Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Poll Finds Most Germans Want US Troops Out of Germany

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by Konzev View Post
    This is usually the way you project your interference.
    In this case i rather assumed that any one talking of the non-citizens in the Baltic states would at least have some rudimentary level knowledge of the topic. After all if you are complaining of their status than it kinda follows that you would need to be aware of that status to begin with does it not? Or are you just blindly following some statements without studying the matter by yourself at all?
    There is an old saying here in Northamerica: " Money talks"
    You asked for a reason and a gave it to you. Russians are now reaping the results of their own foreign politics. This is the result the aggressive Russian politics. If they are not what you wanted then perhaps Russia's policies ought to be reconsidered.
    Russians view this law as ethnic cleansing.
    That is irrelevant. Besides if Russians consider that as ethnic cleansing how do they consider the actual ethnic cleansing carried out by the Russian in the Baltic states both in 1940 and onwards from 1944? Or is it just that per Russian standards it is perfectly fine to deport non-Russian population but if Russian are involved then it immediately turns into ethnic cleansing? Or how does that work, exactly?
    The burden of proof, that this is not ethnic cleansing is on you.
    That does not relate in any manner to your claim with regards of 'US made it an issue'. That was your claim. So prove it then. As to your nonsensical claim of ethnic cleansing lets start with its definition (for your convenience here): "the mass expulsion or killing of members of an unwanted ethnic or religious group in a society". Yet Russians were not forced go through 'mass expulsion or killing' - so it can not qualify as that despite of the Russian fever-dreams. It wouldn't hurt if Russians actually tried not abuse the term in context where it has no relevance - but apparently that is too much to ask for.
    How can they annex provinces/states, that belonged to the Russian Empire for more than 200 years
    They were not part of USSR. It doesn't matter if Russia briefly owned them previously. Per your logic Russia ought to be given over to Mongols and the Poles. After all once upon a time in history those sides owned and had control over Russia. Or perhaps you should simple cede the whole of Russia back to the Swedes? To be serious Russia's imperialist narratives only make the situation worse.
    That's just your viewpoint.
    No. That is exactly the de jure status of Russia control over the Baltic states.
    Like I said before, the USSR took back what was once part of the Russian Empire 1710 until 1919.
    Which it had no right what so ever to do. Which is the reason why it is an illegal occupation and annexation. You are forgetting that those countries were (and are) independent and sovereign nations. Not some Russian puppets. And the comments you just posted are again the perfect example of the reasons why the countries which were under USSR influence have been flocking under NATO and EU banners. That is something Russia created purely by itself and a result of its own policies. Perhaps Russia ought to learn something from that.
    Are you trying to dehumanize fractions of a population by applying labels to them ?
    Far from it. Only to describe their legal status which was forced upon them because of the illegal actions carried out by the USSR. If they don't like that they really ought to demand compensations from the legal continuator of USSR - i.e. Russia - because that is the only party which any legal culpability in this matter.
    Last edited by Vaeltaja; 12 Jul 18, 12:59.
    It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion, it is by the beans of Java that thoughts acquire speed. The hands acquire shaking, the shaking becomes a warning. It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by Emtos View Post
      As long as they're satellites of another great power with foreign troops on their territory, they cannot be left alone. It becomes a danger and should be dealt with. Their actions against the Russian populations further support this point.
      That some one other power soldiers there is purely the result of Russia's own policies against those countries. Joining the EU and the NATO was a direct response to the Russian/USSR actions. If you had left them alone they would likely be neutral now. But no, Russia/USSR had to illegally occupy and annex them and now they hate Russia for it.




      Russian populations who are so badly dealt with that they don't even want to become Russians any longer because they get better living conditions and benefits by staying stateless in the Baltic states. Really horrible...

      Because I'm a logical person. Baltic states are tools in the hands of great powers. Their fate is not important, only their ability to perform a task.
      Baltic states do not cause any problems to the Russia unless Russia tries to invade them. It is as simple as that. Since you insist that they are a problem the only logical conclusion (which - if you really are a 'logical person' - you have to agree with it) is that Russia intends to invade and take control of the Baltic states. That is what logic dictates.
      Last edited by Vaeltaja; 12 Jul 18, 13:00.
      It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion, it is by the beans of Java that thoughts acquire speed. The hands acquire shaking, the shaking becomes a warning. It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by Emtos View Post
        Who cares about the de jure?
        Because we are discussing a matter which directly relates to the legal status of the Baltic states. In this case the de facto is irrelevant and only the de jure matters. Contrary to what Russians seem to believe might doesn't make it right.

