Would most of these ex-Soviet nations treat their respective Russian minorities (even the majority in Latvia) with respect and not think of them as second or third class citizens, Russia wouldn't be in there meddling in.

 I don't think Russia attacks Ukraine unless NATO pours a bunch of troops inside Ukraine. Hopefully, the NeoCon's won't antagonize Russia into a war. 

I think that some folks are playing with fire, and all I can hope for is that this does not turn into another Vietnam! It has the makings of it already. 

But all in all, this kind of thing has been going on for thousands of years with many "conquerors" and we still think they are movies and were not real people! It couldn't happen today with real people, right?

King of Loss wrote: That seems to be in the Russian blood.

This has nothing to do with blood. It has happened all over the world, with Western Europe and the USA also often happily involved.

By the way, I think Putin is a good strategist. Before he does something like this, he'll do his best to make sure that he can get away with it (not that this is particularly reassuring... ).

Blacksword wrote: It appears that one of Moscow's biggest concerns is Ukraine joining NATO, as per Latvia and Lithuania. There is some legitimacy to his concerns, as NATO is encroaching ever close to the Russian border.

It should be up to the people of those countries to decide whether those countries join NATO or not; Russia isn't deserving of a say in the matter. To quote http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/sep/29/lithuania-is-safer-with-nato-mr-corbyn" rel="nofollow - Lithuania's ambassador to the UK : "Our countries were not forced or lured into Nato as part of an American global power grab. We were pounding on the door of the alliance, demanding to be let in, because we feared that Russia might one day become what it is now: a threat."

Sean Trane wrote: I wish the EU (and NATO) would stop meddling in there, and I have even less trust in the Ukrainian regime than I do in Moscow. Would most of these ex-Soviet nations treat their respective Russian minorities (even the majority in Latvia) with respect and not think of them as second or third class citizens, Russia wouldn't be in there meddling in.

Only about a quarter of Latvia's citizens are ethnically Russian, actually. I don't doubt that there's a lot of animosity and ill treatment of Russian minorities in former Soviet states, but you'll have a hard time convincing me that it's bad enough to warrant a military intervention of the kind Russia has already been engaged in in Ukraine since 2014. You could apply the same logic to claim that Nazi Germany was in the right to annex Sudetenland in 1938.

Yeah, I'd like to ask the same question!

snobb wrote: I don't think Putin going to start the war intentionally - today's Russia isn't an USSR, he just wants to push lazy and toothless Westerners once again to get a gift - the promise to leave Ukraine in Eurasian orbit, not European But knowing Eurasians impulsivity and partial irrationality, the local conflict can start just by chance, as it already happened before

I fully agree!

BTW, long time no see, Slava!

Furthermore, the existience of strong Russian minorities is largely the result of deportation and re-settlement of the original population and mass immigration of Russians during the Soviet rule. For example parents of a Lithuanian friend of mine were deported to Siberia and only much later allowed... to Latvia but not to their native Lithuania, as the Russians tried to weaken the native populations. Obviously that's not a justification for treating the Russian minority badly today, however the Russians can hardly derive a right to intervene from this.

Hi,

And I will bet that if he does that, he won't last as a leader a whole lot longer ... he needs to worry about his country, not a military push and invasion, which will deplete their economy even more.

Well, yeah. But Russian history is more or less about conquering large pieces of land.

I know I can get in trouble for this below (especially from Slava ), but here goes  - for better or worse.

Mirakaze wrote: Sean Trane wrote: I wish the EU (and NATO) would stop meddling in there, and I have even less trust in the Ukrainian regime than I do in Moscow. Would most of these ex-Soviet nations treat their respective Russian minorities (even the majority in Latvia) with respect and not think of them as second or third class citizens, Russia wouldn't be in there meddling in. Only about a quarter of Latvia's citizens are ethnically Russian, actually. I don't doubt that there's a lot of animosity and ill treatment of Russian minorities in former Soviet states, but you'll have a hard time convincing me that it's bad enough to warrant a military intervention of the kind Russia has already been engaged in in Ukraine since 2014. You could apply the same logic to claim that Nazi Germany was in the right to annex Sudetenland in 1938.

Mmmhhh!!!..  In high school, I had a geographical  encyclopedia dating from 73 and the individual stats from all the soviet republics were in there and I remember seeing in there that Russians were the majority in Latvia. Things have probably changed in nearly 50y.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not siding on the Russians, but the constant attacks directed to the country, I understand they get tense about things. My instincs tell me that if Russia ever gets broken  up, worldwide mayhem will occur. As westerners, we should be definitely more friendly with Russia, and stop listening to the US paranoia against the "modern soviets".

