alexander koryagin wrote to Robert Bashe on Sunday August 20 2017 at 21:23:

I'm not sure why, but for some reason my system is not transferring your
message to my "adressed to" file, although your addressing is flawless. Have to
check that.

ak> I know history. Poland shamelessly used German's gains of Russia's
ak> territory, after Germany was defeated in WW1.

As "shamelessly" as Russia took half of Poland after WWII? Let's keep things a
bit more neutral. Except in the middle ages, Poland was never an aggressor.
Then the Poles wanted to _vote_ for a king and the whole country
(Poland-Lithuania) fell apart. Things haven't been the same since.

ak>>> The USSR and the Soviet ideology was the only chance to stop the
ak>>> Nazi Germany. Western impotent nations were worthless in WW2. They
ak>>> entered the war when Germany was actually defeated by the USSR.

RB>> That old saw again. You and Ward should get together sometims and
RB>> slap each other on the back. Belgium and the USSR of 1940 coud
RB>> "surely" have defeated Hitler .

ak> Don't know what you mean.

Ward is of the opinion that the American activity in WWII Europe was
unnecessary, as the Germans had already been defeated after Stalingrad. And the
(occupied) Europeans could have finished the job without the help of the USA.
Naturally I disagree.

ak> Well, consider that situation, as it was: Hitler said to Stalin (via
ak> Ribbentrop), "I want to capture Poland for its bad behavior and return
ak> back old German territories. Would you like to take back your Russian
ak> old territories or I will capture them too?"

Rarely have I ever heard such a distortion of the truth. Where do you get this
kind of crud?

ak> You of course think it would have been better if Stalin would said,
ak> "Oh, no! I can't take back old Russian territories because it is
ak> unlawful, so dear Adolf take them all!"  ;=))

As the question never arose, I naturally have never considered such a
hypothetical question.

Jeez! Do they spread this kind of propaganda in the Russian media nowadays?
There's so much fact to contradict this kind of fiction, if you consider more
than the (Putin-controlled) public media. Look at what was published during the
Yeltsin-era to see more fact and less fiction.

ak>>> There was a good subterfuge -- the Russian people referendum and the
ak>>> way Crimea appeared in Ukraine. The Crimeans started all this mess
ak>>> themselves after the coup in Kiev. Putin had no choice.

;-)) Russian TV. "We are always the victims, never the aggressors." Things
haven't changed much since Alexander I.

RB>> Then Trump now has no choice but to invade Crimea, drive the Russians
RB>> out and restore the national borders of Ukraine. Yeah, sure.

ak> Let him help the Arabs. Then the main source of terror in the world
ak> will be eliminated, and the Americans again would be able to travel
ak> around the world without fear to be stubbed in all places available.
ak> ;-)

Care to define "the Arabs"? There are a lot of muslims in this world, and no
two agree. I privately think that the only person a muslim hates more than
infidels is another muslim (sunni vs shiite), but that may just be a result of
the reporting.

By thre way, you might ask yourself why Putin is so set on defending the Syrian
regime. It's not that he likes Assad so much, but a warm water base is worth a
lot to Russia, as it was during the reign of Peter the Great. The ideal
situation (for Russia) would be to annex Istanbul and thus have complete
control over the Black Sea. But that was too much for Peter and also for
Catherine the Great after him. The Ottoman Empire was still too strong. And now
Putin would have all of NATO to contend with if he tried to annex Istanbul.

Cheers, Bob

--- GoldED+/W32 1.1.5-0613