9th of May celebrations at Moscow!!!

The 9th of May is a day of celebration and a matter of honor for Russians and therefore they feel that all of the nations they so called "liberated" should also feel that way and take part of those festivities and invited the president of Estonia there aswell. It caused alot of debate among the Baltic politicians and created a dilemma amongst the nation. As the 9th of May doesn't mean nothing else for Estonians and the nations of Eastern-Europe than 50 years of oppression and dark reign which just created us another day to grieve about while the Russians are parading around the Red Square. Thank the gods our president didn't accept the invitation . I just thought that the overall opinion about this situation would be interresting for me to know. So what is the common thought here, should the "liberated" nations thank the Soviet Union and therefore be commited to go to Moscow or should we show the usurpers the finger and show that we have an independent policy from that of Moscow... Give me some thoughts.

And Dark One is invited to the discussion aswell.

And Dark One is invited to the discussion aswell.

Thanks for the personal invitations.  I honestly don't give a **** waht the elader of some insignificant country which has contributed nothing to the world does. We need actualy allies to join us, not Nazi supporters. America and Great Brtiain should be the only ones required to come, most of the Eastern European countries supported Nazis, and if you see communism as punishment, you got the punishment you deserved.

To dark one:
At first: Soviet Union works a lot for most the east European countries supported Nazi�s. Stalin occupied Baltic States, huge parts of Poland and Romania, and tried to seize Finland. In 1939 USSR hadn't the common border with Germany, and in 1941 it had. Since 1939 USSR and Germany were allies! And Stalin was then the biggest Hitler supporter.
Second: What did Estonians to deserve that punishment? Third: And why do you think communism wasn't a punishment?

To dark one: At first: Soviet Union works a lot for most the east European countries supported Nazi�s. Stalin occupied Baltic States, huge parts of Poland and Romania, and tried to seize Finland. In 1939 USSR hadn't the common border with Germany, and in 1941 it had. Since 1939 USSR and Germany were allies! And Stalin was then the biggest Hitler supporter.

Both were delaying the inevitable (the war).

Second: What did Estonians to deserve that punishment?

Nothing really, I assume most Estonians aren't like Kaleviopeg, he just annoys me so I insulted him

Third: And why do you think communism wasn't a punishment?

Russia right now is better off than it was 50 years ago?

Both were delaying the inevitable (the war).

Yes, but both wanted this inevitable. Hitler declares "Lebensraum" doctrine, Stalin - "World Revolution" doctrine.

Russia right now is better off than it was 50 years ago?

Undoubtedly better off, but:

1. 50 years ago (1945) Soviet Union was badly destroyed after war, and is incorrect to compare it with modern Russia.

2. Since 1991 communists not ruled Russia.

You should to compare Russia in 1913 and Soviet Union in 1985. And after that you should compare the progress of Russia with progress of other countries in that time period. In that case not all is clear.

And if the leaders of some neighbours countries didn't accept the Russian invitation, maybe it isn't only their problem, maybe it is Russians problem too? I think it isn't very good for Russia to have so bad relations with its neighbours.
      

Also 50 years ago was 1955, 1945 would be a differrent matter.

Oops, I'm sorry , it's my mistake.
Yes, 1955 was, maybe, the best time in Russians history of XX century.

About neighbours, first, we can't change the neighbours. Second. You think Russia isn't guilty, that "Nearly all (except Russians living there of course) are strongly anti Russian"? Are, for example, all Danish, Norwegian or Netherlands people "strongly anti Germans"? Maybe we can do something for make our relations better? Or not to do something, that make our relations worse (for example insult our neighbours...)?

1913 was the bad time for Russia, it's true, but I don't think it was the worst in XX century. And where do you mean were the another four "worst periods in Russian history"?


