Ukraine

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Spiffor

If you think the EU hates Russia because we oppose the way you handle Chechnya, then the EU also hates the US for its behaviour in iraq, it hates Israel for its behaviour in Palestine, it hates China for its behaviour in Tibet, it hates Sudan for its behaviour in Darfur etc, it hates Turkey for its behaviour in Armenia etc...
?"

I cant let that pass unchallenged. Israels behavior in Palestine is NOT comparable to Russian behavior in Chechnya. I would suggest you compare tactics, casualties, degrees of destruction etc between Israelis in Jenin and Russians in Grozhny. Israels record is far from perfect, but the above comparison is misleading. (russians would say that theyre excused, cause they are sovereign in Chechnya, not occupiers IE an international law defense, NOT a defense of their actual human rights record)

And of course the Sudan and Armenia examples are cases of alleged genocide, on a large scale. Not comparable to Chechnya, and certainly not to Iraq (where the US overthrew a genocidal regime) or to Israel.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
oh. The citizenship issue is complex, as there have been ethnic Russians SETTLED in the Baltics during the entire Soviet period to create FACTS ON THE GROUND. Since Russia is DEMOGRAPHICALLY strong, it was in Soviet times able to increase numbers to point where a SECULAR DEMOCRATIC STATE OF LATVIA was almost INFEASIBLE. All Latvia has asked is that the SETTLERS adopt the Latvian language and culture, in order to gain full citizenship and voting rights. Otherwise they may remain as residents, but without full citizenship.

They have no citizenship at all, LOTM. They are apatrides.
The Latvian reaction to Russian colonization is understandable, but it is certainly not something we should deem good.
There are many people who are too old to learn the language, and who'll never be citizen again, unless the EU forces Latvia in that direction.
The integration of the Russophone minority should be actively promoted. Fortunately, that's what the EU is doing.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Spiffor

They have no citizenship at all, LOTM. They are apatrides.
The Latvian reaction to Russian colonization is understandable, but it is certainly not something we should deem good.
There are many people who are too old to learn the language, and who'll never be citizen again, unless the EU forces Latvia in that direction.
The integration of the Russophone minority should be actively promoted. Fortunately, that's what the EU is doing.

all the sources ive seen discuss residency as well. Which is not extended to russian migrants post1992, but is extended to those residing in Latvia pre-1992. AFAICT this residency includes the right to live and to work. Thats what i meant by "not full citizenship" any Latvians here?

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
And of course the Sudan and Armenia examples are cases of alleged genocide, on a large scale. Not comparable to Chechnya, and certainly not to Iraq (where the US overthrew a genocidal regime) or to Israel.

What is comparable is not what actually happened. The comparable thing is the EU's criticisms about it. We criticize pretty much every country on this planet (including our own, of course). We criticize Russia, the US, Israel, China, Sudan, Turkey etc. If media attention was brought on Colombia or Indonesia, we'd criticize them just as much.

Yet, does it mean we hate all of you guys? Does it mean we are obsessed with each and every country on the list? Does it mean our foreign policy only aims at undermining you (each individual country on the list)?

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Spiffor

What is comparable is not what actually happened. The comparable thing is the EU's criticisms about it. We criticize pretty much every country on this planet (including our own, of course). We criticize Russia, the US, Israel, China, Sudan, Turkey etc. If media attention was brought on Colombia or Indonesia, we'd criticize them just as much.

Yet, does it mean we hate all of you guys? Does it mean we are obsessed with each and every country on the list? Does it mean our foreign policy only aims at undermining you (each individual country on the list)?

Fine - i just thought it necesary to point out that all those situations are not the same.

[Serb]

Originally posted by lord of the mark


Actually we did encourage civilians to leave Fallujah, and almost all did.

Yeah, right you gave them exactly three days to leave the city. It's more than enough. Not to mention that male persons of age 15-55 were not allowed to leave it.

In the assault our troops STILL went house to house, and did NOT level the city.

I think you need some photos. US used cluster bombs, artllery, missiles, rockets and all available firepower to crush the uprising. Al-Fullujah laid in ruins now. If you need pic, just whistle. It looks a thousand times worse than Grozny looks now.

Perhaps Russians in Grozhny did not do so either.

Perhaps they did.

