HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Newsgroups: talk.politics.soviet
Subject: Re: Confederaion of the Mountain Peoples
From: verbit@zariski.harvard.edu (Mikhail S. Verbitsky)
Date: 2 Sep 92 04:20:26 EDT
Organization: Sozialistische Patienten Kollektiv

In article <1992Aug29.214845.2057@enea.se> sommar@enea.se (Erland Sommarskog) writes:

>Also, I am a bit puzzled that Dudayev are heading for war against
>Georgia over Abkhazia. At least previously, Abkhazia wanted to
>join Russia. And Russian forces in Abkhazia have warned that they
>may responed if they are attacked by Georgian forces. It seems
>unlikely to me that Dudayev would end up on the same side as Russia.
>Or have I missed something?

There are four kinds of different ethnic peoples in Abkhazia:
Georgian-Mingrels (~20-30%) - supporters of Gamsahurdia,
"real" Georgians - (~10-20%) - supporters of Tbilisi goverment
Russians (~10-20%) - well, they are trying to move away now,
	and support nobody in particular
Abkhazians (~30-40%) - support Sukhumi goverment.

Mingrels live in south-wast Abkhazia,
while Russians live in cities, Abkhazians live mostly 
in western part of Abkhazia and close to the mountains,
and "real" Georgians are dispersed evenly. Now Dudaev,
being an avid enemy of a current Georgian goverment and 
supporter of Gamsahurdia and Mingrels could well side with 
Russians-Abkhazians to make more profit from situation
and make Shevarnadze look like an evil aggressor.

Anyway, I don't think that majority of Abkhazian 
officials support joining to Russia. And Dudaev
is in fact a bad politician: he is too sincere and
his head is too hot for this. He has nothing against Russians
in particular (I have read a lot of his interviews),
only against the current goverment. I can easily imagine
him defending Russians in Abkhazia from Georgian
"imperialists", as well as Georgians from Russian
"imperialists" in other situation.

Misha.
From: hubey@pilot.njin.net (Hubey)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.soviet
Subject: Re: "democratic" Estonia
Date: 28 Aug 92 00:10:55 GMT
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.

In article <1992Aug27.200531.16608@watson.ibm.com> oleg@watson.ibm.com (Oleg Vishnepolsky) writes:

> In  <Aug.27.14.24.05.1992.4493@pilot.njin.net>  hubey@pilot.njin.net (Hubey) writes:

> Well, you are not approaching the real point either. The real point
> is simpler than that . Given that YY has gotten self-determination,
> are the people of XX origin born and raised in YY should have equal
> rights as people of YY origin ?


It's always possible to clip a problem (ostensibly to simplify it)
to so that a single solutions seems logical.

I did not pretend to have an answer to the problem. In broad
brush strokes, what I wrote is about history. If the future
is to be like the past (which is mostly 'might makes right')
then today's actions will only sow the seeds of future
conflicts. The weak will not always remain weak. And if
history is any guide, even the strongest empires/superpowers
will crumble. It can mean that 500 years from now, nations
might be trying to bring about what they might feel is
'justice long overdue'. Short-sighted actions of today will
mortgage the lives of future generations.

The problems inherent in the situation are probably obvious
to everyone. How do we protect the rights of the innocent?

I don't think simple principles can yield solutions to
complex problems. Simply being born somewhere doesn't
guarantee anything to anyone. I was born in Austria and
have no Austrian citizenship. As another example, if 
Turkey were to invade Rhodes and populate it with 100,000
newly-wed couples, then can produce 300,000 children in
a matter of a few years. What then ?
-- 

	mark	


   hubey@pilot.njin.net                   hubey@apollo.montclair.edu
 ...!rutgers!pilot!hubey                  hubey@logos.montclair.edu
Xref: sparky talk.politics.soviet:7653 soc.culture.soviet:7052
From: vlad@erg.sri.com (vlad)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.soviet,soc.culture.soviet
Subject: Re: Shafarevich and National Academy
Date: 3 Sep 92 22:34:28 GMT
Organization: SRI International, Menlo Park, CA

