Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Kaliningrad

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

  • #16
    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Kaliningrad

    Originally posted by Andrey
    1. There is no more East Prussia. It is part of Russia ad Poland here.

    2. USSR was organization of 15 republics. Kaliningrad region was not separate region, it was part of PSFSR, one of 15 republics of USSR. After collapse of USSR RSFSR became current Russia (without any territory changing!!!). So Kaliningrad region is region of Russia now. What is problem with this?
    There is no problem. I'm merely asking questions and trying to understand the situation. Nobody I know here even knows that kaliningrad exists or where it is or that it used to be prussia.

    I am just trying to get some lively debate going over a topic I find interesting.

    Thanks for your ideas and insights, though.:thumb:
    Givin' you the scoop, the poop, the skinny and the scuttlebutt since 1969!

    Comment


    • #17
      Perhaps, if Russia is remiss to revert to the historical germanic name, then perhaps a Russian translation of "king's mountain" would be a better choice than having it continue to be the namesake of a forgotten or unknown Soviet politician. Perhaps Kalinin was a great man.....

      What for? If there are no problems with the current name, why would you bother to start renaming it again? Especially since the word "king" ("korol'") is alien in Russian (comes from Polish, as a matter of fact).

      Why, do you think, Russia would never allow Kaliningrad to become part of another state?

      ??? It's a strange question. How many countries do you know that give out their territory left and right?

      Would it have a better chance of becoming an Independant state?

      Only in theory. If the locals decide to have an armed uprising, and if the Russian government is too weak to crush that uprising, then it will happen. But the chance of either or both of these things happening is close to 0.

      Is it still "paying the bill" for the war?

      ??? Kaliningrad is not a colony, it is an integral part of Russia. There is no original German population there at all.
      Kak nyne sbiraetsia veschii Oleg otmstit' nerazumnym ... well, you know who you are :)

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Oleg
        Perhaps, if Russia is remiss to revert to the historical germanic name, then perhaps a Russian translation of "king's mountain" would be a better choice than having it continue to be the namesake of a forgotten or unknown Soviet politician. Perhaps Kalinin was a great man.....

        What for? If there are no problems with the current name, why would you bother to start renaming it again? Especially since the word "king" ("korol'") is alien in Russian (comes from Polish, as a matter of fact).

        Why, do you think, Russia would never allow Kaliningrad to become part of another state?

        ??? It's a strange question. How many countries do you know that give out their territory left and right?

        Would it have a better chance of becoming an Independant state?

        Only in theory. If the locals decide to have an armed uprising, and if the Russian government is too weak to crush that uprising, then it will happen. But the chance of either or both of these things happening is close to 0.

        Is it still "paying the bill" for the war?

        ??? Kaliningrad is not a colony, it is an integral part of Russia. There is no original German population there at all.
        I think Kaliningrad is indeed a colony.

        Much like the history of the United States......

        The english sent a military mission to north america, displaced the natives and claimed it as a colony of England. There are virtually no native americans living in the formor colonies--England's colonies were considered intregal parts of the Empire as well.

        Of course, I'm not suggesting that Kalinigrad attempt to cast off the heavy yoke of imperialism, as I'm sure most Kaliningraders are contented Russian citizens unexploited by the state.


        I'm sure you will disagree with me--and that's fine. Once again I appreciate the stellar quality of this palaver! Kudos! :thumb:
        Givin' you the scoop, the poop, the skinny and the scuttlebutt since 1969!

        Comment


        • #19
          Let me put it this way: when the United States decides to transfer its Minnesota colony to a neighboring state, or when the people of the Minnesota colony rise up against their imperialist exploitation by the US, only then will a serious discussion of this topic be possible.
          Kak nyne sbiraetsia veschii Oleg otmstit' nerazumnym ... well, you know who you are :)

          Comment


          • #20
            I want to say again that ALL German population of current Kaliningrad region was sent to Germany in 1945 (like German population of new lands of Poland). I do not suppose that it was right, but it was and you haveto remember it.

            There are no Germans in Kaliningrad region now.

            Comment


            • #21
              Oleg, I don't see anybody even suggesting that Kaliningrad should be reverted to Germany. I am pretty sure the Germans themselves would be pretty opposed to the idea now just like the majority of Finns would not want to take Karelia back even if it were offered on a silver plate.

              The American colonies of the British did rebel and did gain independence. So did the Spanish colonies. I think Kaliningrad area is a very clear example of a Soviet colony. The people there now didn't just happen to show up.

              As to the independence of Kaliningrad, while an impossible idea now, I don't think it is so inconceivable that one day the Kaliningrad area might want to be independent. I don't think it is likely, but it is possible.

              Just out of curiosity, if the clear majority of inhabitants of Kaliningrad wanted to be independent and if they manage to express this wish through a referendum, should Russia deny Kaliningrad independence? How far do you think should Russia go to suppress this?

