Is there any point in keeping NATO around?

[red_elk]

Thank you for ever so eloquently reinforcing my point.

See, red_elk - we are ingrates who have "rewritten our history to solidify our image as nations occupied by neighboring entity".

You can't both say "nah, not relevant, happened 75 years ago, we're not like that any more" and "nah, never really happened - and you should grateful anyway!".
Or, well, you can, but I hope you see how that doesn't instill much confidence. Maybe when we "stay neutral, soften our rhetoric, be nice to Russian-speakers" some overly kind and helpful ruler of yours will try to make us equal part of your great nation again? Just because he might take pity of us sorry excuses of a state - and of map makers who now need to spend extra paint and time to draw our microscopic borders.

What can I say, the amount of trust and amount of hatred between our people is about the same on both sides of the border.
What Aleksey said about rewriting history, the idea about occupation and Russia being almost "eternal enemy" is something which can be viewed as a current national ideology of Baltic States. Which is IMO a very unfortunate thing. Simply because Russia in any case will remain one of your influential neighbors and building your nation on the base of idea that Russia was and is an evil empire, is counterproductive. You will be treated with the same respect, as you treat us, and if it's 75 years old memories which are haunting you, then both sides will suffer from it. And if you want us to rewrite our history and equalize USSR with Nazi Germany, it is not going to happen.

 

[warpus]

To be fair the USSR and Nazi Germany were equally vile in their atrocities in the region.

 

[Yeekim]

Well, Germany underwent thorough de-nazification after it lost the war.

Absolutely nothing like this ever happened in USSR. In any case, a country executing comparable lustration by himself would be absolutely unprecedented in history and is probably unreasonable expectation.

Yet, in 1990-s there were hopeful signs of overall movement in that direction, however slow.
If only post-Gorbachev leaders had been more competent (and oil prices higher...).

 

[red_elk]

Absolutely nothing like this ever happened in USSR.

Sure, that's why there are no Stalin's monuments in Russia, but Waffen-SS meetings in Baltic States are happening every year.

 

[red_elk]

To be fair the USSR and Nazi Germany were equally vile in their atrocities in the region.

To be fair, I already know your creative interpretation of USSR's history and its role in WW2, so there's no need in trying to explain it to me again.

 

[warpus]

Don't worry, I know that it's impossible to explain anything of the sort to you, so I wouldn't even try.

 

[Tahuti]

Doesn't it usually get a theoretical partition between France and Netherlands?

Although Brussels will be a difficult area to go to either side...

Well, that theoretical partition has very little ground in history though with politics everything is possible. The thing is that in part, modern French originated in part from Wallonia, well before it become it became part of France no sooner than the late 1700s during the revolutionary era and even long before modern French was spoken in all of France. The partition between Belgium and the Netherlands did not occur in 1830, but in fact, happenned much sooner and was based on the retention of the Southern Netherlands (that is, Belgium) by the Habsburgs.

Now, it were the French who expunged the Habsburgs from the Southern Netherlands, though most nations of Europe thought it was too dangerous to keep it part of France. So we got it instead. And the Southern and Northern Netherlands did in fact have several centuries of rule under a common polity, prior to the 80 years war.

Of course, we lost the Southern Netherlands during the Belgian intifada of 1830, although its worth noting that it was only supported by French speaking Belgians, with the Dutch-speaking populace being rather unenthusiastic about it. First of all, Belgium was originally a French-speaking polity and Dutch speakers were considered to be peasants at best. Second, they knew The Hague would implement countermeasures against this French-speaking threat by closing off the channels to Ghent which unsurprisingly continued to be a source of Orangist sentiments well into the 19th century.

 

[Cutlass]

China already has quite a lot of that within its own borders, though. If you look at a population map of China, the east coast is extremely densely populated, but the rest is quite empty.

Spoiler :

EDIT: Not quite as I thought (though note the logarithmic scale) - the logical point of expansion in some directions will go into Mongolia relatively soon before it goes into western China - but then we might also compare the US, which had a similar map in the early-mid 19th century and (as far as I know) never showed any interest in annexing Nova Scotia.

China is looking south. The north and west of China's population centers won't support more people. If more people could live there, they already would be.