As for meddling in neighboring lands (including Moldova's beak-away republic, which has no direct borders with the "motherland"), the problem has arisen because of hate towards the Soviet empire (of which Russia was only one of the parts of) and ailed at the Russians. This has probably driven many Russians to leave fo the motherland. Part of the problem (#1 IMHO) was the way the soviet republic borders were drawn in between the two WW.

From what I understand (I haven't researched this), Ukraine received most of the eastern lands (including the Donbass region) and Kiev (the first Russian capital), whereas the Ukrainians were mostly in the western hills/mountains filled with forests, compared to the flat dark-earthed eastern plains (industry & agriculture) - always occupied by a majority of Russians. As for Crimea, everyone agreed that the region was 95% Russians and didn't want to be in Ukraine, anymore after the Maidan events. So, to my eyes, the Crimea crisis was legitimate. Less sure about the Donbass, though everyone agreed that 65% of the inhabitants were Russians.

The whole thing was started because the EU in 2013 stepped into Russia's backyard, by courting Georgia, Armenia, Ukraine & Moldova into a commercial union.

.

BTW, Hugues makes a very valid point regarding EU expansion and what is perceived to be encroaching on areas Russia traditionally regards as its own.

Of course, Biden won't agree to such a demand.  However, Putin puts the idea on the negotiation table. It's in the conversation. 

I am the man that for some reason attracts Virgo women usually - perhaps, because I may be boring in my search for the roots of everything. I like to dig right till the beginning of the roots. 

To my mind, the main problem here is the general attitude to the former USSR. The massive western view implies that the USSR was broken because of people's fear of the KGB, because of people's hate towards the repressive regime, because the Soviet people wanted to breath a fresh air of freedom... Well, I would say that mainly the USSR was dissoluted in 1991 because the Party elites wanted to have free access to the western goods, and the ordinary people basically wanted the same. Consumerism has killed Totalitarian Socialism (Communism as such was a Utopian goal and thus obviously never achieved in the USSR). People heard about Disneyland, Terminator, Rambo, heavy metal, porn videos, hundreds of types of sausage - but mostly, certainly could not get to any of these. Later they would realise that hundreds of types of sausage mostly differ in label and chemical flavouring, not in "true old-school sausage" ingredients - that would be later. 

Me, I'm just 38 y.o., naturally I only remember the times of Perestroika. Fortunately, I used to talk to my parents, relatives, friends of my parents and relatives rather much when I was younger and they were still alive. I have enough information to analyze myself. What I want to say is that the USSR was obviously a deadborn slowly rotting body - it was destined to die from its very birth. BUT! John Bonham was also destined to die with his unacceptable behaviour when he was drunk. Jerry Lee Lewis happened to be an idiot. Freddie Mercury probably led a very suicidal life. John Lennon was not the most correct person on Earth. And so? Yet they lived for some time (Jerry continues doing so) and left the world somehow positively changed with their works. 

The USSR paved many ways, showed to the humankind what to do and what not to, it was an intriguing geopolitical, political, economical, social, scientific, spiritual, artistic (sic!) experiment. North Korea is a puny parody. Experiments like the Soviet one are inimitable and may only happen once in a lifetime of the Universe. I have no doubt that the USSR committed many crimes, mutilated many lives - like, well, any other huge civilisation, huge project, huge empire. I find it proper to compare the USSR to Monty Python; in my comprehension it was a Weird Empire - not an Evil Empire. Very Pythonesquely unpredictable and versatile, with dark and light pages. As I used to say, the USSR is "Hitler turned Hilter turned Heartli".

Like with any other good quality product (almost any, well), the more time passed since its death in 1991 - the more many of its former citizens start to notice positive in its existence here and there. Brandy, rum, furniture, castles, the USSR - they all fall under the same category. They reveal their real "taste" after some time. 

Now, that was a prologue - noodlingly boring, boringly noodling. 

However, reckoning all of it, said above, the picture looks slightly different. First of all, an average Soviet citizen HAD NO any fear of the KGB, at all - since the death of Stalin in 1953 (and under Stalin it was technically not called KGB, at all). More so, in the last 3-5 years of the USSR existence... So, when the western mass media tells a mantra of "Putin is KGB", it's a scarecrow for the foreigners, actually. 