        And the reason is quite simple: Contrary to what Russians insist the Estonians, Lithuanians and Latvians have their rights too.
        It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion, it is by the beans of Java that thoughts acquire speed. The hands acquire shaking, the shaking becomes a warning. It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by Pruitt View Post

          I have never claimed to have been in Germany. Are you saying that the US has never improved the bases? What about upgrading communications and electrical grid? My Barracks in Fort Polk in 1975 was also WWII built made of Pine. Any bases in Germany made of brick and stone would have been an improvement. We still use German hospitals for our wounded. Are you saying they have not been upgraded and improved?

          So we built dependent housing? Why can't the Germans pay us for the improvements there? I think the Poles and Romanians would welcome us. Let the Germans keep their sinking ship. By the way, who is using the military barracks in Germany now? We moved out of several locations in Germany.

          Pruitt
          May Post were torn down except for a few historical building and some such as Pattonville and Nellingen Barrack have been build into new suburbs. What was or was not paid for the housing I don't know and I doubt that you do. As an expert you should know the Germans don't build with wood. Improved the electrical grid, yep, for 110 volt for American products. Much of the housing that I know of was gutted and rebuilt to German standards after being returned to the Germans. Hospital, not purals. We did fund the building for that and have gotten our moneys worth time over

          IF you think Germany is some how sinking...your listening to Trump. In what way, iyo, is Germany sinking when it budget and economy is in much better shape than the US. It's people are much better off and at least as free as an American in America. The US is becoming a police state before your eyes and seem ok with that.
          "Ask not what your country can do for you"

          Left wing, Right Wing same bird that they are killing.

          you’re entitled to your own opinion but not your own facts.

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by Vaeltaja View Post
            In this case i rather assumed that any one talking of the non-citizens in the Baltic states would at least have some rudimentary level knowledge of the topic.
            You call yourself an Expert ?

            Originally posted by Vaeltaja View Post
            After all if you are complaining of their status than it kinda follows that you would need to be aware of that status to begin with does it not? Or are you just blindly following some statements without studying the matter by yourself at all?
            Please explain to me, how specified your comments are.

            Originally posted by Vaeltaja View Post
            You asked for a reason and a gave it to you. Russians are now reaping the results of their own foreign politics. This is the result the aggressive Russian politics. If they are not what you wanted then perhaps Russia's policies ought to be reconsidered.
            Your explanations is one dimensional, assume that New Mexico was temporarily an independent state, and the US "reoccupied" it, would you call that aggression ?

            Originally posted by Vaeltaja View Post
            That is irrelevant. Besides if Russians consider that as ethnic cleansing how do they consider the actual ethnic cleansing carried out by the Russian in the Baltic states both in 1940 and onwards from 1944? Or is it just that per Russian standards it is perfectly fine to deport non-Russian population but if Russian are involved then it immediately turns into ethnic cleansing? Or how does that work, exactly?
            You blame the current Russian administration for that, is it not rather a Stalin issue ?

            Originally posted by Vaeltaja View Post
            That does not relate in any manner to your claim with regards of 'US made it an issue'. That was your claim. So prove it then.

            "
            The Western vision was to spread the benefits of democracy, a tolerant and open society, and a market economy across the whole post-Soviet space. Substantial assistance was part of this. Most of this aid came in the form of technical assistance for creating the institutions of a free society. This included advisers for transforming a socialist economy to a market one; for building an honest judiciary free of political pressure; for creating an independent and free media; to facilitate the emergence of civil society; to develop honest law enforcement. The United States spent $12,038,178,734 in assistance on the countries of the grey zone from 1991 to 2013.4 Through TACIS the EU spent 7.3 billion euro between 2000 and 2006.5"


            https://dgap.org/sites/default/files...per_herbst.pdf

            Originally posted by Vaeltaja View Post
            As to your nonsensical claim of ethnic cleansing lets start with its definition (for your convenience here): "the mass expulsion or killing of members of an unwanted ethnic or religious group in a society".
            Having not resorted to the letter, does not render my point invalid.

