Russia: No CFE treaty for you!

[Serb]

Originally posted by Heresson
Lack of basic knowledge of geography is something You should be ashamed of.

Says who?

FYI, "Krolewiec" do not exist. Forget about it Heresson. You will never get Kaliningrad, not you, not Lithuanians, not anyone else. Your whine can be very annoying, so please shut-up.

[CerberusIV]

Originally posted by paiktis22

It is all part of the compromise spirit. The one the UK lacks.


It can't go this way since it creates too many variable geometries. Too many special clauses that will hurt the EU sometimes in favor of the UK sometimes without any benefit for it either.

Benefits of the EU? I took the trouble to find out (from the EU's own website) who actually pays.

http://europa.eu.int/comm/budget/pdf...rep_en2002.pdf

Don't click on this link unless you want to download a LARGE pdf file. The key table is on the very last page (I wonder why? ) and I have pasted it below.

Obviously there is more to the EU than just the financial costs - that is why the UK is interested in the single market. But the only four countries who got a net cash benefit from the EU in 2002 were Ireland, Spain, Portugal and Greece.

It becomes obvious why Greece benefits from the EU (until more money goes to the new countries) and that Paiktis's anti-British ranting is based on "pay up and keep quiet" rather than any principles.

The EU can do without the UK but is Greece willing to fund the 3 billion plus euros the EU budget would then be short of?

[Saras]

Originally posted by Serb


Says who?

FYI, "Krolewiec" do not exist. Forget about it Heresson. You will never get Kaliningrad, not you, not Lithuanians, not anyone else. Your whine can be very annoying, so please shut-up.

Y'know what, I've never heard a well-argued case why East Prussia (or Little Lithuania) should belong to Russia. I'm all ears.

[Az]

Little Lithuania? Is this for real? what's the point of calling a part of your country "little", when it's just next to "big lithuania". It would be like the US calling canada "little America", or something.

[Serb]

We won it fair and square. You think after all harm what nazi invasion done to Russia, we shouldn't took any compensation?

[Serb]

Forget it. Kaliningrad is part of Russia absolutely legitimately and this simple fact is recognized by all countries. If you dissagree, come and get it, if you have balls for this. But just stop whinning like girls.

[Saras]

Originally posted by Serb
We won it fair and square. You think after all harm what nazi invasion done to Russia, we shouldn't took any compensation?

I asked for a well argued justification

[Serb]

You think I should spent hours digging for proper almost 60 years old document?

[Saras]

Originally posted by Serb
You think I should spent hours digging for proper almost 60 years old document?

I'm hoping

[Bereta_Eder]

Originally posted by CerberusIV


Benefits of the EU? I took the trouble to find out (from the EU's own website) who actually pays.

http://europa.eu.int/comm/budget/pdf...rep_en2002.pdf

Don't click on this link unless you want to download a LARGE pdf file. The key table is on the very last page (I wonder why? ) and I have pasted it below.

Obviously there is more to the EU than just the financial costs - that is why the UK is interested in the single market. But the only four countries who got a net cash benefit from the EU in 2002 were Ireland, Spain, Portugal and Greece.

It becomes obvious why Greece benefits from the EU (until more money goes to the new countries) and that Paiktis's anti-British ranting is based on "pay up and keep quiet" rather than any principles.

Well that's a convenient explanation for you I'm sure. Doesn't make it true. It only demonstrates your rather limited sight.

The EU can do without the UK but is Greece willing to fund the 3 billion plus euros the EU budget would then be short of?

Sure we don't need your stinking money You can take it and shove it up your arse Without the UK the EU would go forward much faster and money matters much less than a fast forward EU.

[Bereta_Eder]

BTW I love it when you try to make me look like a single UK critisizer when it's actually a paneuropean realization.

[Saras]

Originally posted by paiktis22

Sure we don't need your stinking money You can take it and shove it up your arse Without the UK the EU would go forward much faster and money matters much less than a fast forward EU.

What a lunatic

[TheStinger]

Greece couldn't have put on the olympics without EU and therefore UK money.