In article <Bu0F4D.6tL@apollo.hp.com> goykhman_a@apollo.hp.com (Alex Goykhman) writes:
>In article <OLEG.92Sep2230531@sblapis1.cs.sunysb.edu> oleg@cs.sunysb.edu (Oleg Sokolsky) writes:
>>goykhman_a@apollo.hp.com (Alex Goykhman) writes, concerning Shafarevich's 
>>membership in the Academy of Sciences:

>    Every civilized society develops certain moral criterias and applies them
>    to its members.  For example, our society (hopefully) rejects anti-semitism 
>    as being morally unacceptable.

>    I have no problems with Shafarevich joing the Yugoslavian or Iraqi
>    Academy of Sciences, but he should be expelled from the NAS.

Shafarevich's private views are just that: private. The man has mental
illness. In his views, he blames Jews and Americans for all kinds of
problems in Russia. But what right does the Academy have to expell people
for illnesses? I say, it is time that the Academy stopped both its
antisemitic policies and its meddling in its members' private lives.

Vlad

Employer disagrees
From: Peter=Neenan%NetAd%HSRD@HSRD.SOWO.UNC.EDU
Newsgroups: talk.politics.soviet
Subject: re: Ode to the missing
Date: 3 Sep 92 17:58:58 GMT
Reply-To: "talk.politics.soviet via ListServ" <TPS-L@indycms.iupui.edu>

Hasan B. Mutlu,
we bow our heads in shame;
for driving you away
you no longer make our day.

For showing us the light,
you got naught but grief;
your precious pearls of wisdom
so insightful, yet so brief!

Hasan B Mutlu,
return to us we pray!
Let your cheerful disposition
cast some sunshine out our way.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.soviet
From: sommar@enea.se (Erland Sommarskog)
Subject: Re: "democratic" Estonia
Organization: Enea Data AB
Date: Sat, 29 Aug 1992 21:39:41 GMT

Peter Trei (ptrei@bistromath.mitre.org) writes:
>     Lets take this by stages.
>...
>     Anyone have any problems with the logic above?

Yes, unless you are a Cherokee, Apache, Sioux or of any other
Indian people.

Your "logic" may hold if we are very formalistic, but does ring
very well my ideas of moral at least. The great increase of
Russians in the Baltic states is regrettable, but two wrongs
don't make a right.

>Their situation is more like that of the Taipans of China, the Italians of
>Libya, the French of Algeria, and the Moors of Spain. All of these, as
>their supporting empires fell, were expelled as non-citizens from the
>place they had been born, despite having lived there for generations
>(and in the case of the Moors, centuries).

I whole-heartedly hope you are not seeing Libya, Algeria or medival
Spain as models for Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. Just because
they made something wrong, does not excuse the Baltics committing
the same sins. (I have to admit complete ignorance on all the examples
above, so I can't make further objections on whether they are
applicable at all.)
-- 
Erland Sommarskog - ENEA Data, Stockholm - sommar@enea.se
F|rst till kvarn f}r f|rst vankiva
Newsgroups: talk.politics.soviet
Subject: Re: treacherous Russians (Re: "democratic" Estoni
From: verbit@zariski.harvard.edu (Mikhail S. Verbitsky)
Date: 2 Sep 92 03:56:33 EDT
Organization: Sozialistische Patienten Kollektiv

In article <1992Aug28.223301.23601@leland.Stanford.EDU> georglin@leland.Stanford.EDU (george lin) writes:
>Looking through the Baltic discussion...
>1) The anti-Balt posters exaggerate the potential for terror against Russian
>settlers.  The new Baltic governments are not about to give Moscow any ex-
>cuse for  "rescuing its people."

