Does Putin have a soul?

[Alex157]

Glad to hear that you are alive and well

Alexey!

Hmmm, Kosovo. It was a big problem for Clinton and NATO. We

tried to help a Muslim population and had no understanding of the complex history of the Balkans. When we recognized

Kosovo we tried to do the right thing and, as it happened, did nothing to solve a problem. I don't know if you can

blame the West, or anyone. I also don't know if the problem in the Balkans can be solved.

No, not helping Muslims was a problem. My opinion is not

typical for Russians but I think that NATO had no choice but interfere there.
I was saying

about recognition of Kosovo. It was a direct violation of European principle of inviolability of frontiers in

Europe. It was signed by all European countries and by the US too. The US is not a European country : ) but others

have no excuse.
By the way, such independence violates logic too. If Kosovo has a right to be

independent from Serbia, any district of Kosovo where there are Serbian majority should have such a right also.

I'm curious about how you think Georgia

relates to that situation. Do you think Russia's interest might be geographical and oil related? Georgia is an

important link to the Black Sea, and is between there and

Baku.

Well, first of all both nations –

Abkazs and Ossetins want to be with Russia, not Georgia, it is a fact. So it is not easy for Russia to be

indifferent since all Caucasian nations of Russia are against Georgia too and support Abkazia and South Ossetia. As

NATO didn’t want to see how Albanians were killed in Kosovo we don’t want to see how Georgians kill Abkazs and

Ossetins.
Of course, the Kremlin has interests of its own there, but it has a great pretext

for operating there.
Now it is clear that both the West and the Kremlin have extremely

hypocritical positions. Both accuse each other of doing what the are doing themselves.
It is

a top of hypocrisy to shout about violation of international laws in Kosovo and then to do the same in Georgia. The

West has not any moral rights to accuse Russia after recognition of Kosovo too. It was the West who started it.

What do you think of the defense missile

system in Poland?

As

for me I think nothing, but I am sure that if Russia begins to built military bases in Cuba the US wouldn’t be too

happy too.

Glad to hear that you are alive and well

Alexey!

I visited your website and it has grown a lot! Many beautiful

images! A nice place to visit. I was thinking about posting some pictures there, but your artists are much better

than what I do.

Greg, post something and we compare : )

Oh, why do you

think Saakashivili is scum?

I saw the translations from the UN by the CNN. Of course, Georgian representatives have a good command of

English and in comparison with our old Soviet apparatchik they look much better. Buy they lie as Stalin’s guys lied

60 years ago in the UN.
It was Saakasvili’s regime who started the

war. And they started it cowardly at the first day of Olympics. Hundreds of civilians died for nothing since the

Kremlin was just glad to this provocation and it was obvious that Russia would draw in its army.


By the way, Saakashvili is a mental person too. It is strange that the

West cannot see it.

[Mtnjim]

Well, first of all both nations – Abkazs and Ossetins want to be with Russia,

not Georgia, it is a fact.

That may well have to do

with before the Soviet days, Georga engaged in "ethnic cleansing" in Ossetia. They hated each other.

[idesign]

No, not helping Muslims was a problem. My opinion is not typical for

Russians but I think that NATO had no choice but interfere there.
I was saying about

recognition of Kosovo. It was a direct violation of European principle of inviolability of frontiers in Europe. It

was signed by all European countries and by the US too. The US is not a European country : ) but others have no

excuse.
By the way, such independence violates logic too. If Kosovo has a right to be

independent from Serbia, any district of Kosovo where there are Serbian majority should have such a right

also.

Yes, I understand, but it is difficult to understand why a major ethnic

population within a region cannot have their political freedom when political boundaries have historically been

drawn randomly and without populations in mind. In Eastern Europe it is most difficult, especially in the Balkans

(Yugoslavia and Albania).

If Europe thinks its boundaries to be inviolable, then they need only think back to

their history when the Western nations continuously shifted alliances against various Eastern powers and schemed to

manipulate much of Eastern Europe (post-Ottoman) through those alliances. There was scarcely any time for E.Europe

to establish modern States before the Soviets put an end to that. Modern Europe is only a little more

enlightened, and they are concerned more with economic unity than ethnic freedoms.

Its my thinking that W.Europe

is not that comfortable being part of NATO as a useful force to begin with.

Arbitrary boundaries will

eventually be broken, and nowhere was it more volatile than the Balkans. But, there is little risk that smaller

populations will have the resources to break from the boundaries recently

established.

Well, first of all both nations – Abkazs and Ossetins

want to be with Russia, not Georgia, it is a fact. So it is not easy for Russia to be indifferent since all

Caucasian nations of Russia are against Georgia too and support Abkazia and South Ossetia. As NATO didn’t want

to see how Albanians were killed in Kosovo we don’t want to see how Georgians kill Abkazs and Ossetins.


Of course, the Kremlin has interests of its own there, but it has a great pretext for

operating there.
Now it is clear that both the West and the Kremlin have extremely

hypocritical positions. Both accuse each other of doing what the are doing themselves.
It is

a top of hypocrisy to shout about violation of international laws in Kosovo and then to do the same in Georgia. The

West has not any moral rights to accuse Russia after recognition of Kosovo too. It was the West who started it.