            Originally posted by Vaeltaja View Post
            Yet Russians were not go through 'mass expulsion or killing' - so it can not qualify as that despite of the Russian fever-dreams. It wouldn't hurt if Russians actually tried not abuse the term in context where it has no relevance - but apparently that is too much to ask for.
            Again, this is your unsubstantiated viewpoint.

            Originally posted by Vaeltaja View Post
            They were not part of USSR. It doesn't matter if Russia briefly owned them previously. Per your logic Russia ought to be given over to Mongols and the Poles. After all once upon a time in history those sides owned and had control over Russia. Or perhaps you should simple cede the whole of Russia back to the Swedes? To be serious Russia's imperialist narratives only make the situation worse.
            I disagree, US Imperialism makes this situation worse.


            Originally posted by Vaeltaja View Post
            No. That is exactly the de jure status of Russia control over the Baltic states.
            Like Emtos stated before, De Jure, is not De Fact .

            Originally posted by Vaeltaja View Post
            Which it had no right what so ever to do. Which is the reason why it is an illegal occupation and annexation.
            NATO and EU created this de jure, it holds littel substance.

            Originally posted by Vaeltaja View Post
            You are forgetting that those countries were (and are) independent and sovereign nations.
            Please provide evidence to that effect, that I stated that.

            Originally posted by Vaeltaja View Post
            Not some Russian puppets. And the comments you just posted are again the perfect example of the reasons why the countries which were under USSR influence have been flocking under NATO and EU banners.
            You are trying to sell me goods, that could not be moved : I said "Money talks" And as far as I remember, that I already answered your question.

            Originally posted by Vaeltaja View Post
            That is something Russia created purely by itself and a result of its own policies. Perhaps Russia ought to learn something from that.
            From whom, the Americans ?

            Originally posted by Vaeltaja View Post
            Far from it. Only to describe their legal status which was forced upon them because of the illegal actions carried out by the USSR. If they don't like that they really ought to demand compensations from the legal continuator of USSR - i.e. Russia - because that is the only party which any legal culpability in this matter.
            You are going into your "running in circles" mode again, asking questions that I already answered.

            Comment


            • #51
              I am not a follower of Mr Trump. What influences me is the reduction of the German Army and Merkel's curious social experimenting. Are the German people better off?

              Pruitt
              Pruitt, you are truly an expert! Kelt06

              Have you been struck by the jawbone of an ASS lately?

              by Khepesh "This is the logic of Pruitt"

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by Pruitt View Post
                I am not a follower of Mr Trump. What influences me is the reduction of the German Army and Merkel's curious social experimenting. Are the German people better off?

                Pruitt
                No, the middle class is declining, poverty on the increase, like in most EU and North American countries. The MSM off course denies this.
                Digitalisation is eliminating jobs at ever higher rates.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by Konzev View Post
                  You call yourself an Expert ?
                  Did i claim so? Or is this yet another of your strawman arguments? I merely said that person should have at least a rudimentary level knowledge of the topic. Or is that too demanding?
                  Please explain to me, how specified your comments are.
                  I merely asked those questions to clarify why exactly do you insist on asking questions to which answers are non-ambiguous to any one remotely familiar with the topic.
                  Your explanations is one dimensional, assume that New Mexico was temporarily an independent state, and the US "reoccupied" it, would you call that aggression ?
                  Your imaginary scenario is simply irrelevant since that didn't happen. Try to stick wit the real world. Political status of such entities are far too complex that they could be used as such trivial examples. It really doesn't matter what you imagine however - the current situation is still a direct result of Russia/USSR's own aggressive policies.
                  You blame the current Russian administration for that, is it not rather a Stalin issue ?
                  Russia is the continuator of the USSR. It gets the good and the bad for that. If the USSR existed the blame would go to it. However it no longer does. But Russia as its continuator still exists. Besides given how keen Russians have been to celebrate GPW they should also take the baggage for it too just as happily - yet for some reason they are oddly unwilling to shoulder their responsibilities. Really strange for a country dreaming of being a great power.
                  "The Western vision was to spread the benefits of democracy, a tolerant and open society, and a market economy across the whole post-Soviet space. Substantial assistance was part of this. Most of this aid came in the form of technical assistance for creating the institutions of a free society. This included advisers for transforming a socialist economy to a market one; for building an honest judiciary free of political pressure; for creating an independent and free media; to facilitate the emergence of civil society; to develop honest law enforcement. The United States spent $12,038,178,734 in assistance on the countries of the grey zone from 1991 to 2013.4 Through TACIS the EU spent 7.3 billion euro between 2000 and 2006.5"