Second, LOTS, MILLIONS of former Soviet citizens remember lots of good, positive, superior sides of the Soviet reality. It doesn't mean they want the USSR back - it means they feel nostalgia, keep fond memories, want to dive in those times' art, movies, music, books. The USSR was a Universe in itself, a different planet on the planet Earth. Specific cultural codes, specific atmosphere, psychedelia without drugs kind of. Very few people really, in their clear sane mind want it back, even if they claim so (if only we all really wanted what we claim we do, you know). Everybody understands that the times have changed irreversibly. There were evidently bad aspects of the Soviet reality like for example a primitive and painful dentistry where anesthetics were used exclusively for pulling the teeth and nothing else... There indeed were shortages, lines for almost everything (though, let us be frank, not for bread or milk). On the other hand, monthly payment for electricity, running water, central heating, all that stuff constituted 10-15 rubles - an average monthly salary was around 130 rubles. Professors, top mathematicians, academicians earned like 500 rubles, by the way... There were counters only for consumed electricity which meant you could take a bath with hot water as many times as you liked without any impact on your family budget... 

Third, the top Soviet poets enjoyed the same level of popularity as the music stars in the West. Poets could gather a big concert hall with hundreds of fans of their works. Like in ancient or Renaissance times, yep. Ballet, theatre, music schools, technical sections - all for free, just go and participate and study! It is true that the toilet paper was a very rare type of goods to be found on the store shelves - but man, the Soviet citizens massively used paper napkins, old clothes, various rags, newspapers and... books (!) for the purpose! The books cost very little, so little that you could buy it and then use as the source for toilet paper... 

Now, to the core of my message. Of course, Russian post-Euromaidan narrative is overblown, exaggerated and wrongly compiled. Russian mass media used to say post-Euromaidan Ukraine was against the Russian-speaking people, against Russians living in Ukraine as such - which is bullfeces, to be honest. But, as usual, the truth lies somewhere in between the two positions. Euromaidan was essentially against the Russian Empire, Russian imperial past, present and future. It was not mentioned from the stage at the Maidan square per se - but it sure was so. 

Then, again, considering everything written by me above, the situation gets clearer: millions of Ukrainians also have fond memories of the Soviet time, they have relatives in Russia, they respect their past in one country under the Moscow rule. Post-2014 Ukraine essentially hints year by year that Russia is insignificant, backwardly, stupid country that always humiliated and murdered Ukrainians. Post-2014 Ukraine wants to lessen, loosen and then gradually cut the ties with Russia, wants to eliminate any positive traces of the Soviet past in the modern Ukrainian mindset. It certainly hurts lots of people in Ukraine. On the other side of the conflict, Russia wants to preserve natural historical ties with Ukraine. Russia wants to be an empire, at least in terms of prestige if not in terms of economical might. Russia with Ukraine looks much more geopolitically and economically convincing on a world stage than Russia with Ukraine as an enemy. 

Given that, it's not quite a question of language, as the Russian media used to say. For most of modern day Ukrainians there's no problem in using Ukrainian or Russian for they mostly know perfectly none of them...  Most of Ukrainians tend to freely switch between the two languages, often mixing them insanely. 

The problem goes deeper. On the hidden long-distance level, it implies weakening Russia as the competitor in the geopolitical game. And the weakening of Ukraine, as well - because with all the turmoil, Russia is the old time relative, while the western countries are strange to Ukraine and naturally do not care about its fate that much.

Because for the Soviet Russians and Ukrainians en masse it was their country and their regime - whether they liked both or not. For the countries de facto occupied by the USSR it was NOT their regime. Simple and clear. Poland and Czech Republic were absolutely non-suitable for Communism, at all. They are two classic democratic Capitalist countries in every possible meaning of the word. I would not just say for each and every Pole or Czech, though - but yes, on average, no true Pole likes the USSR, I agree. Though the centuries-long animosity towards Russia plays major role in such attitude, I suppose. 

The question of East Germany is way more complex... First of all, conscious, thinking Germans after WW2 sure felt the need to go through some sort of catharsis. While the Western part of Germany vividly incorporated former nazis in the political and economical life of the renewed country, East Germany tried to really get clean and white in this respect which mattered much for many contemporaries. Second, the ideas of socialism, even if totalitarian one, were not utterly alien for the German way of perceiving life... Social security (e.g., for young single mothers, et al) is still remembered with nostalgia by some former East German citizens, at least. 

As for Lithuanians, Latvians and Estonians - three Baltic countries - I believe, they felt they were humiliated, repressed, oppressed and so on. Then a lot of things may be said on this topic: for example, how rather small Finland happened to defeat the Soviet occupiers while Lithuanians did not?.. As far as I heard from an (anti-Soviet liberal!) Russian historian, Finns actively defended their homeland, the Baltic countries bowed before their invaders very soon... Plus to that, I'm not so sure Lithuania would have been more prosperous if it existed independently in those times. Such small countries on the borders of geopolitical giants usually become trampled by some neighbour's boots - and there's no solution to this problem. Hawaii, anyone?.. OK, I understand that for most Hawaiians inclusion in the USA seems like blessing - but anyway, Hawaii fits perfect for military bases of the USA and that is why it would never become independent, no matter what its inhabitants really think... The same for Baltic states in Stalin pre-WW2 times, they were located critically close to border, to Leningrad. 