What you say makes sense, if you consider "self-determination" to be a goal for a modern

political philosophy. MtnJim's point is well taken, and your explanation is enlightening. In this way of looking

at Ossetia is Russia all that hypocritical? Of course you must discount other reasons.

Int'l politics and law

are constantly shifting, and have always been so. Today's hypocrite is yesterday's hero. The US knows this

because they have been caught in their own devices many times, but the game must be played with today's cards.

That's what makes yesterday's cards so troublesome.

As

for me I think nothing, but I am sure that if Russia begins to built military bases in Cuba the US wouldn’t be

too happy too.

Ah, do you interpret such actions through the lens of a Soviet camera? Or

is the camera a modern Russian one? They are very different. Is it so hard to understand "manoeuvres

defensif"?

I saw the translations from the UN by the CNN. Of

course, Georgian representatives have a good command of English and in comparison with our old Soviet apparatchik

they look much better. Buy they lie as Stalin’s guys lied 60 years ago in the UN.


It was Saakasvili’s regime who started the war. And they started

it cowardly at the first day of Olympics. Hundreds of civilians died for nothing since the Kremlin was just glad to

this provocation and it was obvious that Russia would draw in its army.
By the way, Saakashvili is a mental person too. It is strange that the West cannot see it.

Yes, after some reading I think you are right.

As another thought, what do you think

of the UN?

As for my pictures, they are only good "snapshots", and not artistically rendered. I will gather some

and send them to you.

Nice to see you again!

[Alex157]

Sorry, guys, for some reason I

didn't get a notification again. I'll answer soon.
By the way, Greg, is there a topic about cinema at the

forum?

[idesign]

No problem Alexey, we're always

here. And I saw a shortcoming in my previous reply, but let's continue and I'll correct it.

There is a

thread about Good Movies Lately here, and you

can post anything you like. If you want to create a different discussion you can start a new thread. As a member

you can create a thread on any topic. Just put it in Open Discussion. Let me know if you need any help. What do

you have on your mind besides politics and great photography?

[Alex157]

It is me again

If Europe thinks its boundaries to be

inviolable

Well,

actually the US signed this treaty too

Modern Europe is only a little more enlightened, and they are

concerned more with economic unity than ethnic freedoms.

I

think that the US virtually have not such problems since the significant part of the native population died out (and

many were killed by European invaders) and now constitutes a very small percentage of total population.


As far as I know Europe does much for ethnic cultural freedoms but this

problem has not any solution from my point of view. If every nation has to have a state of its own – what should be

borders? If not, how I can have the same rights as the ‘title’ nation if I want to speak my ethnic language?

What you say makes

sense, if you consider "self-determination" to be a goal for a modern political philosophy.

No, I haven’t any

strict views of my own on the subject. I just think that if a territory has a right to separate, any part of it has

to have the same right. That’s only one thing I am saying. But it is impossible.

[SIZE=

3]--As for me I think nothing, but I am sure that if Russia begins to built

military bases in Cuba the US wouldn’t be too happy too.

[/SIZE]

--Ah, do

you interpret such actions through the lens of a Soviet camera? Or is the camera a modern Russian one? They are very

different. Is it so hard to understand "manoeuvres

defensif"?

I just think that nobody cannot be unbiased. Say, Mexicans will elect

somebody like Saakashvili and a civil war among different ethnic groups will begin (God forbid, of course).


I think that it would be difficult for the US not to interfere at all if

it happens at the US’s borders.

As another thought, what do

you think of the UN?

Nothing Rather, it is a bit better than nothing but the UN is

incapable to solve serious problems, I think.

As for my

pictures, they are only good "snapshots", and not artistically rendered. I will gather some and send them to you.

Great, I am waiting

for it : )

[Alex157]

There is a thread about

[COLOR=#0852

c6]Good Movies Lately[/COLOR]

here

Thanks a lot,

Greg. I am going to read it and post my questions

Let me know if you need any

help

No, no,

everything is OK Thank you!

What do you have on

your mind besides politics and great photography?

Money My main concern is how to get money from the Russian

Internet : ))

[idesign]

If every nation has to have a state of its own – what

should be borders? If not, how I can have the same rights as the ‘title’ nation if I want to speak my

ethnic language?

I understand and partially agree. The only problem is with old borders

drawn arbitrarily, without respect to major cultural/religious populations, as in the former Yugoslavia and

Albania. After the Soviet demise such things were inevitable I think. And then there was Milosevic, another small

problem.

No, I haven’t any strict views of my own

on the subject. I just think that if a territory has a right to separate, any part of it has to have the same right.

That’s only one thing I am saying. But it is impossible.

Self determinism is pretty

important as a foundation for a Democracy. But you are absolutely right about small indigenous groups. They will

not have the power to realize any independence of course.

I

just think that nobody cannot be unbiased. Say, Mexicans will elect somebody like Saakashvili and a civil war among

different ethnic groups will begin (God forbid, of course).
I think that

it would be difficult for the US not to interfere at all if it happens at the US’s borders.