	George, you are wrong there. Most of them write about potential
	for terror from both sides against each other: Russian settlers
	will eventually start military uprising and the situation will
	be similar to one in Yugoslavia (hope not).

>2) They omit mention of the ex-Soviet army still planted in these sovereign
>countries--a rather truculent and hostile presence.

	Yeah, army should go away ASAP.

>3) Sadly, every country has injustices large and small.  I doubt that one can
>create a perfect society with 100% contentment.  To expect saintly perfection
>from the ethnic Balts--who did not receive such treatment from the Soviets and
>who have well-grounded fears for their languages / cultures--is disingenuous.
>Given the awful history they have experienced since 1940, their post-liberation
>behavior could have been much worse.

	And will be soon, as well as behavior of Russians with no less
	awful history before and after 1940 

>4) The Russian settlers are not in the position of pre-World War II European
>Jews, who had no homeland to which they could flee.  Russia may be ragged and
>poor, but it's there.  As a Western diplomat commented in the Nov. 7, 1991,
>Christian Science Monitor:  as long as they possess citizenship in another
>country, this is NOT a human-rights question.

	Well, they have the place to flee, but I am sure most of them will
	prefer fighting, just like Serbs in Bosnia do.
	

	Misha.
From: Richard.Mathews@West.Sun.COM (Richard M. Mathews)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.soviet
Subject: Re: CLINTON ON ARMENIAN GENOCIDE
Date: 3 Sep 92 18:06:49 GMT
Organization: Sunsoft Inc., Los Angeles, CA.
NNTP-Posting-Host: smaug.West.Sun.COM

sethr@cbnewsl.cb.att.com (seth.r.rosenthal) writes:

>This is somewhat flawed.  If .7 % came from Turkey, not all of
>them were ethnic Turks

I realize that, but while there are Kurds, Greeks, Jews, etc. in
Turkey, ethnic Turks make up 85% of the population there.  0.7% of
the U.S.  population is about 2 million people.  That is far enough
over the 1 million figure, that it doesn't seem at all unreasonable to
guess that the number of ethnic Turks here is on the order of magnitude
of a million; and that is all that is necessary to prove wrong the claim
about Clinton singing a different tune.  I have no interest in getting
involved in an Armenia/Turkey debate; I just object to a claim to know
how someone else would think or act in a hypothetical situation.  And
when the hypothetical situation turns out to be not so hypothetical at
all, it really galls me that the attack is used anyway.

     Richard M. Mathews			F oster 
					 E stonian-Latvian-Lithuanian
Richard.Mathews@West.Sun.COM		  I ndependence and
					   F reedom!
From: linnan@SANDMAN.CS.HUT.FI
Newsgroups: talk.politics.soviet
Subject: Re: Visa and border control
Date: 4 Sep 92 15:57:31 GMT
Reply-To: "talk.politics.soviet via ListServ" <TPS-L@indycms.iupui.edu>


   >my Finnish friend. His wife is in border control in Turku. He told
   >me, that only way to stop illegal emigrees (mostly Vietnameese) from
   >_living_ in Finland is at the border. Once they are in country it is
   >almost impossible to expell them. It is just considered unhuman.

   Oh, of course. Probably your friend just meant: "considered unhuman,
   if they had not, of course, come from USSR".

  Have you heard stories about expulsions? It is possible to expel
people from Finland, but it is a long legal process. The ex-Soviets
are not handled differently from other people from countries with which
Finland has no agreement about dropping visa formalities.
(I won't post this 'cause it's got nothin' to do with Soviet politics.)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.soviet
From: sommar@enea.se (Erland Sommarskog)
Subject: Visa and border control
Organization: Enea Data AB
Date: Sat, 29 Aug 1992 22:04:15 GMT

Jarmo Ryyti (ryyti@jyu.fi) writes:
>The border between Estonia and Russia is leaking all the time. The first
>people of whom the estonians would like to get rid of are the criminals
>coming from CIS, who can now move quite freely around, in and out.

