-

This is not really related to the Georgia crisis, but since Rumpel is spreading so much misinformation in this forum and many people are believing him, I think it's worth setting the record straight about that "Estonian Nazi worship". BTW, "Rumpel" is not mean to sound condescending, I just find his name hard to spell.

And also Anita Hussein, I don't blame you for being ignorant on the Estonia issue, since obviously it's a pretty insignificant country on a worldwide scale, but this further illustrates where Rumple is coming from. Here are the original claims he made in this thread:

viewtopic.php?f=48&t=43354&p=1238656#p1238656



...What Rumpel fails to mention here, is that the estonian political leaders also give honors to estonian communists. What kind of country loves both nazis and commies? They must be EEEEEEVIIIIIIILLLL, right?

Well, a quick piece of history:

Estonia was independent until it was occupied by Soviet Union in 1940. Immediately over 8,000 people, including most of the country's leading politicians and military officers, were arrested. About 2,200 of them were executed in Estonia, while most were moved to prison camps in Russia. Then in 1941 over 60,000 civilians were deported to Siberia and other remote areas of the Soviet Union, where nearly half of them later perished in concentration camps and "labour battalions". At the time the entire population of Estonia was 1 million, which puts those numbers in perspective.

In 1941 Germany drove the soviets away from the Estonia and invaded it. Many estonians took part in driving the soviets away and a large population of Estonia hoped that the German invasion would pave way for regaining Estonian independency. In fact they even set up government administration under the last constitutional prime minister Juri Uluots, in the short-lived power vacuum when soviets withdrew as a result of the uprising of Estonian partisans, and before the Germans took over. This "independency" was of course very short as Germany declared Estonia as a part of German-occupied "Ostland". Luckily for Estonians however, Germans thought Estonians to be the most aryan of Baltic nations and as a result Estonia avoided many of the evils other east-European countries had to face. Under German rule the the last Estonian government still worked underground under the leadership of prime minister Uluots, waiting for a chance to overthrew the germans and declare Estonia independent again.

This chance came in 1944 as Germany started to detoariate. Soviet Union decided to invade Estonia once again, seeing Germany getting weaker. Estonians correctly realized that the only hope for independency was to fight along with the German occupiers against the soviets, defeat USSR, and then simply wait for Germany to fall, which was an inevitability at this point. Unfortunately for estonians, Soviets succeeded in their invasion from then on the nation was ruled by the iron hand of USSR.

Estonia didn't become independent until 1991.

If you ask non-russian Estonians which invader was worse, they will almost say Soviet Union. Because they had to suffer only 3 years of the relatively light oppression of Germany, but 47 years of USSR. And the German rule in Estonia never approached the horrors that Soviet Union put the nation through. Those timespans should put the estonian opinion into perspective.

Of course, you couldn't gather any of this from Rumpel's post.



The statue of a soviet soldier, the "Bronze soldier", has traditionally divided Estonian into two groups: For the majority of the Estonian's russian population (who form roughly 1/3 of the entire population) it is a an anti-Nazi symbol, where are for most estonians it's a symbol of the 47 years of totalitarian soviet regime. The statue was erected in 1947 by the Soviet regime to praise the soldiers who "liberated" Estonia from Germans in 1944. In other words: The central square at Tallinn, the capital of Estonia, had a monument which celebrated the moment when Soviet Union invaded Estonia and drove the country into 47 years of totalitarian oppression, committing numerous disturbing crimes against humanity and against estonians.

To give you an idea of what estonians think, here is what Estonia's government, president and parliament said in a joint statement."For many, the end of World War II means the victory of freedom over tyranny, and for many it means one violent regime was replaced by another."

Some other things Rumpel doesn't mention: The decision to move the statue and the graves beneath into a less controversial location was a direct result of a long time of violent clashes at the statue between Estonian nationalists and Russian Ethnic Activists, happening right at the central square of Tallinn. This new, less controversial location is the Defence Forces Cemetery of Tallinn close to downtown, which has graves of Estonian, Russian and German soldiers killed in WW2. Yes, a very honorable place indeed. The leadership of Estonia also made it a point to travel to the cemetery and put flowers to the statue and the graves in their new location, in order to honor the memory of the soviet soldiers.

Rumpel also chooses to ignore the fact that Estonia has also removed similar controversial monuments that depict Estonian soldiers who fought alongside nazis during WW2 to "liberate" Estonia from Soviet Union. To put it simply: Estonia wants to remove any controversial and offending traces of two imperialist, totalitarian states that once invaded Estonia and used it as their playground.

As for the riots:

There were three sides in the riots: Police, Estonian nationalists and Russian ethic activists (Reading Rumple's account you might think there were only two sides). Thousands of people took part in the riots in Tallinn and 500 people were arrested, 60 injured (including 12 policemen) and 1 dead. The rioters threw bottles and rocks, burned cars and looted stores and did vandalism. Police answered with tear gas and water cannons.