Can't say for people from Poland or Lithuania, but in many ways his observation is fair.
 

Universal statement, always true, even if you replace Russians with any other nation. 

Unfortunately, I have to go to sleep - so I will gladly hear your recollections and opinions a bit later. But, briefly, I must add that I as the religious person (I hope so) and the person that went through many different obstacles on my way and the person that changed his mind a lot on many things in life - I simply used to go up to the meta level (I'm not a FB employee, it's not a hidden ad therefore ). I climb to the meta levels of it all. 

For, yes, there was extremely little to no nightlife under Communists. Yes, the foreigners were met with suspicion. Yes, you couldn't just go and buy what you wanted. But... I don't know... I used to think it requires a pinch of humour to meditate upon such burdens in life. Burdens were counterbalanced by a very unique inimitable atmosphere. Can there be a freedom in an unfree society? It looks like yes, retrospectively.

As the popular Russian joke's punchline nails, "How much do you know about the fairies?"... 

Good night!

Easy Money wrote: The soviet country had no freedom of movement, no one was out at night at all and there was nowhere to go anyway. Tomorrow night, my best friend from soviet Poland will be here and I will try to get her to come on here and tell you about life under the soviets.

I think the Western side is even more likely to stick to MAD because they stand to lose a lot, lot more if London and New York City were nuked.  Russia is a little less dependent on high finance (even though Moscow does form a huge part of its economy) and also has a history of imposing far more suffering on a people who will gladly endure it compared to Europeans or Americans.  So the risk of the US/NATO/AUKUS going all the way to say screw you to MAD is low at least in a conflict with Russia. What MAY happen is if NATO makes big moves to control Ukraine, Russia attacks it and then US imposes even more sanctions. Which is basically what has been going happening through the second half and onwards of Putin's rule.

You could be describing lots of places in India that are not named Mumbai (and maybe even parts of Mumbai).  If you have a weak state where there aren't enough police to cover the land and where the police are corrupt and demotivated anyway thanks to constant interference by politicians, you get the same outcome.  There are lots of places in India, including the bustling Noida region right next to Delhi, where it wouldn't be safe, particularly for women, to venture out at night and lots of places which are simply way too provincial to have the Western concept of nightlife.  But you know, that doesn't look like such a bad thing for people who don't know a different life.  Like, just have dinner at home and watch TV and tuck in?  

Maslow's hierarchy applies.  If there is a country where people's basic needs are met to the extent where they don't even have to worry that they won't have enough MONEY to pay for them, other aspects may not matter so much to them.  Now would I as a Mumbaiite who grew up in post-liberalization India settle for THAT?  Nope! And I say that as a bookish guy who doesn't really fancy getting drunk (as opposed to drinking a couple of pegs) and clubbing it out...because I want to be able to step out all alone at 3 AM if I have to or want to. But I can certainly understand how small towners may think all this nightlife business is just wasteful excess and indulgence and to a certain extent, it is. So if you think people deprived of nightlife would be terribly unhappy, you would be wrong.  

AND...where the Indian state, weak and ineffective as always, embraced controls but still failed repeatedly to provide the basics to the people until it finally bankrupted itself and needed to open the economy for an IMF loan, the Soviet state did succeed in providing the basics and raising the average living standards even if nobody could be as wealthy as in Europe/North America. The Indian state under Nehru and his daughter only aspired, very unsuccessfully, to achieve what USSR could w.r.t its citizens.

Until, as Woon Deadn says (and this is what some very erudite Russians on Quora including the wonderful Dima say too), the Russian party elites themselves got tired of this life of comfortable austerity and decided to break up the USSR and grab whatever part of the ensuing loot they could.  I think reflecting on the post-1991 chaos is also important as a way to understand why Putin is unshakable.  While Western media celebrated the arrival of democracy (with TIME being so impertinent as to celebrate US' intervention to help Yelstin win a re-election bid he was losing), for the average Russian it was a time of terrible economic devastation.  Putin gives at least an appearance of being in control and in command.  To what extent he actually is, I cannot say.  But this is what I have gleaned from listening to what Russians who no longer have to watch their words (at least in the way they had to in Soviet times) have to say. 

Again, I am not a leftie and definitely don't want the USSR back because from my Indian perspective, it was a failure for us.  But I am just trying to provide a different point of view.  A lot of older generation people in India in fact do regret that India had to 'give up' and embrace a Western way of managing the economy even if they would gladly accept there was no alternative in 1991.  Because it was the death of a dream...from their perspective.