Fallujah has been covered extensivly by embedded reporters, who have given detailed reports on US marince actions including reporting an instance where a Marine shot a terrorist who was wounded and apparently not resisting. It caused quite a stir over here.

Oh really? Why members of Red Cross weren't allowed to be there then?
I can't recall any Russian reporter broadcasting from Al-Fallujah, despite there are dozens of them in Iraq.

Have reporters accompanied Russian troops in Chechnya?

Of course they did. We have seen reports from there live in every TV news, everyday , every hour.

Have Russian troops been held to such standards, not to kill a wounded (but not surrendered) terrorist?

Of course.
But I'm not aware of any single case of such behavior of Russian troops. I'm talking about well documented evidences (like that tape for example), not about fairytales of those freedom fighters or their cheap fakes you westerners like to buy.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Serb

Yeah, right you gave them exactly tree days to leave the city. It's more than enough. Not to mention that male persons of age 15-55 were not allowed to leave it.

all evidence is that everyone who wanted to leave had time to do so. ANd military age males WERE allowed out of the city, but were subject to detention.

[Serb]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
oddly, when Latvia applied to the EU, THIS is what ethnic Russians chose to protest.

"RIGA, , May. 1 (UPI) -- While Latvia formally joined the European Union Saturday, ethnic Russians in the country held a huge rally in defense of their language rights.

The ex-Soviet nation along with nine other states joined the EU Saturday. But at least 20,000 protestors marched peacefully through Riga to protest a law curbing the use of Russian in education, the BBC reported.

Under an EU law, all schools must teach mainly in Latvian.

Russian speakers make up almost a third of Latvia's population, and less than half of them have been given citizenship.

The demonstrators, many bused into the capital, sang the anthem of the Russian-language movement, a version of Pink Floyd's "Another Brick In The Wall."

The demonstration centered at the Soviet-era Victory Monument, which commemorates the defeat of Nazi Germany. Many Latvians see the monument as a symbol of the beginning of Soviet oppression."



Had we intervened in FRY in defense of Albanian language rights, we would have had to go in years before we did. However we did not.

I've meant something different. IIRC, Albanians in Kosovo (after your bombing campaign) declared authonomy (in fact their own independent state which regulary kills and expells few remaning Serbs). They did the same in Macedonia, despite they are about less than 10 or so % of population there, Albanian language was recognized as the second state language there and there were some legislation changes. Russian minorities in Latvia and Estonia represents much greater % of population than Albanian minority in Macedonia, but who in EU cares about that? They are Orthodox and Russians, not their beloved Albanian Muslims, so they don't have any rights at all, they are crap.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Serb


I think you need some photos. US used cluster bombs, artllery, missiles, rockets and all available firepower to crush the uprising. Al-Fullujah is in ruins now. If you need pic, just whistle. It looks a thousand times worse than Grozny looks now.

yes they used weaponry as needed against building used by insurgents. Which is why a very large percentage of the city is ruined, though many buildings are not. However Marines took many casualties going house to house in Fallujah. Which would not have been necessary if wed just leveled the place from the air.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
yes they used weaponry as needed against building used by insurgents. Which is why a very large percentage of the city is ruined, though many buildings are not. However Marines took many casualties going house to house in Fallujah. Which would not have been necessary if wed just leveled the place from the air.

This is actually very similar to Russian tactics in Groznyi actually. The Russians had grave losses because of snipers, and the city was mostly levelled with land-based artillery rather than air power.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Spiffor

This is actually very similar to Russian tactics in Groznyi actually. The Russians had grave losses because of snipers, and the city was mostly levelled with land-based artillery rather than air power.

ok, thanks

[GePap]

Why wasn't this closed down 200 posts ago?

[Serb]

It's a perfect ground for US bashing.

[Serb]

Originally posted by Spiffor

This is actually very similar to Russian tactics in Groznyi actually. The Russians had grave losses because of snipers, and the city was mostly levelled with land-based artillery rather than air power.