No, no, you are not updated. The border between Russia and Estonia
is in the process of being controlled just like any other border.
Several people have had to turn back in lack of an Estonian visa.
As you may now, Russian citizens need a visa to enter Estonia.

Of course, there are probably still leaks, as the border control
is only a few months old. And poorly paid, unexperienced border
guards are of course good target for bribe attempts, testified
by the Somalians who are passing Estonia with false passports
on their way to Sweden.

>The foreign countries cannot give
>a visa freedom for the estonians until no one knows who is estonian,
>an estonian citizen. This one aspect in the game.

At least Poland and the UK has lifted the visa requirements for
one or more of the Baltic countries. (I am not 100% certain whether
UK-Estonia is such a case, but I believe so. In any case, Estonia
is the most clear-cut case of the three on who is a citizen or not.)

>One reason why estonians want borders is economical but an other is
>visa politics. For instance Finland will not allow free travel from
>Estonia until there is not clear borders, controlled borders
>around Estonia, because Finland has a policy not allow free travel
>from Russia to Finland not either via Estonia.
>...
>At least in Finland is suspected that if there were a visa freedom
>from Estonia in generally it were used as a loop hole to come to
>Finland.

No, Jarmo, don't fool yourself. The reason that neither Finland
nor Sweden are lifting the visa requirements for Baltic citizens
is that they are afraid of people coming to our countries to
escape the poor circumstances in their home countries. And this
has nothing to do with people from Russia or anywhere else. It
is Estonians, Latvians and Lithuanians our governments are
afraid of.

It is embarrassing that Estonians can go to the UK without a visa,
but not to Sweden which is supposed to be such a "close friend".
-- 
Erland Sommarskog - ENEA Data, Stockholm - sommar@enea.se
F|rst till kvarn f}r f|rst vankiva
Newsgroups: talk.politics.soviet,soc.culture.soviet
From: serg@appmath.uchicago.edu (Sergey Reznikov)
Subject: Re: Shafarevich and National Academy
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 17:48:33 GMT

goykhman_a@apollo.hp.com (Alex Goykhman) writes:

>    I say, expel the anti-semitic bastard.

Just $0.02 to clarify.  The NAS has no provision for expelling a
member in its chapter.  It sent Shafarevich a letter suggesting that
he considers resignation from the Academy.  If he refuses, no one will
boot him out.  Or at least so it was said in NYT.

Sergey Reznikov
Xref: sparky talk.politics.soviet:7649 soc.culture.greek:8440 soc.history:8041
From: michael.polymenakos@factory.com (Michael Polymenakos) 
Newsgroups: talk.politics.soviet,soc.culture.greek,soc.history
Subject: 'M.U.T.L.Us Inability To Distinguish Between Italy and Greece
Date: 1 Sep 92 23:37:00 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: Invention Factory's BBS - New York City, NY - 212-274-1243v.32bis
Reply-To: michael.polymenakos@factory.com (Michael Polymenakos) 


>source. Your inability to distinguish between 'Lausanne' and 'Montreux'
>is incredible. You 'palikaryas' make me laugh. The Dodocanese islands
>in the Aegean Sea must be demilitarized in accordance with the Montreux
>Treaty (1936). Flouting this international accord, Greece has built

 Mutlu, you moron, now you've done it!

 In 1936, the Dodecanese was under ITALIAN rule!

 Greece did not receive D. until 1945, as war reparations. How in the
name of G.d and/or Allah could Greece demilitarize the Italian army
in 1936?

 I guess the same way that Greece occupied South East anatolia, as you
have claimed in the past!

 In light of the above, your claims about the Armenian atrocities
against Turks are beginning to make sense. You are obviously refering to
the Armenian atrocities in 1934, during Mao's long march through Mexico,
whose goal was to unite the Italian people against the Czar!
 Now, that makes sense!