                  https://dgap.org/sites/default/files...per_herbst.pdf
                  And? Nothing in that indicates in any manner or level that it would have been in any means related to color revolutions like you claimed. Nice try but a clear and utter failure unless your only aim was to create a strawman argument.
                  Again, this is your unsubstantiated viewpoint.
                  Wrong. You insisted upon the fantasy tales of Russians being subjected to ethnic cleansing. They are not. I merely proved that you posted nothing but pure nonsense. I get that you may believe in such fabricated stories but don't seriously expect any one with even a slightest capability of critical thinking to do the same.
                  I disagree, US Imperialism makes this situation worse.
                  The problem with that statement is that NATO is not any sort of appendix of the USA. Hence being NATO memberships does not make any one part of 'US imperialism'. This is in direct contrast to Russian/USSR illegal occupation and annexation of the Baltic states. So, once again, you are barking at the wrong tree. IF you truly seek some one to blame for the issue, you should be looking at Russia.
                  Like Emtos stated before, De Jure, is not De Fact
                  .
                  Except de facto doesn't matter in case where the legal status is being determined, the de jure does. You can whine and complain like a petulant child about that if you so choose to do, it really doesn't matter.
                  NATO and EU created this de jure, it holds littel substance.
                  No they didn't. Not accepting de jure status predates both the NATO and the EU.
                  Please provide evidence to that effect, that I stated that.
                  When you deliberately started repeating the old irrelevant imperialistic Russian nonsense of their past. Which ignored the legal status of the Baltic states as independent and sovereign countries prior to the Soviet aggression towards them.
                  You are trying to sell me goods, that could not be moved...
                  It really doesn't matter how you try to explain that. What you posted is the exact reason why Russia is seen as untrustworthy and even occasionally hated. That is something Russia/USSR's own actions have created. Not acknowledging the crimes of the past committed by the Russians/USSR like the illegally occupation and annexation of the Baltic states only makes things worse.
                  From whom, the Americans ?
                  From the history. From the clear failure of the Russian aggressive policies.
                  You are going into your "running in circles" mode again, asking questions that I already answered.
                  That is because discussion ventured back towards those matters.
                  It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion, it is by the beans of Java that thoughts acquire speed. The hands acquire shaking, the shaking becomes a warning. It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    First of all, you are a very entertaining debate partner, and a thank you for all the attention you spend on me. Well, I'm just an old fart with time on it's hand. So I will try to be patient with you, because I can.

                    Originally posted by Vaeltaja View Post
                    Did i claim so? Or is this yet another of your strawman arguments? I merely said that person should have at least a rudimentary level knowledge of the topic. Or is that too demanding?
                    That's a good deflection.

                    Originally posted by Vaeltaja View Post
                    I merely asked those questions to clarify why exactly do you insist on asking questions to which answers are non-ambiguous to any one remotely familiar with the topic.
                    Here we go again. In Circles.

                    Originally posted by Vaeltaja View Post
                    Your imaginary scenario is simply irrelevant since that didn't happen. Try to stick wit the real world. Political status of such entities are far too complex that they could be used as such trivial examples. It really doesn't matter what you imagine however - the current situation is still a direct result of Russia/USSR's own aggressive policies.
                    That is a bad deflection.

                    Originally posted by Vaeltaja View Post
                    Russia is the continuator of the USSR. It gets the good and the bad for that. If the USSR existed the blame would go to it. However it no longer does. But Russia as its continuator still exists. Besides given how keen Russians have been to celebrate GPW they should also take the baggage for it too just as happily - yet for some reason they are oddly unwilling to shoulder their responsibilities. Really strange for a country dreaming of being a great power.
                    Did you ever confront Russian Veterans with this viewpoint, and if where and when ? If not, what kind of a gas bag are you ?