Grozny was destroyed during first war. Russians, thanks to arrogance of our high command (I meant Yeltsin of course and his minister of defense Grachev) thought they could wipe out arses of those militias within few days and brought as twice as less personel to storm the Grozny than the force of militants who defended it. Russians were outnumbered at least 2:1 and were taken heavy losses, because those militias were pretty well prepared for urban warfare they turned every building there into a small fortress, prepared huge ammo and weapons stockpiles and made huge undeground communications. They were ready, plus they knew the city as no one else. The only retalation to this was heavy use of Russian firepower. Russian troops could took Grozny few times, but everytime highest leadership (read Yeltsin and his gang) made order to stop which allow enemy to regroup and regain its strenght.
During second war things were way different.
Russians are swift learners.

[Serb]

Originally posted by Spiffor

this one should work

Sorry, it doesn't work.

They are treated as second-grade citizens (actually, as no citizens at all, since most of them have no nationality), but the EU does care.

Just a little correction here.
I've said a second-grade humans, a not-second-grade citizens. A second-grade ghumans means that most of them do not have citizenship and their basic human rights constantly violated.

Latvia is the country where the problem is the worst. At the independence, Latvia only gave nationality to those who were there before 1945, and their offspring. Meaning that only about half of the population had the Latvian nationality.
There have been two waves of naturalization for the Russian minority, and now half of that minority has the Latvian nationality. The Russians of Latvia have the EU to thank for that, given that the local Latvian authorities hate the "invaders". And the EU demands more, and are now backed by the second party of Latvia, a Russophone party.

As soon as Estonia candidated for the EU membership in 1995, it was required to integrate its Russophone citizens. The integration is vastly insufficient, but at least, the Russophones devoid of Estonian nationality can vote in local government. And it has been noticed they now vote more on ideological than on ethnical reasons, which is an encouraging sign that integration progresses. Again, these progresses mostly stem from the EU, although Estonia doesn't seem as hostile as Latvia.

Your claim made me curious, and I googled about the situation of the Russian minority in these countries. After all, given their poor treatment wrt civic rights, that could be possible.
I haven't found even one source that confirms what you are saying, including on websites that defend the rights of minorities. Could you please give me sources of that?

All you have to do is type in google something like "emigration from Latvia or Estonia".
A couple of interesting articles here. Those articles doesn't describe how Latvian police throw oot Russians from thier homes, no such details there, only numbers and facts:

"Population decline in Latvia between 1991 and 1998 was more than 8% and over 7% in Estonia. Most of this was emigration to the former CIS. Despite a slow-down of the population decline in the late 1990s (with decreasing emigration), natural population decline continues to be high - approx. 15,000 persons annually in Latvia and between 6,000-7,000 in Estonia."
Guess who were all those people who emigrated from Latvia and Estonia to CIS and why they had to?

http://vasab.leontief.net/background/part1_1_3.htm

More news about this democratic country:

http://hrlibrary.ngo.ru/hrcommittee/latvia1995.html

Had Russians commited something like that towards their national minorities you would ring in all bells calling Russia fascist dictatorship.

If you need the exact exaples how their police expell Russian minorities, throw them out of thier homes to detention camps, I'll try to find some heartbreaking stories.

It is the very same reason why our public opinion opposed the war in Iraq. Because we oppose the conditions which lead to such terrible destruction. Because we oppose the heavy-handling of such a situation.

Well, your humanism didn't stop you when you bombed Serbia and killed thousands people. looks like you have double standards for people who deserve human treatment and who doesn't.

If you think the EU hates Russia because we oppose the way you handle Chechnya, then the EU also hates the US for its behaviour in iraq, it hates Israel for its behaviour in Palestine, it hates China for its behaviour in Tibet, it hates Sudan for its behaviour in Darfur etc, it hates Turkey for its behaviour in Armenia etc...

Do you really think we hate all those countries?

Thanks for comparing Russians in Chechnya with Turkey in Armenia. Next you'll compare Putin's Russia with Hitler's Germany.

Do you think that maybe, it could come from a very bad experience with the Russian domination, and their attempt to be protected from ever being dominated by Russia again? Or is this possibility outright impossible?

My point is - now they want to be dominated by Uncle Sam, becase he is stronger. Simple as that.

We saw his style when he was prime minister, and our media immediately noticed the difference.

Sure, and immediately started its anti-Putin campaign.

But do you think we even mused at the thought? That our deciders wondered, during soùe international summit: "how could we isolate Russia some more, now that they have lost their superpower status?"

That's a long story. You don't need Russia isolated, you need it to be part of global economy (to rob it of course). Don't have time for that.