But you don't have to thank us we're big enough not to get annoyed about that.

[Heresson]

First of all, if SU hadn't invaded Poland, Germany wouldn't have invaded it. Secondly, it was given to Russia which, of all European Soviet republics, was the less harmed by the war. Russia has no historical, ethnical or whatever rights to Krolewiec (by the way, what's the Lithuanian name). Northern part of the region should have been given to Lithuania, southern to Poland, with Krolewiec itself. Russia hasn't lost any land during the war, and Lithuania even gained it, so perhaps entire thing should go to Poland, which was cut by 1/3 (or 1/4, dependant on the counting) reduced on cost of its eastern neighbours. Remember that citizens of Krolewiec and Eastern Prussia have several times accented them being part of Poland, as they were fief of it illegally given to the Brandenburgians. Also, in the 1657 Welawa-Bydgoszcz treaty, it was said that if Hohenzollerns would cease to rule Prussia, it should be entirelly incorporated into Poland.

[Serb]

Originally posted by Saras


I'm hoping

I don't have any desire to spend my time on that. USSR took this territory in accordance with treaty Germany signed when it's capitulated in WW2. And it's a well-known fact.

[Serb]

Originally posted by Heresson
First of all, if SU hadn't invaded Poland, Germany wouldn't have invaded it.

1) USSR "invaded" only when Polish independent state was non-existent. Polish army was already crushed by Hitler's forces. SU took Northern Ukraine and Northen Beylorussia, you've stolen from Soviets in 20's.
2) Germany wouldn't invaded anyone if UK and France hadn't encouraged it. All attempts of SU to cooperate with other great powers and do something to stop Hitler failed. UK and France just turned away from USSR and keep playing their dirty games with Hitler, surrendering Reihnland, Austria, Czechoslovakia and let him modernize German army.
3) Poland participating in division of Czechoslovakia on pair with Hitler, thus making Germany stronger, so stop playing a saint here.

Secondly, it was given to Russia which, of all European Soviet republics, was the less harmed by the war.

You have no remorse, Herrison. No other country, EVER suffered so much as Russia in WW2. No other country, EVER paid so high price for victory over invaders.
26,6 MILLIONS people dead, thousands of towns and villages burned to the ground, thousands of plants, factories and other industrial facilities destroyed, thousands of libraries, museums, universities and schools destroyed, hell know how many agricaltural feilds destroyed, millions of domestic animals stolen, etc. No other country, suffered so enormous material damge, no other country, was so pillaged, so damged, EVER.
And you dare to say what you've said?
F*ck you. F*cker.

Russia has no historical, ethnical or whatever rights to Krolewiec (by the way, what's the Lithuanian name).

F*ck you once again.
Kaliningrad will remain Russian forever. You dare to say about historical rights? We gain this city as part of contribution, as compensation for disaster that nazi invaders brought to our land, (I doubt this peice of land can compensate loss of 26.6 millions lives, but still it's better than nothing).
This is our historical right to own this territory.

It is you who have no right to have it. What have you done to have it? You fought for it perhaps? NO. You have destroyed nazism and saved Poland and other peoples from extermination? NO.
You didn't won this war. You didn't played a decisive role in destruction of nazism. You didn't pay the price which we have paid. That's why it's our territory, not yours. And it will remain ours forever.
You want it? Come and get it, if you can. You'll share the same fate as the f*cker who tried to attack Russia last time.

Northern part of the region should have been given to Lithuania, southern to Poland, with Krolewiec itself.

In your dreams. You're not a king of mighty Polish kingdom who won WW2 and destroyed mighty German kingdom. So shut the f*ck up.
The only way how you can get it- by force, because it's our territory. So gather your army of fancy Polish crusaders and attack us. Perhaps this time you'll be more lucky than the last time.
Actually, we will kick your good-mannered, educated, fancy Polish as$es as we always do.
Just in case if the same sh!t will happen as always and your fancy kingdom will become part of Russia again, know that you was warned. And it was your fault, not anyone else.