                    Originally posted by Vaeltaja View Post
                    And? Nothing in that indicates in any manner or level that it would have been in any means related to color revolutions like you claimed. Nice try but a clear and utter failure unless your only aim was to create a strawman argument.
                    You do not like my answers, so feel free to categorize them. Obviously you did not watch Oliver Stones documentary. Which I linked in our first exchange. Otherwise, you would have noticed the pattern.

                    Originally posted by Vaeltaja View Post
                    Wrong. You insisted upon the fantasy tales of Russians being subjected to ethnic cleansing. They are not. I merely proved that you posted nothing but pure nonsense. I get that you may believe in such fabricated stories but don't seriously expect any one with even a slightest capability of critical thinking to do the same.
                    I'm glad it wasn't me, who started the name calling.

                    "
                    A huge percentage of the ethnic Russian population in Estonia and Latvia are stateless. These people do not belong to the state they live in (being Estonia or Latvia), nor do they belong to the state of their ancestors. As a result of the fall of the Soviet Union, the state to which they had once belonged, ceased to exist. Therefore, they were stuck in state of limbo, as they were not citizens of any existing country (Rozenvalds and Muižnieks 98). In the prospect of European Union accession, Estonia and Latvia needed to meet the Copenhagen criteria's minority policies in order to be considered as valid candidates. This meant that these two countries had to significantly reduce the number of stateless persons. In the mid 1990s Estonia and Latvia began to work on integration methods to reduce statelessness (Rozenvalds 45). After granting some individuals citizenship and achieving European Union accession, the two countries began to slow the process once again. The number of stateless individuals is still alarming in these two countries, as the percentages are at 18% for Latvia and 13% for Estonia of the total population. Lithuania is clearly more liberal in this area of granting citizenship, as its number of stateless persons is just 0.3% of the total population (Aptekar 510). The citizenship and nationality laws of the three countries are a large determinate in the variance of their stateless populations. The access to citizenship and nationality laws of the three"

                    https://journals.uvic.ca/index.php/v...ile/11634/3698

                    Originally posted by Vaeltaja View Post
                    The problem with that statement is that NATO is not any sort of appendix of the USA. Hence being NATO memberships does not make any one part of 'US imperialism'. This is in direct contrast to Russian/USSR illegal occupation and annexation of the Baltic states. So, once again, you are barking at the wrong tree. IF you truly seek some one to blame for the issue, you should be looking at Russia.
                    Please explain to me, why my impression is wrong ?

                    .
                    Originally posted by Vaeltaja View Post
                    Except de facto doesn't matter in case where the legal status is being determined, the de jure does. You can whine and complain like a petulant child about that if you so choose to do, it really doesn't matter.
                    My impression is, that to whine and complain is your property.


                    Originally posted by Vaeltaja View Post
                    No they didn't. Not accepting de jure status predates both the NATO and the EU.
                    The NATO and the EU can claim this status all they want.

                    Originally posted by Vaeltaja View Post
                    When you deliberately started repeating the old irrelevant imperialistic Russian nonsense of their past. Which ignored the legal status of the Baltic states as independent and sovereign countries prior to the Soviet aggression towards them.
                    Their status will change with real politics again and again, the current one determined by the NATO and EU states hold little value.

                    Originally posted by Vaeltaja View Post
                    It really doesn't matter how you try to explain that. What you posted is the exact reason why Russia is seen as untrustworthy and even occasionally hated.
                    NATO and EU is not the world.

                    [QUOTE=Vaeltaja;n5046643]
                    That is something Russia/USSR's own actions have created. Not acknowledging the crimes of the past committed by the Russians/USSR like the illegally occupation and annexation of the Baltic states only makes things worse.
                    /QUOTE]

                    Okay, you did not mention that before, did you ?

                    Originally posted by Vaeltaja View Post
                    From the history. From the clear failure of the Russian aggressive policies.

                    That is because discussion ventured back towards those matters.
                    Do you ever get tired of this viewpoint ? I don't want to give up on you.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by Konzev View Post
                      Those countries are holding Europe hostage. Why do they not just apply as American satelite states like Puerto Rico.


                      What do you mean they are holding Europe hostage? That they don't kowtow to Germany and France?