Michael.
                                                                                      
Xref: sparky talk.politics.soviet:7643 soc.culture.soviet:7040
From: f33012l@puukko.hut.fi (Janne Kivel{)
Subject: Re: "democratic" Estonia
Organization: Helsinki University of Technology, Finland
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 10:02:09 GMT

muh@physics.Berkeley.EDU (Yury M. Mukharsky) writes:

>>     3.The puppet occupation governments set up by the Soviets were
>>therefore also illegal.
>
>Sorry, do not tell that to Finns :). Their acting goverment
>were set in 1918 by German occupants. Those occupants had collaborators,
>of course. I do not remember any borderline between 1918 goverment
>and today's goverement, which is just fine with me. My point is that
>even puppet goverment may evolve to something decent. In fact, there
>were gradual transition from Suprem Soviet of Estonin Republic to
>today's goverment, too. After all independence were proclaimed by
>that puppet goverement. 

Mr. Mukharsky seems to reveal some unknown aspects of Finnish history.
Would you be so kind to tell us more about "the Finnish puppet government
that was set in by German occupants"?

>General point is that Russian, living today in Estonia are not guilty
>in anything. Children are not responsible for the parents sins.
>They will learn Estonian eventually, no doubt, like Swiss learning
>all languages of thier country. Stop thinking about them as different
>people. I think Swiss is good example. Who live there? Germans,
>French, Italians? No, citizens of Switzeland. Each speaking
>their own language, and each fierce patriots of ? Swtzeland, of course.

It's not easy to see Russians as the same people in Estonia. The damage
done has been too horrible for that, though majority of Estonians probably
understand that local Russians are as much victims as they are.

What strikes me as most disgusting is the way some 'forces' (politicians and 
generals) in Russia are using the Baltics to boost their own interests.
The Army wants to keep the military bases and uses the treatment of Russians
as an excuse. The ultra-nationalists try to wake up 'patriotic' feelings
in Russia. It sometimes makes me wonder, why Estonia is chosen to play
the role of a scapegoat. Is treatment of ethnic Russians so much better
in Kazakhstan, Tadzhikistan or Uzhbekistan?

The Estonians had better show restraint and not to let themselves be
provoked to violent conflicts that could be misinterpreted in Russia.
Yet there is no reason to give in to Russian demands in the military
base question. 

Though some of the writers in this newsgroup would like to blame other
nationalities than Russians for the evils of Soviet empire, nobody can
deny that Russians were the dominant nationality of the empire. Ironically
Russians were also the nationality that probably suffered the most from 
the 'reign of red terror'.

>Yury.

Janne Kivela"
From: dleschin@FEDS66.PRIME.COM (Dmitri Leschiner)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.soviet
Subject: Re: The revival of the "Moldavian" language
Date: 1 Sep 92 23:33:33 GMT
Reply-To: "talk.politics.soviet via ListServ" <TPS-L@indycms.iupui.edu>

>Date:         Tue, 1 Sep 1992 03:41:32 GMT
>From: "Mikhail S. Verbitsky" <verbit@COOLIDGE.HARVARD.EDU>

>...there are lot
>of nationalists who use pre-Revolution alphabeth
>for Russian language (it was different from current one).
>If they came to a power (quite probably that they will),
>they will surely change the script for Russian
>language as well. Will you blame people who will
>change it back as facsists? I am sure you will not.


No, we'll blame `em as communists.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.soviet
From: oleg@watson.ibm.com (Oleg Vishnepolsky)
Subject: Re: "democratic" Estonia
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 18:00:36 GMT
News-Software: IBM OS/2 PM RN (NR/2) v0.037 by O. Vishnepolsky and R. Rogers
Reply-To: oleg@watson.ibm.com (Oleg Vishnepolsky)
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM
Organization: IBM T.J. Watson Research Center

In  <1992Aug25.154740.27554@linus.mitre.org>  ptrei@bistromath.mitre.org (Peter Trei) writes:
> In article <01GNYUEVSZCK8ZDW2C@MPS.OHIO-STATE.EDU> "talk.politics.soviet via ListServ" <TPS-L@indycms.iupui.edu> writes:
>
> >  When you are living in a democratic country, like e.g. US,
> >nobody would deny you a citizenship just because you cannot
> >speak English. This is a first. The second thing is that
>
>      Sorry, but this is simply incorrect. Part of the naturalization
> process in the US is a test of English proficency. It's not a
> particularly difficult test; it's on the level of being able to hold a
> simple conversation, or read and understand a newspaper article.
> Without English, you can remain a resident alien, but you *cannot*
> receive citizenship.