Russia hasn't lost any land during the war, and Lithuania even gained it,

You'll never stop to amaze me Heresson.
WE"VE WON THIS WAR AND IT'S QUITE NORMAL THAT VICTORIOUS SIDE DIDN'T LOST ANY LAND IN WAR IT WON.

so perhaps entire thing should go to Poland, which was cut by 1/3 (or 1/4, dependant on the counting) reduced on cost of its eastern neighbours.

In your dreams. If you still do not get it, I'll try to explain once again. You've lost your war vs. Germany in 1939. Your country didn't paid such price for victory as Russia paid. Your country didn't played such role in destruction of nazism as Russia. You have no right to claim more from Germany than you already recieved.
You are not the victor of this war, so no one really cares what you wish. Had you destroyed nazism the case would have been different, but since it didn't happen- shut up and be gratefull that we did it, otherwise you wouldn't be born, because in case of nazi victory there would be no Slavs today at all, including Polish and Russians of course.

Remember that citizens of Krolewiec and Eastern Prussia have several times accented them being part of Poland, as they were fief of it illegally given to the Brandenburgians.

And who cares?
Today this territory belongs to Russia and majority of its population are Russians.

Also, in the 1657 Welawa-Bydgoszcz treaty, it was said that if Hohenzollerns would cease to rule Prussia, it should be entirelly incorporated into Poland.

Really?
And since Poland was part of Russian empire long time ago, it still should be part of Russia today, right?

[Bereta_Eder]

Originally posted by TheStinger
Greece couldn't have put on the olympics without EU and therefore UK money.

But you don't have to thank us we're big enough not to get annoyed about that.

UK contribution to the whole EU: 3 bil.

Greece budget just for Olympic security : 1 bil.

We coult do the Olympics without UK even existed (what a glorious day that will be).

So sorry no cigar now go perish you angloamerican genocidal dopes. You've been ****ing in these parts for too long. Time for payback.


Lunatic Saras? From one who claims Nazis to be the same as the Soviets? From such persons I consider the characterism a compliment keep them comign

[Bereta_Eder]

As for our eastern european friends, (not lithuanians, good at basketball attrocious at political attitudes) what you want? To be the puppies of the yanks? You will leave one "chain" (as you say USSR was) to enter another? Do you think that angloamerican bastardi will help if Russia ever decides to recapture you?

Two words: Get real!

It is logical to have issues with the Russians. (However it is not OK to equate Soviets with Nazis unless you're Nazis yourselves Saras). No matter what issues you have turning to US doggies like the UK is not the answer. Sure Chirac was wrong saying some things but the bottomline is don't play doggies for the US. You have nothing to gain you have lots to lose. EU strong, Russia EU relations strong as well and everyone living as best as he can.

[Bereta_Eder]

As for Lithuania Poland ect. You know getting to NATO means for your countries? getting ripped off, buying useless american weapons from their industries. Not having enough to eat and they steal you blind for your last money. That's NATO for you. It doesn't offer you absolutely no guarantee. It is an angloamerican device to swell their coffers with your money.

Your road is with the EU and with good relations with Russia. It will take arounbd 10 years to realize it but once you do, you'll know what the deal is. I wish you good luck!

Besides NATO will relatively soon expire. Think about it when you've given billions of money YOu DON'T HAVE for the sole reason to make them bastards rich.

[Bereta_Eder]

And something else. You think USSR was a dictatorship and US/UK was freedom? Boy are you in for a surprise. You should educate yourselves and learn about the millions of people that have died because of direct or indirect US/UK actions. You should educate yourselves about the american holocaust and then we could speak. Be sure to figure these things out soon or you'll pay a heavy price. But then again you won't cause EU has acted fast. Fortunately your politicians learn faster than your average citizen unless they're fanatical like some states.... but you will be the onces to pay for your fanatism and you're the onces who have the power to change it as well.