The Bronze Statue riots were the worst riots in the history of independent Estonia, and a climax of 16 years of increasing tension between Estonian nationalists and Russian Ethnic Activists, both of which represent only a small portion of each national segment, but they are very vocal and aggressive.



I have already explained in detail the soviet-german relationships of Estonia in WW2, so that gives some good context to this issue.

The man in question is Arnold Meri, the cousin of the former democratically elected Estonian president, Lennart Meri. In 2003, Arnold Meri was investigated in participating in the deportations of Estonians in 1949. In August 2007, Estonian Western Circuit Prosecutor’s Office formally charged (Which is something they have to do by default if there is any concrete evidence for such crimes, as there is in this case) Arnold Meri with genocide, for allegedly organising the deportation of 251 Estonian civilians from the island of Hiiumaa to Novosobirsk region of Siberia. According to the Prosecutor’s Office, most of the deportees were women and children, and 43 subsequently died.

And this is very important: Meri HAS ADMITTED taking part in the deportations, he just denies responsibility for them.

And this is also pretty important: The trial is in progress, and there has not been decision so far. So for all we know, Meri could be freed from all charges.

On a sidenote, I have no idea why Rumpel thinks that Meri shouldn't be accused of the crime because he is:

1. 88 years old. (Age doesn't prevent anyone from being prosecuted for any crime).

2. He is the only living estonian Hero Of Soviet Union (The Hero Of Soviet Union is a title given by Red Army, and has nothing whatsoever to do with estonian military accolades or estonian criminal politics)

3. He is WW2 hero. (Yes, he is a WW2 hero for the red army, but again what does that has to do with anything?)

4. Chairman of Estonian Anti-Fascist Committee. (Since when taking part in any committee puts you above the law? And also, unlike you might assume this committee is not a general anti-fascism committee. It exists for the purpose of criticizing the policy of the current republic of Estonia towards WW2. In other words, Meri doesn't agree with the (historically accurate) stand that USSR posed a greater threat to Estonia than Germany. The committee also often exists as a voice for Russian Ethnic Activists).

- - -

So Anita Hussein Briem, my more detailed analysis on "Estonian nazi worship" probably shared a lot of light on the issue, and on what the actual TRUTH is. The truth certainly isn't the extremely subjective, biased rants of Rumpel, which (intentionally?) choose to tell only one side of the story, to jump over very crucial bits of information, to exaggarate issues, and so on.

It should be also mentioned that Rumpel uses these tactics in *most* threads that deal with Russia in any way. I'm not sure if this is deliberate, thought. He does live in a nation which doesn't have free press as we know it, and he is being bombarded with very one-sided propaganda on a daily basis. So it's likely that he is a victim, not a perpetrator.

-

LOL sweden a World power. They were never a world power. There biggest claim to fame was during the Thirty Years war. Also there was no Turkey back then it shows what you know about world history. It was the Ottoman Empire, and yest they though 5 times in the 18th Century with Russia winning three of those conflicts. The Teutonic knights were also never a major world threat. And Poland was a joke in the 17th and 18th centuries and that is why it got gobbled up by powers around them. The thing is until the late 18th century Russia was no major player and their first big moment came with Napoleon's invasion. Still they were never a threat to Britain or France because they were so far behind them in economics and had no Navy to speak of. Sure, I admit my knowledge of Russian history isn't my strong point. I studied more western European and U.S history so don't say I know nothing. I bet you couldn't tell me anything about what happened in France during the 100's war either. If you want to say I am weak on Russian history ok sure but I stand by my point about them not being a world power to the late 19th century at the earliest.

.....

Is that and argument? Because I'm not sure if it is, and if it is, I don't know how to adress it.

Like... What *is* the actual argument here?



Obviously they are not the one and the same thing. And I haven't claimed so.

But it's a grey zone to travel, as for many russians the great achievements of Soviet Union were also great achievements of Russia. For example plenty of russians like to take pride on the admittedly impressive achievements of the USSR space programs.

Anyone who tries to claim that Russia and Soviet Union don't overlap a lot in the minds of russians themselves doesn't know much about their mindset. Obviously this overlapping doesn't happen in all issues, as no russian fancily remembers the more negative aspects of USSR. But it happens in a lot of issues, the greatness of Soviet Union was also the greatness of Russia. The evils of Soviet Union - Not so much.

Obviously it would be a factually incorrect statement to state that Russia = USSR. Which is exactly why I haven't stated so.

...Which means you have no argument here. When listing russian invasions I deliberately chose them both from the time of the Russian Empire and time of the Soviet Union, as those two are considered the two powerful periods of Russia.



Again, was there an argument here? I couldn't spot one.

