Hi, Robert Bashe!
I read your message from 21.08.2017 10:22


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

I believe I have changed nothing in my Thunderbird software during last 
time.

  ak>> I know history. Poland shamelessly used German's gains of Russia's
  ak>> territory, after Germany was defeated in WW1.
  RB> As "shamelessly" as Russia took half of Poland after WWII?

Not after the WW2 -- Russia(the USSR) returned its territories in 1939 
till Brest.

  RB> Let's keep things a bit more neutral. Except in the middle ages,
  RB> Poland was never an aggressor. Then the Poles wanted to _vote_ for
  RB> a king and the whole country (Poland-Lithuania) fell apart. Things
  RB> haven't been the same since.

Poland had made a cat's paw out of Keiser Germany. Poland had become 
twice bigger after WW1, and it didn't become an aggressor. Very funny 
indeed. Almost a Solomon's wisdom. ;-)

  ak>>>> The USSR and the Soviet ideology was the only chance to stop the
  ak>>>> Nazi Germany. Western impotent nations were worthless in WW2.
  ak>>>> They entered the war when Germany was actually defeated by the
  ak>>>> 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
  RB>>> coud "surely" have defeated Hitler .
  ak>> Don't know what you mean.

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

If the US and Britain would not opened the second front in 1944 the 
USSR's troops had reached Paris once more by themselves.

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

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

Well, explain to me the principal, according to which Hitler and Stalin 
had divided Poland. Who did offer what, in your opinion? Who will be 
happy if Hitler would have captured all Poland? ;-)


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

You could present these facts, at least a few, instead of this 
unsubstantiated tirade.

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

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

If you want to know how an aggressor and occupant looks -- go to 
Palestine, but surely not to Crimea. National policy in every country 
should be carried out with a greatest care. If it has not happened and, 
for instance, Catalonia wants to separate from Spain -- Spain can do 
nothing to prevent it. The same was in Crimea. The new Ukraine authority 
has been carrying out an awful national policy towards Russian speaking 
people. Results are no wondering.

  RB>>> Then Trump now has no choice but to invade Crimea, drive the
  RB>>> Russians out and restore the national borders of Ukraine. Yeah,
  RB>>> sure.
  ak>> Let him help the Arabs. Then the main source of terror in the
  ak>> world will be eliminated, and the Americans again would be able to
  ak>> travel around the world without fear to be stubbed in all places
  ak>> available. ;-)

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

All civil wars in Muslim countries start after the US invasions, 
inciting or other "help". This happened in Iraq, Libya, Syria that were 
prosperous countries before "help".

  RB> By thre way, you might ask yourself why Putin is so set on
  RB> defending the Syrian regime. It's not that he likes Assad so much,
  RB> but a warm water base is worth a lot to Russia, as it was during
  RB> the reign of Peter the Great.

So does America. There no secret it supported most ugly regimes where it 
had bases or interests. As for Assad, the Syria before war was the most 
democratic country across the whole medieval Middle East, where women 
are still humans of second kind and no democracy at all. But these fat 
cats are important for the US interests. The less critics the better.

  RB>  The ideal situation (for Russia)
  RB> would be to annex Istanbul and thus have complete control over the
  RB> Black Sea. But that was too much for Peter and also for Catherine
  RB> the Great after him. The Ottoman Empire was still too strong. And
  RB> now Putin would have all of NATO to contend with if he tried to
  RB> annex Istanbul.

Black Sea has no big strategic value at present moment. The Russian 
Black sea fleet is the inheritance of the USSR. Actually Russia is in 
awkward position. There is no necessity to built this fleet up, but it a 
pity to give it up for scrap metal. ;) Putin tries to invent some tasks 
for it.

Bye, Robert!
Alexander Koryagin
fido7.fidonews 2017
--- FIDOGATE 5.1.7ds