3 ms·

You are confusing the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.

by gdy 3y ago

chrysler 3y ago
In a totalitarian one-party state without a separation of powers, that's a distinction without a difference.
- gdy 3y ago
  The difference is quite obvious -- RSFSR was about half of the USSR's population.
  - chrysler 3y ago
    Doesn't make any practical difference. Soviet "republics" were as independent as Reichskommissariat Niederlande. Internal borders were freely redrawn and native populations resettled to satisfy Soviet colonial policies. If you want to start settling old scores and reversing "historical injustices", you can demonstrate good faith by giving Estonia back the 5% of its territory that is still occupied by Russia. Not to mention China's grievances about "humiliations" and "injustices" regarding the Russian Far East.
    - gdy 3y ago
      "Doesn't make any practical difference." Yes, it does. You are confusing 'Russian' and 'Soviet'. "Soviet colonial policies" That was funny. You are confusing with your colonial past. "If you want to start settling old scores" It's not about that. Russia was fine with the Crimea belonging to the Ukraine while it didn't matter much for Russia and for Crimeans themselves. That was until the nationalists took power in 2014 with the help of American 'midwifing' (quoting Obama here). "you can demonstrate good faith" USSR demonstrated good faith when it greenlighted reunification of Germany and got assurances that NATO won't expand to the east. Look how that worked out.
      - _kbh_ 3y ago
        > USSR demonstrated good faith when it greenlighted reunification of Germany and got assurances that NATO won't expand to the east. Look how that worked out. Of all the Russian propaganda you pick the one piece that was super easy to debunk, Gorbachev himself said this never happened. The negotiations were always about NATO expanding into east Germany and not east in general. NATO still isn’t in the former east Germany anyway. I’m pretty sure I or others have told you this many times before though so I have to start questioning is you are posting in good faith or if your posting to push an agenda?.
        gdy 3y ago
        "Declassified documents show security assurances against NATO expansion to Soviet leaders from Baker, Bush, Genscher, Kohl, Gates, Mitterrand, Thatcher, Hurd, Major, and Woerner" [0] [0] https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/briefing-book/russia-programs/2017-12-12/nato-expansion-what-gorbachev-heard-western-leaders-early https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/briefing-book/russia-programs/2017...
        _kbh_ 3y ago
        That isn't a counter to a primary source that says he never discussed it. Although I do know that NATO Expansion is another historical grievance Russia has (getting lots of these aren't they) because Russia is very much pro being able to invade states, and NATO stops that.
        gdy 3y ago
        These documents are primary sources. Gorbachev says contradictory things. "Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev, who participated in the 1990 negotiations, subsequently spoke out about the existence of a "guarantee of non-expansion of NATO to the east" inconsistently, confirming its existence in some interviews and refuting in others." [0] Here is what Gorbachev was saying in 2008. "Relations have further deteriorated after Nato promised eventual membership to Georgia and Ukraine, a move interpreted by Mr Gorbachev as an attempt to extend America's sphere of influence into Russia's backyard. "The Americans promised that Nato wouldn't move beyond the boundaries of Germany after the Cold War but now half of central and eastern Europe are members, so what happened to their promises? It shows they cannot be trusted."" [1] [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controversy_in_Russia_regarding_the_legitimacy_of_eastward_NATO_expansion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controversy_in_Russia_regardin... [1] https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/russia/1933223/Gorbachev-US-could-start-new-Cold-War.html https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/russia/193...

You are confusing the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.

by gdy 3y ago

You are confusing the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.

chrysler 3y ago

In a totalitarian one-party state without a separation of powers, that's a distinction without a difference.

gdy 3y ago
The difference is quite obvious -- RSFSR was about half of the USSR's population.
- chrysler 3y ago
  Doesn't make any practical difference. Soviet "republics" were as independent as Reichskommissariat Niederlande. Internal borders were freely redrawn and native populations resettled to satisfy Soviet colonial policies. If you want to start settling old scores and reversing "historical injustices", you can demonstrate good faith by giving Estonia back the 5% of its territory that is still occupied by Russia. Not to mention China's grievances about "humiliations" and "injustices" regarding the Russian Far East.
  - gdy 3y ago
    "Doesn't make any practical difference." Yes, it does. You are confusing 'Russian' and 'Soviet'. "Soviet colonial policies" That was funny. You are confusing with your colonial past. "If you want to start settling old scores" It's not about that. Russia was fine with the Crimea belonging to the Ukraine while it didn't matter much for Russia and for Crimeans themselves. That was until the nationalists took power in 2014 with the help of American 'midwifing' (quoting Obama here). "you can demonstrate good faith" USSR demonstrated good faith when it greenlighted reunification of Germany and got assurances that NATO won't expand to the east. Look how that worked out.
    - _kbh_ 3y ago
      > USSR demonstrated good faith when it greenlighted reunification of Germany and got assurances that NATO won't expand to the east. Look how that worked out. Of all the Russian propaganda you pick the one piece that was super easy to debunk, Gorbachev himself said this never happened. The negotiations were always about NATO expanding into east Germany and not east in general. NATO still isn’t in the former east Germany anyway. I’m pretty sure I or others have told you this many times before though so I have to start questioning is you are posting in good faith or if your posting to push an agenda?.
      - gdy 3y ago
        "Declassified documents show security assurances against NATO expansion to Soviet leaders from Baker, Bush, Genscher, Kohl, Gates, Mitterrand, Thatcher, Hurd, Major, and Woerner" [0] [0] https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/briefing-book/russia-programs/2017-12-12/nato-expansion-what-gorbachev-heard-western-leaders-early https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/briefing-book/russia-programs/2017...
        _kbh_ 3y ago
        That isn't a counter to a primary source that says he never discussed it. Although I do know that NATO Expansion is another historical grievance Russia has (getting lots of these aren't they) because Russia is very much pro being able to invade states, and NATO stops that.
        gdy 3y ago
        These documents are primary sources. Gorbachev says contradictory things. "Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev, who participated in the 1990 negotiations, subsequently spoke out about the existence of a "guarantee of non-expansion of NATO to the east" inconsistently, confirming its existence in some interviews and refuting in others." [0] Here is what Gorbachev was saying in 2008. "Relations have further deteriorated after Nato promised eventual membership to Georgia and Ukraine, a move interpreted by Mr Gorbachev as an attempt to extend America's sphere of influence into Russia's backyard. "The Americans promised that Nato wouldn't move beyond the boundaries of Germany after the Cold War but now half of central and eastern Europe are members, so what happened to their promises? It shows they cannot be trusted."" [1] [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controversy_in_Russia_regarding_the_legitimacy_of_eastward_NATO_expansion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controversy_in_Russia_regardin... [1] https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/russia/1933223/Gorbachev-US-could-start-new-Cold-War.html https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/russia/193...