That is simply incorrect. If you were born in US (as similarly is the
case with Russian-speaking population in the Baltics being born there),
you are not required to know English to be a citizen.
From: hubey@pilot.njin.net (Hubey)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.soviet
Subject: Re: "democratic" Estonia
Date: 27 Aug 92 18:24:05 GMT
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.



It seems like the real point is being evaded.

Country/Nation/People XX invade a piece of territory YY; invade, here
means take by force, meaning again that against the wishes of
the majority of the people living there.

We wait for some time period TT...

What happens to the people of XX origin? Are they still invaders,
colonizers, interlopers, foreigners?

The answer seems to depend on the identity of XX and YY and the
length of time TT, and even the time period in discussion, and
even the ethnicity of the discussers.

If we make TT too long, then we'd have to leave America to
the Indians.  IF we make TT zero or very short, then we leave
weak countries as fair game to the stronger ones; that is any
strong country can invade any smaller/weaker country and
colonize it, since within a few years it will be possible to fill
up the territory with young people (newly weds) who will produce
enough offspring who will be born in that place and thus claim
citizenship.

How long should TT be ?  Should it always stay the same or should
we insist that UN principles be enforced? 
-- 

	mark	


   hubey@pilot.njin.net                   hubey@apollo.montclair.edu
 ...!rutgers!pilot!hubey                  hubey@logos.montclair.edu
Newsgroups: talk.politics.soviet,soc.culture.soviet
From: oleg@watson.ibm.com (Oleg Vishnepolsky)
Subject: Re: Shafarevich and National Academy
Date: Thu, 03 Sep 1992 13:34:54 GMT
News-Software: IBM OS/2 PM RN (NR/2) v0.11 by O. Vishnepolsky and R. Rogers
Reply-To: oleg@watson.ibm.com (Oleg Vishnepolsky)
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM
Organization: IBM T.J. Watson Research Center

>  I say, expel the anti-semitic bastard.

If National Academy of Sciences starts judging its members on
criterias that have nothing to do with science, it will damage its
own image. It should keep its nose out of its members prejudices
equally as it keeps it out of their bedrooms.

Oleg Vishnepolsky
From: Danny_Prousline@lbl.gov (D. Prousline)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.soviet
Subject: Re: "democratic" Estonia
Date: 27 Aug 1992 20:49:36 GMT
Organization: LBL
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: 128.3.120.21

I did not read the thread in full, but what strikes and really worries me is 
(not something new, but sad and serious)
Did you all notice how quick and easily the discussion deteriorates to the 
You-are-mutlu-No-you are and worse level????
That is between hi-tech shit, educated, European, Jewish or whatever participants.
Now think of this in the overall European context - Armenia, Moldova, Yugoslavia,
Rostock, etc, etc,?????!!!!!!
Get the idea? 
EVERYBODY WILL BE AT EACH OTHERS THROAT  BEFORE WE KNOW IT.
Fast regenerating national hatred  faster than any of us would think, even the
most disillusioned.
That is my feeling of  Europe as it is now  gun powder barrell and burning faster 
than we see it. 
Was it different before WW1 and WW2?
I dont think so.
Is it going to be better in the USA meanwhile? 
I question that.

DP
415.255.1215 home
My humble opinions.

PS: This is not by any means a call for Brotherly Love  that is even worse fantasy.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.soviet