 

[Flying Pig]

Is Mongolia any more hospitable than those areas, though? I'm not great on geography, but I doubt it.

 

[innonimatu]

Well, Germany underwent thorough de-nazification after it lost the war.

Absolutely nothing like this ever happened in USSR. In any case, a country executing comparable lustration by himself would be absolutely unprecedented in history and is probably unreasonable expectation.

Yet, in 1990-s there were hopeful signs of overall movement in that direction, however slow.
If only post-Gorbachev leaders had been more competent (and oil prices higher...).

Don't delude yourself, it's dangerous. Estonia is in a rather difficult position between those tho historically expansionist countries.
German denazification: after Germany lost the war and was occupied the germans had to either say they were no longer nazis or starve.
USSR destalinization: after Stalin died his successor decided that imprisoning or killing opponents by the thousands in peacetime was rather excessive (or worse, though it was hard to say so publicly) and dismantled most of the repressive side of their state. Eventually went so far as to outright abolished it, but that was another story decades lated, and politically a stupid move if I had to judge.

Keep in mind that in both places most of the people who executed commands throughout the bureaucracy and the economy of those states kept their jobs and influence. The difference I can find that t least the soviets recognized they had done some wrongs on their own initiative, the germans remained convinced they were right right until defeat.

 

[Cutlass]

Is Mongolia any more hospitable than those areas, though? I'm not great on geography, but I doubt it.

Areas south of China support very large populations. And have resources valuable to China. and good strategic positions. If Mongolia and points north could support more population, it already would be. Same with western parts of China.

Here is a variety of maps of China which you can peruse to see just how inhospitable to human population a very sizable part of China's area is.

http://www.fao.org/ag/agp/agpc/doc/counprof/china/china1.htm

 

[FriendlyFire]

Sure, that's why there are no Stalin's monuments in Russia, but Waffen-SS meetings in Baltic States are happening every year.

Not sure if too much Vodka again or in Russia by saying there are no Stalin monuments Russian means they are now building Stalin monuments.

Pro-Stalin sentiment has experienced a resurgence in Russia, and in September two separate regions unveiled monuments to the leader, who died in 1953. Meanwhile, nearly half of poll respondents in March answered in agreement with the statement: “The price paid by the Soviet people in the Stalin epoch was justified by great aims and results."

the current government's lionization of the Stalin-led Soviet victory over invading Nazi forces in World War II. President Vladimir Putin

“Recent years have brought increasing propaganda among the population of an idealized, one-sided, removed from historic reality image of Stalin's era,” said Dobrynin, as reported by Tass, a state-owned news agency. The senator said the propaganda “inflicts tremendous harm on the Russian state and society.”

http://www.ibtimes.com/under-putin-...n-senator-moves-criminalize-monuments-2108218

Two monuments to Josef Stalin were unveiled in separate Russian regions in one day this week in a face-off that marks a deepening rift within the nation about the Soviet dictator's legacy.

At 2.7 meters high, it could be the first monument to Stalin of such scale to appear in post-Soviet Russia, the party said in its statement, calling the monument a “tribute to a great man” whose “name has been unjustly forgotten for 60 years.”

growing interest in Stalin, as Russia is going through tough times due to a decline in industrial production and the sanctions imposed by Western countries,” and suggested that Russia could benefit from a return to Stalinist practices.

In Tver, another central Russian region, a museum has been opened in honor of Stalin's political and military achievements in a house where the dictator spent one night in 1943, local news portal TverNews.ru reported.

There have been numerous calls praising the dictator's supposed achievements and requesting the building of monuments and museums in Stalin's honor.

http://www.themoscowtimes.com/news/...light-controversy-over-his-legacy/529855.html

 

[Agent327]

Sure, that's why there are no Stalin's monuments in Russia, but Waffen-SS meetings in Baltic States are happening every year.

Source missing.

To be fair, I already know your creative interpretation of USSR's history and its role in WW2, so there's no need in trying to explain it to me again.

Pointing out unpleasant facts is 'creative interpretation'. Hm, now where have I seen that before... Perhaps you should respond by posting pics of glorious Russian engineers building bridges? Seems just as irrelevant, but it's slightly less ad hominem.

