but not allways ... like me )
Sometime I think that my american fellow lack of "esprit critique" but well ... they are not arrogant frog like me

[Dead Man Flying]

Originally posted by Boroda
I think that Cuban crisis was a major Soviet victory.

LOL!

Too bad Nikita Khrushchev wasn't quite so successful in painting it as such to his fellow high-ranking party members, eh?

-- Todd/Leviathn

[Sikboy]

Originally posted by straffo
  ...

I guess that it make me a commie suporter for lot of american but they will be as wrong as you saying I'm a capitalist pig

As I'm an ultra communistico-anarchist-capitalist-free market pig

We have a word for that here in America. We call that "French"

-Sik

[weazel]

The Rising Sun by John Toland, an in depth study of the decline and fall of the Japanese empire.  

A great read, very informative, it also supports what Boroda is saying.

Originally posted by Kieran
hehe, I can't believe you, Boroda.

You hold the position the Russians helped the Allies as a result of Yalta, but did absolutely nothing until it was obvious the Japanese were about to surrender. You seem to want me to believe they had picked August 9th as the day to attack, which just happened to coincide with the second atomic bomb (Nagasaki) and Japan's overture to surrender through Russian channels.

Interesting the Japanese should choose the Russians as the path to sue for peace... why would they do that, unless... the non-aggression pact they had with Russia made them believe the Russians might actually honor the intent of the message? Stupid Japanese, eh? And of course, we know the Japanese were a serious threat to Russia by this point, so it was imperative for Russia to defend itself. Hehe.

So the poor Russians had to declare war on a defenseless country because they were afraid of the propagandist Americans scathing criticisms. Oh. And I thought it was an opportunistic land grab attempt...

I read fine. I understand fine.

[straffo]

Originally posted by Sikboy
We have a word for that here in America. We call that "French"

-Sik

hu ho

forgot this one

[Kieran]

I am not saying the US in post-war wouldn't have said anything about the Russians- they did, and that's a matter of public record. What I am finding amusing is the assertion the Russians didn't grab as much land at the close of the war as they possibly could, and that they never occupied territory without the invitation of the occupied.

For the record, Russia did declare war only after it was obvious the Japanese were finished, for whatever reasons. The Russians did have a non-aggression pact with the Japanese throughout the war. Again, both points are a matter of public record.