Edited by Yaroslav

"Russia in 1913 was at it's worst in the 20th century, and in fact could be said that that was one of the top 5 worst periods in Russian history.Nikolai Vtoroy "Krovaviy" was the worst ruller Russia ever had"

And i think that the millions of Russian peasants killed by Uljanov during 1917-1922 were the better times. Comeone you have to admit, the Soviet Union until the end of Stalins rule was at its cultural, ethical and humainist lowest ever in its history. Uljanov starved his own working class to death, chased them around the vast areas of Russia, had their homes taken, had executed humans from infant age to elderly folk. Yes, Uljanov was so skilled at ruling that 6 million Russians were known to have died of starvation during the above mentioned years. And during the timeframe from 1825-1917, IIRC, the tzars couldn't exeed the weekly kill limit of the future, and "better", communist state. And then comes Stalin, starves yet another 6 million to death, this time Ukrainians for little reason other than mass nationalism and stupidity. And then came the anti-semitism, the deportations, you must be prouder of those times then the times of the Romanovs, who had ruled for 300 years and were mildely repressive. O and you mentioned corruption during the tzars, forget that. The leading communists in the Soviet Union could be called Ivan Korruptovitsh's, or something like that. The only state, where people got into power to have absolutely no good done for the people. We'd best hope those times come back before the tzars do, logical.

 

And what is more preferable for you - superpower of your state, or happiness of your people?

Yes, that is the sad case right now. It seems that Dark One would prefer a country where his people were slaughtered by his own government, but at the cost of those lives, Russia would be a super power who could bully others. What is a few million lives next to the status of that kind of power huh?

And i think that the millions of Russian peasants killed by Uljanov during 1917-1922 were the better times. Comeone you have to admit, the Soviet Union until the end of Stalins rule was at its cultural, ethical and humainist lowest ever in its history.

Yes, it is really amazing that there was massive starvation during the civil war, n the horses were taken to the front (by both sides), we just got out of WWI, there was starvation already began in February 1917, and there were droughts in 1920 and 1921. So obviously it's all Lenin's fault, after all what effeccts could the things I jsut listed have ont eh quality of live in the country?
Also 1953 was a good time for Russia, and I fail to see how anything you said in the second sentence is true.

And what is more preferable for you - superpower of your state, or happiness of your people?

Both in moderation. Russia cannot loose everything generations have struggled for, not to mention the fact that during the time from the death of Stalin to 1962, our apex of power, was also the best living conditions in the USSR.

And then comes Stalin, starves yet another 6 million to death, this time Ukrainians for little reason other than mass nationalism and stupidity.

Are you really that stupid or do you choose to ignore the facts?
Stalin starved them because they refused to do their share for collectivization. Of course the organziation of farm labor clearly has a lot to do with nationalism, I mean why else would he do it? To avoid rebellion? To go on with his plan? No it must be nationalism, you are of course correct.

About neighbours, first, we can't change the neighbours.

So we might as well tyr to improve relations. But sinc ehty refuse that, I really don't see a choice than to ignore them.

Second. You think Russia isn't guilty, that "Nearly all (except Russians living there of course) are strongly anti Russian"? Are, for example, all Danish, Norwegian or Netherlands people "strongly anti Germans"? Maybe we can do something for make our relations better? Or not to do something, that make our relations worse (for example insult our neighbours...)?

Our government is already highly tolerant of them, what they don't realise that we really don't care about them (again except for Lithuania, we need the transportation to Kaliningrad). As for me attempting to insult Kalevipoeg it is personal,and I don't see how it affects Russia's relations with Estonia.

1913 was the bad time for Russia, it's true, but I don't think it was the worst in XX century. And where do you mean were the another four "worst periods in Russian history"?

Ah of course it wasn't teh worse int eh 20th century, it was the worst time of peace in the 20th century that was at least 5 years after a war to rephrase it more correctly. And yes there were anotehr four worst periods in Russian history, I suspect you misunderstood my language. I mean relatively bad, compared to otehr better periods. The civil war, both world wars, the rule of Nikolai II were extremely bad periods which should go as four of the five worst.