I think it's fair to say that ALL human systems have failed for the most part but when it comes to comparing different -isms, i have to go with who has produced the most prog!

I don't know whom you met but I know lots of people who lived in East Germany at the time (I'm writing as a West German who didn't live that far from the old border). It wasn't a happy time but nightlife they had for sure! And there's some of that nostagia for that time, too, that Woon Deadn has mentioned, maybe not as much as in Russia, but still.  

By the way, if you know German, some music of the time will tell you about it. There are even traced on some albums listed here, "Der eine und der andere" from Stern Meissen's Stundenschlag for example.

Yup, as the Occident, we need Moscow to remain master of Siberia. Because every year, there are a couple millions of Chinese emigrating to Yakutia and Kamchatka. Given the respective birth rate, we can fear that eastern Siberia will be Chinese in 50 years or so.  AFAIAC, having China setting a foothold in the Artic is totally inacceptable if only for Climate change reasons. 

Generally agreed (read my post of yesterday evening).

But indeed, if Ukraine wants to get rid of the Eurasian plains (or more likely the people living there), than it should let it go. TBH, ever since the crisis was started by the EC, I've come to best solution is that the Ukrainian North-west should let go the Russian south-east (which incorporates Crimea in the south. This could appease the area (not likely, though), but if Ukraine still wants Nato or the EC, it won't do...... Unless the EC & Nato strike a deal or partnership with Moscow.

I've always perceived Ukrainians (well those that are not my cleaning ladies) as those savages living in western wooded hills and creating pogroms well before it happened in other lands and modernized by the Nazis. If the Ukrainian nationalist are claiming the Austro-Hungarian heritage, then I suspect that it's because the "purification" after WW2 didn't happen in the area. 

BTW, my sister-in-law is half Russian (her uncle was a star dancer in the Bolshoi) , half Moldavian/Romanian from the Bessarabia region (now halfway in Ukraine) and she largely agrees with me. But most of her Russian family now live in Canada or Bavaria

Sir, whether it's unjust or whatever, being small is always unproductive in our world - when smb/smth is small, its/his/her/their fate is always decided by somebody/somebuddies else. Fine, when it's good parents. In case of countries, there are no parents, have never been. Russia, Ukraine, Belarus are big enough countries to digest the repressions, digest millions of killed and imprisoned, forgive or even forget them (or not forgive and not forget but still move on) and go further. Small countries like three Baltic ones or say it, the western provinces of Ukraine (that used to hold an isolated microcosmic life within their own ethnic minority group for centuries) are simply not able to forget that, they are too small to move on, or too proud to move on, or both for that matter. When you are not going to move on, there's no need to look up to the skies to find the highest meanings of what's happened and what is goin' to happen. When you are offended over the top, you look for no reasons, no explanations, you don't notice the details, the shades of senses, the shades of sense. It's just one big trauma that makes you blind. Though there's a masochistic comfort in such a state, such state is fruitless and senseless. 

You say about russified Eastern Ukraine. OK, let's talk about independence movement in Provence! Do you know that this region in France was also very freedom-loving, they differed from other French regions quite enough to be considered a distinct entity on the world map. But somehow they were included, assimilated, became the part of France. Hundreds of languages disappeared in the history of humankind. Because some state projects happened to be more useful, more powerful than the others. More passionate and more unified state projects ate the weaker and less unified ones up. This is life. Who planned and gave orders to build Ukrainian cities like Kharkiv, Odessa, Dnipro(petrovsk)? It was Russian Empire! Those who planned, designed, gave money, gave orders - those people reasonably brought their language with them and planted it as the language of the people in power. Villages were Ukrainian-speaking and they mostly still are, even in the Eastern Ukraine. But you can't build a modern civilised country based on village people. You have to urbanise. Urbanisation in the eastern Ukraine was held by Russian Empire and then the Soviet Union. What you'd expect then? If the Russians build you cities, they bring you their language. It is legitimate, I think. 

Your experiences are very limited. True, there wasn't remotely as much nightlife as in the west, particularly people were not out on the streets in the night for reasons other than getting from A to B, and many people got up at 5:30 and didn't care. But there were pubs and bars and student clubs, and of course house parties. There was a curfew, as far as I know depending on the place and day of week at 23:00 or midnight. Maybe nobody was out after 8 where you were, I have no idea, but it's just not true that there wasn't any nightlife. (Same for Czechoslovakia & Poland by the way, in the eighties they had jazz clubs, I don't know much about how it was in other countries.) 

BTW, this is even truer for their women, who will follow almost any stranger out of the country, just to escape the local males alcoholics.  Seriously I pity Russian women , knowing the abuse they get everyday. 
 

