Why don't people like Russian?

Dwayne   Thursday, March 24, 2005, 14:04 GMT
Mishka,

>>> The Russians suffered more than any other nation in Russia as they were the majority. <<<
Well, I do not understand your logic here. How come that being majority necessitates to suffer more? I would say that more often the contrary is true -- minorities suffer more. Though, of course, there is no single factor that determines that, besides human suffering is not a thing that you measure by a meter, so any such comparision is very subjective.

>>> Georgians? As Stalin and Beria were Georgians. <<<
It has nothing to do with one's ethnicity but what country gave them the power to do what they did.

>>> How about Napoleonic war, caused so much sufferings here? <<<
Any war causes grief and suffering :( But at least Napoleon's army did not commit any atrocities against civilians, and now this war is nothing but a page of European history. In constrast, Stalin and Hitler have commited a crime against humanity, which should not be forgetted or forgiven.

>>> And what about the Latvians worn the uniform of fascists who fighted with the Soviet Army? <<<
The Latvians had the right to fight against the army that invaded in their territory and deported many citizens. Of course, cooperation with Nazi German was morally wrong, but what you can do if you're caught in cross-fire between two much more powerful neighbors? Some people saw Germany as the less of two eveils. Maybe they were right or maybe they were wrong, but in any case, if they had to appologize to someone then to Latvian Jews. Of course, wearing this SS uniform cannot be justified. This uniform is a sign of Nazi ideology, not Lativan independency.

>>> my facts were taken from here:
http://rigaxx.narod.ru/latvijaxx3e.html <<<

I hardly see any facts there but soviet propaganda, which probably taken from some old soviet history workbook or something like that.

>>> Pity, it's not in English. <<<

Indeed... then everyone could see what crap is written there.

If you are intereseted in facts then read this:
http://www.answers.com/topic/occupation-of-baltic-republics


>>> The people who killed and tortured others and carried out Stalin's orders were the Russians (in majority), but also the people who set the Eastern Europe free from fascism and died for this by hundreds of thousands were the Russians as well. <<<
One thing does not exclude the other, but in this case, this freeing from fascism happened as the result of defeating German, which was the goal of the USSR in the war. The Soviet Union has never cared much about freedom of people but how to increase its military present in Europa. The followed events -- Hungary (1956), Checkoslovakia (1968) -- clearly demonstrated the repressive nature of the soviet regime and its attitude tio the right of other nations to self-determination.


Vytenis,

>>> I would like to know where are you from? <<<
Well, that's become a traditional question at the end of almost any thread I participate in :)
I am Russian and live in Russia now.
Vytenis   Thursday, March 24, 2005, 20:04 GMT
Thanks. I am from Lithuania:)
Travis   Thursday, March 24, 2005, 20:19 GMT
mishka, well, this is a bit belated, but the thing is that you cannot necessarily assume the same people to have been directly involved in both themselves, even though they had the same political leaders, who were as a result responsible for both. But then, remember that the "Great Patriotic War" wasn't necessarily all about simply trying to defeat Nazi Germany, as it did involve the effective conquest of the Baltic states, the attempted conquest of Finland, the expulsion of German-speaking populations from Eastern Europe (much of which had nothing to do with the Third Reich in the first place, and which was far, far bloodier than what most'd think), and in the long run turning Eastern Europe into a Soviet sphere of influence. One cannot assume that the Soviet side in World War Two was really fighting against specifically /fascism/ per se. Rather, it seems like it was faught primarily for nationalism more than anything else, and such nationalism is perfectly compatible with the same government which gave Russia the purges and gulags.
mishka   Friday, March 25, 2005, 00:13 GMT
Travis,
Well, following your logic, the Soviet Union was nationalistic state.
Nice, indeed.
Maybe Russians should have lost this war and let Hitler the opportunity to drown the Europe with blood. Though, the Brits and the Americans would't care much as I take it. They were just waiting who will give in first-Russians or Germans until 1944 when the outcome of war in Europe was predetermined.

Seems like you still mix two things the Russians and the Soviets.
But I don't care. I quit it.
Travis   Friday, March 25, 2005, 00:40 GMT
That's just how I was saying that the two were compatible with each other (the Soviets' defeat of Nazi Germany and the actions of the Soviet government both within the Soviet Union as well as throughout Eastern Europe as a whole). Whether one side should or should not have one at this point is basically all in retrospect, and effectively irrelevent, as no matter what one thinks of what /should/ have happened, what did happen did happen, whether one likes it or not.