[Bereta_Eder]

In short the angloamerican game of today is: split the EU. For that they use their british dog. That's well known. Now they found you my dear eastern europeans. You have enemity with the Russians. The US and its dog is trying to use that for her own advantage. However once you realize and you've already start doing that, that their game is NOT your interest you'll know what's going down.

be sur that the angloamerican bastards will buy everything you got turning you into modern slaves. I'm sure you don't want that...again. Remeber the old game of divide and conquer. You're at the centre now. You have to make a choice and play it or stand up for yourselves, be friends with your neighboors and give those who want to divide you hell. It is obvious where the best solution lies...
I'm very symapthetic to you 'cause there are some thinsg that you have as illuions but they have soon started to vanish. The sacrifice of the EU to include you gets more and more vindication as time goes by.

[David Floyd]

1) USSR "invaded" only when Polish independent state was non-existent. Polish army was already crushed by Hitler's forces. SU took Northern Ukraine and Northen Beylorussia, you've stolen from Soviets in 20's.

This ignores the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, which set this invasion up to begin with. The M-R Pact gave the Soviets "rights" to the eastern 77,000 square miles of Poland, as well as putting the Baltic states in the USSR's "sphere of influence" (otherwise known as free reign to take them over). This not being enough for the Soviets, they turned around and invaded Finland in 1940, a war which produced German and Swedish volunteers to come to the defense of Finland.

2) Germany wouldn't invaded anyone if UK and France hadn't encouraged it.

I guess that France and the UK didn't want to go around starting wars and invading people. Obviously the Soviets had no such compunction. Except oh wait, that's right, the Soviets actually signed a military pact with Germany for the purpose of foreign aggression. It seems that if you think France and the UK "encouraged" Germany, then the Soviets did too - to a much worse degree. I don't recall any Franco-German military alliances.

3) Poland participating in division of Czechoslovakia on pair with Hitler, thus making Germany stronger, so stop playing a saint here.

So by that argument, the Soviet Union participated in the division of Poland, thus making Germany stronger as well. Right? Your own argument, after all...

You have no remorse, Herrison. No other country, EVER suffered so much as Russia in WW2. No other country, EVER paid so high price for victory over invaders.
26,6 MILLIONS people dead, thousands of towns and villages burned to the ground, thousands of plants, factories and other industrial facilities destroyed, thousands of libraries, museums, universities and schools destroyed, hell know how many agricaltural feilds destroyed, millions of domestic animals stolen, etc. No other country, suffered so enormous material damge, no other country, was so pillaged, so damged, EVER.

Yeah, and just think, without the Western Front and without Lend-Lease, both made possible primarily by the US and Britain, all of that suffering would have been for nothing. Well, nothing, unless you were a German, in which case you'd probably be settling in a large new estate in the Ukraine.

Kaliningrad will remain Russian forever. You dare to say about historical rights? We gain this city as part of contribution, as compensation for disaster that nazi invaders brought to our land, (I doubt this peice of land can compensate loss of 26.6 millions lives, but still it's better than nothing).
This is our historical right to own this territory.

So, it's your right to take Polish land in compensation for German aggression, when, in 1939, you greatly contributed to Germany invading Poland in the first place?

And by that argument, the US should simply seize a chunk of every country in Europe, including the Soviet Union.

It is you who have no right to have it. What have you done to have it? You fought for it perhaps? NO.

Really? So winning a war is the only justification for owning land? Actually, come to think of it, the last time Poland and the Soviet Union directly fought, in the early 1920s, didn't Poland WIN?

Unless you count, of course, the Soviet invasion in 1939. But that wasn't a real war, right? Because Poland didn't exist, right?

So either, the last time the Soviets and Poles fought, Poland won, or the last time they fought, the Soviets had invaded. Oh wait, that invasion bit is true for both times, isn't it?

You didn't pay the price which we have paid.

Speaking of price, don't you owe the US a few billion in Lend Lease? We'll take that in adjusted 1945 dollars, please.

You're not a king of mighty Polish kingdom who won WW2 and destroyed mighty German kingdom.

No, just the mighty Polish kingdom that tossed out the Soviets the last time they fought one-on-one. Hmmmm...

You've lost your war vs. Germany in 1939.