..

You mean like giving Hitler the parts of Czechoslovakia where there was a strong German minority? The experience of what happened next does not look very promising to Ukraine. And Russia was involved in that, too. 

You know, after the two WW, in those regions, there were more millions of people displaced from where they lived than there were total dead (including in death camps) and frontiers/borders were moved and it still hasn't worked out. An yet, still valid IMHO for the ex-Yugoslavian republics and its sub-republics (Kosovo & Vojvodina). 

Separate the belligerents, whenever possible, since they don't want to live together. 

Separate the arseholes who don't want to deal with the other arseholes in front of them.

Furthermore, in those same regions, there are still internal conflicts that can brew: Hungary, Slovakia and Romania have strong Gypsy/Tzigan/Roms issues as well. 

Not to mention regional tensions inside the westerns countries like Ireland, GB (Scotland), Spain (Basque, Catalan), France (Corsican & Bretons), Belgium (Flemish & Walloons), Netherlands (Frisians), Italy (Sardinia & Sicily, Liga of the North) etc.... 

That's exactly what my Russian, Polish, and Ukrainian friends told me.  Rock Music and Blue Jeans were expensive. 

Sir, an inhabitant of a small Baltic country speaks with your mouth... Too offended to look up to the skies.

First, you haven't witnessed the level of alcohol consumption in Poland yet... They say, the very word vodka may be of Polish origin, by the way.

Second, Indians and other peoples from the region that want to achieve something in this world, pretty much speak English. Freddie Mercury is the first example that comes to mind. Intrinsic Asian name of Freddie Mercury... 

Third, generalisation is a bad advisor. Western countries looked for colonies somewhere far, in Asia and Africa, far from their borders. Russia colonized the space near its borders. Ukrainian and Russian languages belong to the same family, same group, same whatever you want. They are closely related languages. Any of the Indian languages are not that closely related to English - some of them very distantly are, some not at all. Can you see the difference between the two situations? 

Fourth, the word Holodomor seems to be a direct clone of the Czech word Hladomor - interesting, what was the need to copy the word from the other language, the language that most of Ukrainians can't understand, unless they are West Ukrainians?.. The term applying to the famine in Ukraine in 1932-1933 first appeared in Canadian press in the late 1970s. The word mysteriously resembles the word Holocaust, don't you think? Is it a coincidence? Maybe. 

My maternal parents both were children in 1932-33, granma lived in a relatively rich family, grandad lived in a pure poor one. NONE of their families has died, for all I know. Indeed, my granma once recalled that there was "oh so terrible famine". However, again, NOBODY from their families seemed to die - and they got really big families, like five brothers and sisters, etc. The famine also happened all over the Soviet Union, percentage-wise it was Kazakhstan that suffered most. Was it constructed specifically to kill Ukrainians? Perhaps. But if you are aware of the Russian way of life, Russian way of doing things, you may believe the famine was the consequence of a permanent Russian chaos. Or to be more PA-friendly, the famine was the consequence of an eclectic nature of Russian statehood. Eclectic prog, you know. 

Was there a famine? Definitely! What caused it? God only knows, literally! For your information, it is well-known to researchers that the Soviet power disliked the village people at all, as the class. Villagers were too free, had some land in their property, could easily hide themselves or hide someone/something, were impossible to bug. Village people were alien to the Soviet regime. ALL of them, not only in Ukraine. 

Fifth, British Empire is certainly sinless. They took Indians as their equal, as their friends. Agreed!

Don't get me wrong, in our dreams, size doesn't matter. In some Hollywood movies, size doesn't matter. I fully agree that we as the humankind according to... best traditions... reckoning the bla-bla la-la etc et al have to... has to... obliged to... 

But there's also a real life. Where the American government has the right to land the plane of the Bolivian president and the Belarusian government has no right to land a commercial plane - although the official state presidential plane is impenetrable by international law. Unless you're a pirate, or the USA. Belarus is small, USA is big. That simple. 

You're simply living in a very dream-like state of mind. That's your right, sir. 

Again, try to think of a mysterious coincidence between the terms Holodomor and Holocaust. A divine coincidence, I'd say. Or a ciane coincidence?..

I wouldn't even say I'm a fan of Putin. I'm a fan of Gentle Giant. I'm a fan of grapefruit. But the world doesn't consist of fans only... There are also combs and brushes and tons of other things. 

Simple solutions don't work. Simple explanations don't work. If you are able to dive deep, the whole new world is getting exposed in front of your eyes. 