Now, this is for everyone else, but Rumpel:

As you can see, when Rumpel is given *facts* to debate with, he can't give any proper counter-arguments. The reason for this is simple: He can't. Because he has nowhere to stand on.

I have followed the politics forum for a long time, but I have not taken part in discussions, because I find the political back-and-forths to be extremely time-consuming. But Rumple has been spreading mis-information about everything Russia-related for a very long time, and I just had to step up.

So a word of advice: When he gives you "information" about Russia-related issues, be EXTREMELY cautious, as while you might be hearing accurate information, just as often you are hearing biased propaganda. Most people in here probably don't know much about Russian politics, past and present, due to your geographical gap. It's understandable, and I don't blame you.

I just wanted to get this off my chest.

And on a sidenote, there are lots of wonderful people in Russia, I've befriended some over the years. And many of them are very critical thinkers, and very intelligent. And while Russia is right now going to the wrong direction, it's not too late for it to steer back to more democratic ways. Time will show where they will go. They certainly have the potential for *true* greatness, let's hope they find it.

Which according to your *own* criteria makes your opinions worthless, because you completely lack the "own eyes" perspective to russian matters. And depending on how long you have lived in USA, you at least partially lack the "personal history" aspect to russian politics.

You don't have much to base opinions on, except for press (which you don't use according to yourself) and occasional bits of info you get from relatives / friends in Russia and maybe your own occasional trips to Russia.

You live in the US?? Why does your location say somewhere in our russia then?

[

I recommend a diplomatic resolution. And yes, Russia has been bombing Georgian targets outside of South Ossetia. Read the news. Even the moronic gazeta.ru mentions it.

Well, bombing targets outside of SO makes sense. Russia is treating this like a full war on the side while saying they are only protecting and focusing on SO. You have to bomb air bases and strategic points when you want to get the other side to submit. It's no surprise I saw a blurb saying the GA pres was asking (begging) for a ceasefire from Russia and that his forces were willing to stop first. That gave me a chuckle. GA needs to just give up on the two separatist regions and move on.

Bombing outside SO makes no sense from the point of view of protecting the peacekeeping mission, which is what Russia claims.

Both sides are lying at this point - they're both claiming the control of Tshinvali, while both admitting that there's fierce fighting going there.

Why is Georgia even trying??

Russia would easily beat them and I doubt Russia will back down, as they want to look a bunch of tough guys to the world.


Imo Russia is just flexing its muscle...

Also Peter the Great brought Russia out of the stone age in the late 1600's and it was Under Catherine did Russia become somewhat powerful.


Also dislike Putin all we want, but he made Russia a joke of a nation into a scary one during his reign.

Not to sound war-crazy, but it's a very big question if Russia can defeat Georgia. Have you heard of Chechnya? Russian army got repeatedly embarrassed by the Chechen fighters in the Caucasus. How do you think it's going to fare against a real army?

Dima's right. The Caucasians are historically good fighters, or at least have great defensive terrain. Even the Mongols and Timurids had a lot of trouble from them and couldn't even totally dissolve the medieval kingdom. I'm trying to remember the last time Russia kicked the ass of mountain-dwellers. Afghanistan? Bwhah.

I know but to me it looks this is Russia and rebels vs Another country instead of Russia VS Rebels.


They are facing Georgia and a full standing army instead of rebels though...


Actually the guerrillas and marauders are on the Russian side this time...


imo recent histroy has shown us anything...

Proper standing armies are easy to beat as the US easily beat the Iraqi army but when they came as guerrillas all hell broke lose and now the Taliban are on the rise again in Afghanistan.

That's why this is so interesting. Dima convinced me Tbilisi is a cool city, and I heard the food and wine is great, so I hope it doesn't get wrecked again. Other than that? This will be a lot of fun to watch.

I just hope that Georgian guy on a forum I frequent is alright. Haven't heard from him in a while. Probably out looting...

really there should be peace but what is Georgia trying to do.

The Russians want more area under their control and they are doing this by acting as peacekeepers.

Peacekeeping, the way.

Putin is one scary sob...

He puts platinum in people's soup and no can do nothing...


Also I heard on BBC that Russia has 10,000 troops in Georgia...


Look like there will be a serious war going on as Georgia will not back down and with Putin around, Russia will not back down.

Are you missing the begging their weak President is doing in front of the world media? Practically begging for a ceasefire while trying his best to paint Russia as the aggressor when his forces began this tussle. Georgia will have to give in at some point because no one in the intl community or the un security council can do diddly about this.

hmm.......Sochi (Olympic Wintergames 2014) is right next to the border to Georgia.
Maybe thats gonna be a symbolic attack place for Georgia.

there are reports that two Georgian missile boats attacked a Russian Battleship and the Russians returned fire and sunk one missile boat.

Ukraine just issued a statement that it won't let any Russian battleships that are involved in the fighting to return to the base (there is a Russian naval base in the city of Sevastopol in Ukraine).