So? You lost yours vs. Poland in 1922.

Your country didn't paid such price for victory as Russia paid. Your country didn't played such role in destruction of nazism as Russia.

Russia better pony up some cash to the good ole US of A in that case.

shut up and be gratefull that we did it, otherwise you wouldn't be born, because in case of nazi victory there would be no Slavs today at all, including Polish and Russians of course.

Credit where due, please. Without the US, the Soviets would NOT have won. Stalemate at best would have resulted.

Today this territory belongs to Russia and majority of its population are Russians.

Obviously so, that's what happens when you move in by the thousands.

[Serb]

Oh it's you again.

Read this book:

http://www.worldhistoryhub.com/Russi...786707224.html

Perhaps you'll understand something about WW2.
Untill then...

[David Floyd]

So, my obvious trolling aside (the Lend Lease stuff, although it IS true), how can you deny my points about Soviet aggression?

And the fact that Poland beat the Soviets in the 1920s is a FACT.

[Ned]

EU is strong? EU is reliable? France has your back?

Someone is definitely living in fantasy land.

[Saras]

Originally posted by paiktis22

Lunatic Saras? From one who claims Nazis to be the same as the Soviets? From such persons I consider the characterism a compliment keep them comign

I stand by my "Lunatic". You guys only wanted to have soviets run your place. We actually had them running it for 50 years. Only lunatics would want that

Serb, one reader commmented the book you linked

"<...>The only draw back of this great account is that it is written in such a pro-Soviet manner as to almost make the reader believe that Werth is an apologist for the crimes of the Soviets during the entire conflict, especially the invasion of Germany."

[Bereta_Eder]

We didn't want to have ANYONE running our place.

[Serb]

Originally posted by David Floyd
So, my obvious trolling aside (the Lend Lease stuff, although it IS true), how can you deny my points about Soviet aggression?

Your points?
David, read this book, it's writen by British BBC military reporter, an eyewitness of events, a person who meet highest leadership of countries involved in WW2. It will provide you a basic understanding about WW2 and about what kind of hell it was there when nazi invaded. Untill you'll finish this book, there is nothing to speak about. You as well as absolute majority of Americans know nothing about war on Eastern front.
I'm tired of your constant trolls like "Without the US, the Soviets would NOT have won".
You Yankees have your own shining version of history and seems to believe it.
I don't have time and skill to educate you. I gave you a link. So, read this Werth's book and educate yourself.

And the fact that Poland beat the Soviets in the 1920s is a FACT.

So?
Perhaps Somehow it change the fact that they had attacked USSR and grab part of its territory?
Soviets used situation in 1939 and returned this territory. Case is closed.

[Saras]

Kaliningrad’s Legal Status

The Problem: Kaliningrad’s legal status remains problematic in the minds of some commentators. Their case rests on the following facts. With the September 12, 1990 treaty between the Federal Republic of Germany and the German Democratic Republic—Germany surrendered control of the former Konigsberg region but, “...it did not transfer its sovereignty over the Kaliningrad Territory to the Soviet Union or to any other country.”4 Moreover, the four WW II allies did not settle the issue at the time of German reunification so the Soviet Union never enjoyed sovereignty over Kaliningrad. Consequently after the USSR imploded, Russia could not legally acquire the territory.

The official U.S. government position is not clear-cut and may be cited to support the case of those who question Moscow’s claim that Kaliningrad belongs to Russia. It is that Kaliningrad is under Russian administration but stops short of stating that Moscow enjoys de jure control of the territory.

Questions concerning Russia’s de jure control of Kaliningrad has prompted recommendations that the Oblast’s ultimate fate be determined by an international body. This was the thrust of a 1995 resolution proposed by U. S. Congressman Christopher Cox. Later, the Gilman Amendment excised that provision from the proposed bill. It was never enacted—but the Russian Foreign Ministry reacted with heat to it saying in effect. “How would the U.S. Congress like it if some foreign parliament suggested Texas be handed over to an international body to determine its future?” Moscow also was unhappy about the Gilman Amendment’s linking the establishment of a free trade zone in Kaliningrad with demilitarization.