Or, let me put it another way: is John Bonham great? TO WHOM? To the people he abused, men and women? No, he wasn't great. To his wife and son? Yes. To the people all over the world that never met him? Some like him, some do not care, some don't like him. I personally hate such people as John Bonham or Jimmy Page. Replace "John Bonham" with "the USSR" and you'll get the idea, my friend. Keep in mind, however, that John Bonham remains the same.

Getting a bit off-topic but the Frisians don't belong in this list at all. There is a movement in the Dutch part of Frisia advocating for greater autonomy and cultural recognition, but there's no real Frisian independence movement, let alone "regional tensions" or any real ethnic hatred between Frisians and Hollanders.

Easy Money wrote: When did you visit or live in a soviet country?

You could notice under my avatar that I'm from Russia. 

I lived the first half of my life "under soviets" and the second half "under westerners" (including transitional period called Perestroyka), so I can compare. Some things were better then, some now, and vise versa - some were horrible, some are horrible now. No answer to the question: what's better? It would be better to take all good from both eras and throw away all the bad, but it doesn't happen.

I have the feeling that we live in the end of Western civilisation. I see no end of the last years' madness (multiculturalism, political correctness. BLM, COVID hysteria and digital Gulag, total hypocrisy etc). What comes next? New barbarians? I hope for good, but don't believe things will be better. 

Slava, I know you hate Russian Empire. It's your right, but please tell us how Baltic countries suffered so badly from Soviet occupation, which included "technologies, industry, common organization". And how independent Baltic Tigers saved and improved these technologies and industry. Because bad tongues in Putin's land say you've lost (просрали in Russian) most of them. Are they lying?

just testing if I was being read at all. 

Though I work in West-Friesland (between Alkmaar & Den Helder), and we don't have Mennonite or Amish villages in our area, the people's Dutch is quite hard to understand.

Eastern Europeans like generalising about how bad the USSR when they were part of the Soviet Union. 

Everyone compares the Soviet Union to the British Empire or contrasts it against the political system of the US - which isn't "democracy", incidentally, but more "consumerism" (and arguably plutocracy). Well. Why not compare it to the Roman empire, then ? Just as utterly pointless. 

There are other generalisations about how good / bad the USSR was (usually propaganda based but some with a factual basis). 

Everyone will throw up historical incidents to illustrate points, and whilst events like the Holodomir are still in living memory, what happened in East Germany in 1960 or Czechoslovakia in 1968 bear little bearing on the present day. You might as well bring up the battle of Borodino in 1812. "No relevance". 

There are hearsay reports on how Russians "long for the past" - having been there and spoken to the older generation, some do, some don't. The younger generation are quite different in outlook..... in some places. Go over the border to Georgia and the reverence for Stalin is just beginning to fade.

Russia is a big place, the term "Eurasian" was really coined in the 19th century as an insult to the Russian character. Part of Russia is Western, in geography and outlook, part is Eastern. I've stood at what some people consider the "border" - edge of the Volga - although others tend to look at the Ural mountains as the dividing line. Yes, you can factor in population numbers, but you can do that with any country. The outlook for Russia is Western, rather than Eastern. Power exists in Moscow and St Petersburg, not in the Kamchatka peninsula. 

"Russia has always tried to expand". Newsflash - most countries have a history of trying to expand in terms of territory. This includes the USA, and !!! Hello from England, where we used to be experts at it. War is generally economic in nature, or it was when I was doing a degree in History back in the early 90's. 

So what we get here is the standard internet argument where people present baseless opinion as knowledge (the situation is far more complicated and not black and white) which is coloured by nationality and prejudice and, in most cases, bears almost no relation to the current situation. 

Welcome to the internet. 
 

However, I would add that as a child in times of Perestroika and a teenager in the 1990s I have never heard anybody around me (including occasional elder companions, occasional elder bygoers, bystanders) speaking about the 1932-33 famine. The massive talks began in the 2000s. It could be a result of traumatic experience, for sure. Collective amnesia. But still, the whole Holodomor issue is utterly political. There was also a 1946-47 famine in Ukraine, hardly planned by anybody. I suppose, there was a famine-alike situation in many European countries after WW2... There were many tragic pages in our history, in the world history. After all, the 1930s were a time of Great Depression, also a famine-alike situation. 

Certainly, this is a typical internet discussion with no solution, no agreement, a no-win discussion. However, several wise sentences appear here and there in the process. 

To me, certainly three Baltic countries were occupied by the USSR. East and Central European countries were occupied by the USSR. The USSR acted as any other huge empire, they defended their borders by increasing the layer of buffer zone states. Notice that the Soviet Union had rather cold relations with Yugoslavia and Albania - because these countries did not lie on the direct way from Germany to the USSR and therefore were unuseful as the shield against possible future threat from Capitalist Germany. 