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Kaliningrad

                Originally posted by Fenrir
                There is no problem. I'm merely asking questions and trying to understand the situation. Nobody I know here even knows that kaliningrad exists or where it is or that it used to be prussia.

                I am just trying to get some lively debate going over a topic I find interesting.

                Thanks for your ideas and insights, though.:thumb:
                I got impression that you asked your questions in aggressive anti-Russian manner.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by pp(est)
                  Oleg, I don't see anybody even suggesting that Kaliningrad should be reverted to Germany. I am pretty sure the Germans themselves would be pretty opposed to the idea now just like the majority of Finns would not want to take Karelia back even if it were offered on a silver plate.

                  The American colonies of the British did rebel and did gain independence. So did the Spanish colonies. I think Kaliningrad area is a very clear example of a Soviet colony. The people there now didn't just happen to show up.

                  As to the independence of Kaliningrad, while an impossible idea now, I don't think it is so inconceivable that one day the Kaliningrad area might want to be independent. I don't think it is likely, but it is possible.

                  Just out of curiosity, if the clear majority of inhabitants of Kaliningrad wanted to be independent and if they manage to express this wish through a referendum, should Russia deny Kaliningrad independence? How far do you think should Russia go to suppress this?
                  1. About colony

                  Is Alyaska colony of US?

                  2. About independence.

                  I never heard that anyone spoke about independence of Kaliningrad region so it is only shaking of air to discuss this question.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    1. Of course Alaska is a colony.

                    2. I've heard that ideas like that have been circulating in Kaliningrad. Apparently some business people there think that Kaliningrad could do better as a separate state than part of Russia. Of course this is just based on a few conversations with people who have visited Kaliningrad lately and like I said I don't think it is likely that this would happen anyway. I think my question is valid as a theoretical question. We can ask any Americans here the same question concerning Alaska. We know what the US did last time when some states wanted to secede - how would the US react now?

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by pp(est)
                      1. Of course Alaska is a colony.

                      2. I've heard that ideas like that have been circulating in Kaliningrad. Apparently some business people there think that Kaliningrad could do better as a separate state than part of Russia. Of course this is just based on a few conversations with people who have visited Kaliningrad lately and like I said I don't think it is likely that this would happen anyway. I think my question is valid as a theoretical question. We can ask any Americans here the same question concerning Alaska. We know what the US did last time when some states wanted to secede - how would the US react now?
                      1. Alaska is not colony. There is Russiam term "anklav" but I didn't find it in my dictionary.

                      It is part of Country territory which is far from main country territory.

                      2. Ha-ha-ha. I understood you so that some Estonian business people suppose that it will be better for Kaliningrad region to be independent country...

                      Let's Russians in Kaliningrad will decide it themselfes, Estonian opinion is not related to this question.

                      As I know situation to discuss making of independent state in Kaliningrad is like to discuss independent state in place of current New York City.

                      I do not want to discuss complete science fiction.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        1. I think the word you seek is enclave.

                        An enclave is an enclosed territory that is culturally distinct from the foreign territory that surrounds it.

                        A colony is a company of people transplanted from their mother country to a remote province or country, and remaining subject to
                        the jurisdiction of the parent state; as, the British colonies in America.

                        Alaska was initially a Russian colony (I believe the first governor of the colony was a Finn), but Russia sold the colony to the US and then it became a US colony. Of course the colony there is so old that it is not really accurate to call Alaska a colony anymore - perhaps the 1959 official recognition as a state would be an appropriate watershed where the American colony which was acquired in 1867 was no longer a colony, but a state.

                        BTW an enclave is not antithesis to a colony. Most of the time colonies are enclaves. In the beginning the American settlements in Alaska could easily be described as American enclaves.

                        2. Actually my source are a few Finnish businessmen who said that some local businessmen are interested in independent Kaliningrad which could then join EU some day.

                        You don't have to drag Estonia into every thread I participate in.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          http://www.kaliningrad.it/eng/stampa/20030228.asp

                          I guess it was more than a few businessmen. It appears that the Russians in Kaliningrad even have a party devoted to some sort of quasi-independence.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by pp(est)
                            You don't have to drag Estonia into every thread I participate in.
                            Ha-ha, it were your words - you said phrase "some business people here", I know that you live in Estonia so "here" means "in Estonia".

                            Youe opinion about colony is correct that now Alaska is not colony and it is not important that it was colony in past, we speak about current time so Alaska is not colony now.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              I live in Finland and am currently in Finland, hence here means Finland in this instance. As I do constantly move back and forth I may be inconsistent with the term here. To me Tallinn and Helsinki is pretty much the same thing.

                              Comment

                              Latest Topics

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X