Finally Russians never ever lived in the region but over the centuries many Lithuanians did in what was called Lithuanian Minor; consequently, some nationalists in Vilnius have argued that Lithuania is justified in claiming part of the Kaliningrad territory.5 With the collapse of the USSR, the status of Kaliningrad became a raw nerve in Lithuanian-Russian relations. In the 1993 presidential campaign, Stasys Lozoraitis—Lithuania’s Ambassador to the United States—said Kaliningrad belonged to Lithuania and then retracted what most political commentators in Vilnius deemed a faux pas. But in the summer of 1997, Lithuanian Parliamentary Chairman, the conservative, Vytautas Landsbergis, said that the status of Kaliningrad remained to be settled. He said afterwards that his words had been taken out of context, but they prompted the Oblast’s governor, Leonid Gorbenko, to respond that Klaipeda—called Memel when it was controlled by Germany—had been unlawfully incorporated into Lithuania. 6

Within Kaliningrad itself, local scholars have argued that the Oblast’s residents possess the legal authority to decide it’s fate. Through a referendum, they can choose the status quo; choose to remain within the Federation but with the enhanced powers enjoyed by republics like Tatarstan; or, choose to become an independent Fourth Baltic Republic.7

The Legal Question Today: The Russian position is that “The Potsdam accord on Konigsberg was as fundamental and irreversible as the Potsdam decisions on Poland’s frontier along the Oder and Neisse.”8 In the 1970 Moscow Treaty, Germany surrendered any claim to Kaliningrad. What’s more, the Helsinki Agreement of 1975—which settled all of Europe’s outstanding post-World War II border questions— justified Russia’s control of Kaliningrad. And Moscow claims that with the signing of the 1990 treaty of German reunification by France, Great Britain, Russia and the United States, the “Big Four”, in effect, signed the final peace settlement to World War II which was mentioned at Potsdam.

Whatever the legal situation the political picture is clear. Neither Germany nor Poland have made claims on Kaliningrad, nor has any other government. Moreover, Lithuania’s first popularly elected post-Soviet president, Algirdas Brazauskas, has stated categorically that Kaliningrad belongs to Russia and the 1991 and 1997 border agreements between Lithuania and Russia acknowledge that declaration. Valdas Adamkus, the Lithuanian-American who replaced Brazauskas in 1998, has taken the same position.

In June 1998, Russian Foreign Minister, Yevgeny Primakov, visited Vilnius to acknowledge—among other things—that he was favorably impressed with Lithuania’s cooperation with Kaliningrad.

Some background, taken from Richard Krickus' "The Kaliningrad Question"

[Serb]

Originally posted by Saras


Some background, taken from Richard Krickus' "The Kaliningrad Question"
With the September 12, 1990 treaty between the Federal Republic of Germany and the German Democratic Republic—Germany surrendered control of the former Konigsberg region but, “...it did not transfer its sovereignty over the Kaliningrad Territory to the Soviet Union or to any other country

Of course they didn't, because they could not. Neither Federal Republic of Germany or German Democratic Republic had any authority over Kaliningrad in 1990 when Germany was re-united.



The Legal Question Today: The Russian position is that “The Potsdam accord on Konigsberg was as fundamental and irreversible as the Potsdam decisions on Poland’s frontier along the Oder and Neisse.”8 In the 1970 Moscow Treaty, Germany surrendered any claim to Kaliningrad. What’s more, the Helsinki Agreement of 1975—which settled all of Europe’s outstanding post-World War II border questions— justified Russia’s control of Kaliningrad. And Moscow claims that with the signing of the 1990 treaty of German reunification by France, Great Britain, Russia and the United States, the “Big Four”, in effect, signed the final peace settlement to World War II which was mentioned at Potsdam.

Germany surrendered any claim to Kaliningrad. Neither Poland or Lithuania have right to demand anything, because if they'll do, then both Poland and Lithuanian frontiers should be re-considered as well (which is not in interests of both countries).
Case is closed.