Is it legal, is it humane to use tens of millions of people as the living shield? No. Who cares? How many of us wake up every morning with a thought of sympathy towards poor Africans and Asians that do not even have clean water to drink? Not me, honestly. It's just life as it is. 

As the homeland, to me the USSR (quite like John Bonham to his children) is a rather nice cute entity. In terms of material goods, their variety and accessibility, the USSR was definitely a loser. In terms of ethereal non-material atmosphere, feelings, hints, impressions, memories, glimpses of glory, moments of deeper understanding of life/universe/everything - the USSR had a mystical quality. 

Have you known, for example, that both Victory Day (over nazis) celebrated in Russia on May 9 and the day Yuri Gagarin flew to space both happened on the third day after Orthodox Christian Easter. In 1945 it was on May 6, in 1961 - April 9. Catholics and Protestants celebrated Easter on April 1 in 1945 and on April 2 in 1961. What in the world should that mean?! Going deeper, Yuri is the native Russian variant of the name Georgy; May 6 is the Orthodox Christian feast of Saint George the Victory-Bringer, saint patron of Russia, Moscow, Georgia (homeland of Stalin, btw!) and the UK... At the time the king of the UK was George. And Berlin was taken by Soviet troops under Marshal Georgy Zhukov command. Plus to that, Marshal Ivan Konev fought the nazis in Czechoslovakia effectively helping Zhukov. Konev loosely means Horseson in Russian. Saint George went to Berlin on a Horse... Supported by George in the Britain Isles. Saint George also flew to space first. Russian George...

Not to even mention that Nikita Khrushchev, the last of the Soviet rulers that openly publicly despised Christianity, was removed from office by his atheist colleagues on the Orthodox Christian feast of The Intercession Of The Mother Of God (October 14), a very Russian feast traditionally connected to the protection of the motherland from its enemies... Accidentally?

And in North Korea they sure play the bloody fool, trying to create a cruel parody. They better become Capitalist. Their parody simply won't work. Why? Maybe, because they do not have any saint patrons... Who knows?..

Well our respective profile mention Brussels & Vilnius, not Alkmaar & Den Helder  , so that didn't help 

(I suppose you are/were there for the NATO base?)
 

An average old enough Pole undoubtedly dislike Russia, the USSR. The roots of mutual enmity are centuries deep. First of all, Poland was strictly Catholic country. Second, it was a typical Capitalist democratic western style place: its kings had constant conflicts with the noblemen, a democracy that is. Russia is Eastern Orthodox Christian since 988 AD. Also Russia used to rely on a centrified "vertical of power" with "a kind czar and his evil noblemen". 

Even nowadays in Russia Catholics are (unofficially) perceived as strange if not thoroughly alien people. For example, if Russian music video makers want to somehow laugh at the Christianity, they traditionally use characteristically Catholic clothing, interiors, Catholic three-dimensional elliptic halos around saints' heads (in Orthodox Christianity halos are drawn in two dimensions as circles like in Buddhism), Catholic rows of seats (in Russian Orthodox Christian churches there are only several benches along the walls for those who are not able to stand during the service), Catholic gothic architecture. 

You may look at this Russian music video to see a proof to my words. Its creators and the singer himself have indeed heard some bad words from various groups of Russian Christians about the video, but practically nobody on official level in Russia cared about it, and the public in general stood silent - because the church, the monks, the priest/bishop in the video are unmistakably Catholic... The singer is by the way an Orthodox Christian himself... If you're Catholic, the video will offend you. In Russia there's a law about offending the feelings of religious believers - but since the video doesn't concern directly Orthodox Christians, Muslims (who are too hot-blooded to touch them) or Judaists (who are, you know, it's the Jews' religion), nobody in Russia said an official powerful word of criticism against the creators of the video. Nobody sued them. 

Apart from that, Poland is your typical fine not-that-big cosy European country. Russia pretends to be messianic, at all possible costs - quite like the USA. I personally think of USA/Russia confrontation as the continuing contest between the West Roman Empire (USA) and East Roman Byzantine Empire (Russia). 

Given that, with all my respect and love to your friend Basia, I can easily predict what she has told you. Polish girls are terrifically beautiful. And I love Polish language, Polish culture. They are nice people. Poland and Russia are simply incompatible, they are very different in their approach. their views, their understanding of their role in the Universe. 

Russia is definitely like John Bonham, again. You either like her with all her drunken tricks or not. Both attitudes have equal rights to exist and be shared and discussed. 

Yet one shouldn't generalise too much... I have a very good Latvian friend, one Polish, and another from Czech Republic. They're all dead against Soviet rule (and none of them is orthodox, two atheist one catholic, guess who ) but have a big love for Russian culture, literature, music.