 

[r16]

We would give the Chechens everything they need to carry out all sorts of terroristic mayhem in Russian cities.

the Saudis openly threatened doing the same in 2014 to stop Russian support for Damascus , we are in 2015 and Russians are bloody staring the West down and it's only Putin's fault that he was badly wanting to diversify gas supply to Europe , playing softly with the Jihadi supporting Ankara .

Well, nobody have doubts that US will sponsor terrorism if needed.

indeed and ain't them sponsporing right now ?

Show me a nation that plays by all the rules in war, and I'll show you a nation that will get quickly and soundly defeated by its enemies.

just recorded for posterity without any "aggression" on the posters and we will see .

R16, serious question: any maps of the sides/populations in that prospective/theorised civil war to come?

r16 as always and they are irrelevant now that had it been Americans talking to Turks , they would be all like "We'll squash you like a bug." This last has no relevance to a morbid argument that goes on in Turkey between journos of different stripes .

 

[red_elk]

USSR destalinization: after Stalin died his successor decided that imprisoning or killing opponents by the thousands in peacetime was rather excessive (or worse, though it was hard to say so publicly) and dismantled most of the repressive side of their state.

Funny part is that every time I mention it on the forums, it comes as a surprise for many people. At least in offtopic, world history subforum was a bit different IIRC.

Well, nobody have doubts that US will sponsor terrorism if needed.

indeed and ain't them sponsporing right now ?

Against Syria perhaps, not in Chechnya. And supporting Chechens now is already an outdated and not very effective tool against Russia, level of threat in Chechnya seems to be lower comparing to neighboring Dagestan and Ingushetia. They might support the Caliphate influence in North Caucasus and Middle Asia, which most likely would create problem for the Russians, but this tactics would backfire from several directions. Though shooting themselves in foot seems to be not a problem for Americans, according to last years developments.

 

[r16]

oh the rant is more specifically at the news that the Syrian branch of the seperatists are readily and vocally "defended" as the only bet the West can have against the ISIL , especially after the debacle of the 30th "Division" which went into action with 50 personnel and ended up with 5 after a day or two of altercations with the Nusra Front .

 

[Farm Boy]

EDIT: Not quite as I thought (though note the logarithmic scale) - the logical point of expansion in some directions will go into Mongolia relatively soon before it goes into western China - but then we might also compare the US, which had a similar map in the early-mid 19th century and (as far as I know) never showed any interest in annexing Nova Scotia.

Well, I didn't mean as overtly aggressive foreign policy. Cutlass seems to be right about that being directed South. I guess I was more interested in population pressures. The PRC usually seems to play the long game. Everywhere that is China has always been China. Is the border porous at all, are there shifts(small shifts make big differences in small populations), what are senses of identity, all that. The US never had a need to annex Canada. Travel is mostly open and the economy is so penetrated by the US economy that they function well enough as part of the same unit. If that's the situation in northeastern Asia already and everybody is happy, then everybody is happy. Now, lots and lots of people that are competing for finite space/stuff in the South is more interesting. Why would anyone muss that up with peckerwaggling that might trigger political expenditure in the north?

 

[Tahuti]

Keep in mind that in both places most of the people who executed commands throughout the bureaucracy and the economy of those states kept their jobs and influence. The difference I can find that t least the soviets recognized they had done some wrongs on their own initiative, the germans remained convinced they were right right until defeat.

Konrad Adenauer made up a theory that Nazism and the German Empire of 1871 was a product of Prussian/Asiatic culture, with Weimar Germany and the Federal Republic of Germany being the legitimate successors of Germany's Catholic and Holy Roman heritage. Basically, he considered Nazism and Prussianism to be akin to a foreign occupation of Germany.

 

[red_elk]

oh the rant is more specifically at the news that the Syrian branch of the seperatists are readily and vocally "defended" as the only bet the West can have against the ISIL , especially after the debacle of the 30th "Division" which went into action with 50 personnel and ended up with 5 after a day or two of altercations with the Nusra Front .

US/Saudis pet coalition obviously wouldn't survive there for long without external support. It looks like some sort of Shia alliance is being formed there, perhaps even with Russian air support, which is a bit worrying. But it may become more viable opposition to ISIS.

 

[Lohrenswald]

What is this about the Baltic states being "archaic nonviable entities"?
As opposed to Russia?
Russia is even an older country