                      Originally posted by Konzev View Post
                      Russland did not break the promises that where made between Gorbachev and Kohl, the USA and NATO did.
                      If there was something serious about those verbal exchanges they would have been put into written treaty. Verba volant.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by Vaeltaja View Post
                        That some one other power soldiers there is purely the result of Russia's own policies against those countries. Joining the EU and the NATO was a direct response to the Russian/USSR actions. If you had left them alone they would likely be neutral now. But no, Russia/USSR had to illegally occupy and annex them and now they hate Russia for it.
                        If they were left alone they would be province of the Third Reich. They wanted to left their owner and they were just taken back to whom the belong.

                        Originally posted by Vaeltaja View Post

                        Russian populations who are so badly dealt with that they don't even want to become Russians any longer because they get better living conditions and benefits by staying stateless in the Baltic states. Really horrible...
                        Why they should become Russian citizens if they don't live in Russia ? They live in those states so they should have the local citizenship. They're home.

                        Originally posted by Vaeltaja View Post
                        Baltic states do not cause any problems to the Russia unless Russia tries to invade them. It is as simple as that. Since you insist that they are a problem the only logical conclusion (which - if you really are a 'logical person' - you have to agree with it) is that Russia intends to invade and take control of the Baltic states. That is what logic dictates.
                        Your twisted logic maybe. Normal logic says that they can be used to launch an attack on Russia.
                        There are no Nazis in Ukraine. © Idiots

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by Konzev View Post
                          That's a good deflection.
                          Only if you agree that you tried to pass on yet another strawman argument.
                          Here we go again.
                          You did ask.
                          That is a bad deflection.
                          Not a deflection only noting that dredging an imaginary as well as an utterly irrelevant strawman argument to the discussion like you tried is pointless.
                          Did you ever confront Russian Veterans with this viewpoint, and if where and when ?
                          Why would that matter? Or you are saying that because Russians do not like the reality or the facts therefore nothing which Russians living in their own fantasies might consider offensive must be discussed? Is that it? How about just accepting the reality. USSR is the continuator of the USSR. It inherits both the good and the bad. There is no cherry picking like you seem to imagine.
                          You do not like my answers, so feel free to categorize them.
                          It doesn't matter if i like or dislike your answers when you were not even answering to the matter at hand and instead just tried to insert yet another tiresome strawman into the discussion. Only thing you are proving is that you have no evidence to prove anything you are claiming. As said none of what you posted supported the thing you claimed - which is a repeating theme with your posts.
                          I'm glad it wasn't me, who started the name calling.
                          There was no name calling in it. I only noted that since you are unable to prove a single thing you have claimed that what you are claiming is not something any one thinking critically would accept. As said burden of proof for your own claims is fully your own.
                          "
                          A huge percentage of the ethnic Russian population in Estonia and Latvia are stateless. These people do not belong to the state they live in (being Estonia or Latvia), nor do they belong to the state of their ancestors. As a result of the fall of the Soviet Union, the state to which they had once belonged, ceased to exist. Therefore, they were stuck in state of limbo, as they were not citizens of any existing country (Rozenvalds and Muižnieks 98). In the prospect of European Union accession, Estonia and Latvia needed to meet the Copenhagen criteria's minority policies in order to be considered as valid candidates. This meant that these two countries had to significantly reduce the number of stateless persons. In the mid 1990s Estonia and Latvia began to work on integration methods to reduce statelessness (Rozenvalds 45). After granting some individuals citizenship and achieving European Union accession, the two countries began to slow the process once again. The number of stateless individuals is still alarming in these two countries, as the percentages are at 18% for Latvia and 13% for Estonia of the total population. Lithuania is clearly more liberal in this area of granting citizenship, as its number of stateless persons is just 0.3% of the total population (Aptekar 510). The citizenship and nationality laws of the three countries are a large determinate in the variance of their stateless populations. The access to citizenship and nationality laws of the three"