Interesting analogy Alexey, especially in the light of your

comment about borders. Of course the US would have an interest in the outcome. That raises a question I have.

What is the international status of South Ossetia?

As you recognized, there is a cultural

difference between the north and south. If either area have an allegiance to Georgia or Russia then their political

sponsor has an obligation: Georgia in the south and Russian in the north. But I'm not sure of the dynamics of

these areas among their people, if you exclude powerful armies.

Going back to the subject of this thread

(remember that?) the west is becoming a little nervous of Putin for other reasons as well. We will

see.

Nothing

Rather, it is a bit better than nothing but the UN is incapable to solve serious problems, I think.

And are corrupt and political.

[Alex157]

I understand and partially agree. The only problem is with

old borders drawn arbitrarily, without respect to major cultural/religious populations, as in the former

Yugoslavia and Albania.

Major on minor?

After the Soviet

demise such things were inevitable I think.

Well, the same

problems are in Catalonia or the Country of Basques, for example.

And then there was

Milosevic, another small problem.

Yes, sure, but now there are another guys there.

Interesting analogy Alexey, especially in the light of your

comment about borders. Of course the US would have an interest in the outcome. That raises a question I have. What

is the international status of South Ossetia?

The same as of

Kosovo : ) It is a part of Georgia, of course.

As you

recognized, there is a cultural difference between the north and south.

Well, I don’t think

so. The only difference, I believe, is that there were many ethnic Georgians in South Ossetia, of course. As well as

there were quite enough Serbs in Kosovo. Of course, the difference is that some Serbs remain in Kosovo, but I think

that all Georgians were banished from South Ossetia and Abkhazia…

If either area have an allegiance to Georgia or Russia then their

political sponsor has an obligation: Georgia in the south and Russian in the north.

I think that the

main problem is that Russia is more tolerant to ethnic minorities than Georgia. Actually even as an Empire ethnic

minorities in Russia were much more equal to the main nation that in the Western Empires. Maybe because Russians

were mainly serf slaves so there were no difference for Czars :

)
Georgians want to make everybody Georgians and it is not OK with Abkazs

and Ossetins.

Going back to the subject of this thread (remember that?)

the west is becoming a little

nervous of Putin for other reasons as well. We will

see.

Yes, all

troubles at the Caucasus are only coming : ))

And are corrupt and political.

Well, Greg, what is not corrupt and political in the modern

world? : )

[idesign]

Hi Alex,
After finally getting

around to doing some more reading about Georgia, I have to agree with you. Saakashvili made a big mistake, and his

country paid a price. The Russian response may have been a little heavy-handed, but Putin is the kind of person who

likes to prove his point.

The discussion about Kosovo, Basques, ethnic sovereignty and such can be discussed

endlessly, and is probably one of the more interesting discussions available. Ethnic and religious tensions that

history ignored - or suppressed under a dictatorship - later become revolutions if they can, genocides if they're

very unlucky, or victims of re-suppression if they're only moderately unlucky. This ignores political tensions

which suddenly appear in the vacuum of a failed imperial tyranny such as the Soviets.

Considering all that, the

Balkans were a very old soup that boiled over after its last restraint was removed. It was going to happen, and the

Western powers had to make a choice. Recognizing Kosovo was not so much a matter of violating borders, but of

recognizing a new political landscape that they did not choose, but had to accept.

In sheer pragmatic terms, a

population must have the means to revolt in terms of capability, then it must have legitimacy in its political

sphere. These two rules prohibit many populations from breaking whatever "chains" they have, or perceive to

have.

On another note, I see that Putin, ooops, Medvedev wants to place missiles near Poland. Medvedev said that

he is counting on our new President to make "conciliatory gestures". What do you think of this? What do you think

of our new President?

[Alex157]

Greg hi,

After finally getting around to doing some more reading about Georgia, I have to agree

with you. Saakashvili made a big mistake, and his country paid a price.

Well, I remember a line from ‘Jackie Brown’. - Can you trust Melony? –

You can trust that Melony will be Melony.
Or something like this.

Saakashvili is Saakashvili and I think that it is a great mistake of the US government that it supports such guys.

Again, Hitler was elected democratically too.

On another note, I see that Putin,

ooops, Medvedev wants to place missiles near Poland. Medvedev said that he is counting on our new President to make

"conciliatory gestures". What do you think of this?

Nothing : ) As far as I know we have not military units to the west of

Moscow at all and all this is just a show. A good half of Russians are very anti-Western and I think that the

Kremlin guys just try to satisfy them.

What do you think of our new

President?

Well, I am glad that after Bush America chose something else For me it shows that

democracy works.
Much more a bit later – we are making our site and my

brains don’t work completely : )
What do YOU think of new President?

[Mtnjim]

On another

note, I see that Putin, ooops, Medvedev wants to place missiles near Poland. Medvedev said that he is counting on

our new President to make "conciliatory gestures".

You might be too young to remember, but I would say

"Cuban missles in reverse."