                          https://journals.uvic.ca/index.php/v...ile/11634/3698
                          That is quite a feat. Yet again you found something which is as usual utterly irrelevant to the Russian fantasy of ethnic cleansing of Russians in the Baltic states which was the thing you claimed. So was that 'ethnic cleansing of Russians' just a lie then since you clearly can't prove it with your claims?
                          Please explain to me, why my impression is wrong ?
                          Because NATO is not the same as the USA despite of what Russia and Russians seem to be claiming. NATO memberships is not some mythical aspect of 'US imperialism'. It is just a voluntary participation to an coalition for collective defense. Which FYI is not in any manner even related to any sort of 'imperialism'.
                          My impression is, that to whine and complain is your property.
                          Yet for some reason I have been the one who actually has provided evidence supporting his claims while you have only provided just more nonsense and empty words. Which places the whining and complaining solely into your specialty.
                          The NATO and the EU can claim this status all they want.
                          That is irrelevant since the status predates them both. So once again you are trying to manipulate information.
                          Their status will change with real politics again and again, the current one determined by the NATO and EU states hold little value.
                          That is very doubtful unless Russia changes its tone and accepts blame for the illegal occupation and annexation of the Baltic states.
                          NATO and EU is not the world.
                          Did any one claimed they would be? Your statements however provide excellent case for countries to aim for both NATO and EU memberships.
                          Okay, you did not mention that before, did you ?
                          Many times, but since you seem to have difficulties of understanding or accepting the only way forward appears to be repeating it.
                          Do you ever get tired of this viewpoint ? I don't want to give up on you.
                          If some one proves it wrong, then sure. However you have not done anything which would give any credence to assume that would be the case.
                          It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion, it is by the beans of Java that thoughts acquire speed. The hands acquire shaking, the shaking becomes a warning. It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by Vaeltaja View Post
                            Because we are discussing a matter which directly relates to the legal status of the Baltic states. In this case the de facto is irrelevant and only the de jure matters. Contrary to what Russians seem to believe might doesn't make it right.

                            And the reason is quite simple: Contrary to what Russians insist the Estonians, Lithuanians and Latvians have their rights too.
                            De jure you can invent anything you want. You can even consider that Russia belongs to Estonia. De facto is the reality. Might always makes right.
                            There are no Nazis in Ukraine. © Idiots

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by Imperial View Post
                              [LEFT]
                              [SIZE=14px][COLOR=#000000][FONT=Arial]What do you mean they are holding Europe hostage? That they don't kowtow to Germany and France? [
                              [/QUOTE]

                              They are being seen by many as a burden, not an asset. Their ties are certainly stronger for the US, than for the EU. It perturbs many on the "Green" and Neo Liberal Left , about their unwillingness to accept Migrants from Africa and the middle east. Also by the larger business community as a hindrance for better trade and better relations with Russia.


                              Originally posted by Imperial View Post
                              [LEFT]
                              If there was something serious about those verbal exchanges they would have been put into written treaty. Verba volant.
                              [/QUOTE]

                              Written treaty's only work , if they would come to a basic unilateral understanding,. I do not see that happen with the current EU.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Originally posted by Emtos View Post
                                If they were left alone they would be province of the Third Reich. They wanted to left their owner and they were just taken back to whom the belong.
                                Wrong. They wanted to be independent. They didn't want to be part of either of the totalitarian dictatorships. Had Soviets not occupied or annexed those areas and walked away after the war the situation would have been very different. As said before, this mess is purely the result of Russia/USSR's own aggressive policies.
                                Why they should become Russian citizens if they don't live in Russia ? They live in those states so they should have the local citizenship. They're home.
                                No they don't. They either moved or were moved into those areas during a de jure occupation. Which means that they are not automatically eligible for the local citizenship. It doesn't matter how much you complain of that - it won't change. Main reason why they still exist is because Russia wants them to. Russia has given the stateless people several exceptions especially with towards border crossing that people have no interest in changing their status any longer as they are (or so they judge) better off as living as a stateless resident in Estonia or Latvia than being Russian in Russia. And that again is Russia's own doing.
                                Your twisted logic maybe. Normal logic says that they can be used to launch an attack on Russia.
                                Again, the problem for you is that NATO is a coalition for collective defense. Any action beyond that requires a consensus among the member states. Not a majority, but a consensus - so contrary to the usual Russian delusions USA can not dominate or even control that decision. NATO's refusal to take part to Iraq invasions proves without a slightest doubt. Which makes your assumption into nothing but a fantasy. It would require that none of the NATO member states would disagree with such an action.
                                It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion, it is by the beans of Java that thoughts acquire speed. The hands acquire shaking, the shaking becomes a warning. It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion

                                Comment

                                Latest Topics

                                Collapse

                                Working...
                                X