Another 'Orange' Revolution

[The_Enigma]

KYRGYZ PREMIER RESIGNS, PRESIDENT FLEES

MOSCOW, March 24 (RIA Novosti) - Kyrgyzstan's President Askar Akayev has fled the country, and Prime Minister Nikolai Tanayev applied to resign, Kabar news agency reports with reference to Kurmanbek Bakiev, prominent on the opposition.

Defense Minister Esen Topoyev and Kalyk Amankulov, National Security Service chief, are going on with routine work. General Isakov, parliament member, has been appointed Deputy Defense Minister. Abdylda Suranchiev, previous Deputy Interior Minister, received the ministerial portfolio. Parliamentarian Sultan Alimbayev will lead the ministry with him.

"Things are very complicated, really. There's bad suspense in Bishkek [Kyrgyz capital]," said Mr. Bakiev. He appealed to the public to stay calm, and those who are in the Government House and the square in its front to behave with dignity.

Source

Can anyone (Especially the Russians) really beleive that Russia is sitting around and doing nothing? I thought Putin would of acted with the Ukraine election, and now even with this no-name country Kyrgyzstan. He could act there and get almost no heat from any foreign nations, Russia already has an air force base there for christ sakes!

No wonder Putin's approval rate is to low, Russia is in a state where it can only be ruled by a radical pushy leader, not a moderate.

[Hamelkart]

Well, if Putin han interfered in Ukraininian and Kyrgiz government, rest of the world would think he was trying to build new USSR. And I think every Russian wants to move away from that.

[The_Enigma]

Originally posted by Hamelkart@Mar 25 2005, 09:58 AM
Well, if Putin han interfered in Ukraininian and Kyrgiz government, rest of the world would think he was trying to build new USSR. And I think every Russian wants to move away from that.

False-The majority of Russians want to see the return of the USSR.

EDIT
And while on that subject, I believe 49% (Or maybe 51%, was one of the two) of the Ukraine population wants to see a reunification of Ukraine, Belarus and Russia.

[Profler]

He could act there and get almost no heat from any foreign nations, Russia already has an air force base there for christ sakes!

The US also have an airbase in the region, so although this coup is unlikely to concern them, the strategic location of an airbase so close to China and Russia will not be lost on the US if events took an unfavourable turn. The Chinese might also have reason to fear a potential influx of oppositon refugees if Russia were to act. Russia would almost certainly, 'get heat', but it would be ineffectual and largely irrelevant unless the action was a case of complete annexation.

[The_Enigma]

Originally posted by Profler@Mar 25 2005, 10:32 AM

The US also have an airbase in the region, so although this coup is unlikely to concern them, the strategic location of an airbase so close to China and Russia will not be lost on the US if events took an unfavourable turn. The Chinese might also have reason to fear a potential influx of oppositon refugees if Russia were to act. Russia would almost certainly, 'get heat', but it would be ineffectual and largely irrelevant unless the action was a case of complete annexation.

The US could not do anything to really stop Russia from doing what they want in the region.

[Profler]

The US could not do anything to really stop Russia from doing what they want in the region.

Well that's why I pointed out any response would be ineffectual. They could do some fairly heavy leaning, but there's no precedent on the part of the US for direct involvement.

[Bombay211]

im not too sure that russians want a new "USSR" but i no they want to reinstill russian pride and unify the fromer russian states like the Ukraine, Georgia, lithuania, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan and latvia

[Siena72]

Originally posted by Bombay211@Mar 25 2005, 10:52 AM
im not too sure that russians want a new "USSR" but i no they want to reinstill russian pride and unify the fromer russian states like the Ukraine, Georgia, lithuania, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan and latvia

first of all - what you listed are not "former russian states", but former Soviet republics.
Secondly - those are very diverse countries, with VASTLY different cultures ranging from Europe Union country like Lithuania to islamic cultures like Uzbekistan.

Thirdly - you kids don't get one thing - that Russia cannot handle anymore military conflicts. Cechnya was more than enough for Russia. It has no economy and any other major hardship - like having to opress yet another coutry - may backlash - and Russians may get rid of Putin. So why would Putin want that?

One thing is - to run propaganda and quite another is to send army in yet another country.

[RusskiSoldat]

Can anyone (Especially the Russians) really beleive that Russia is sitting around and doing nothing?

Putin is extremely passive. I remember how similiarly he acted during the Kursk disaster. And the 49% of Ukrainians that want reunification are Russians, Kruschev just gave that part of Russia to Ukraine some time ago (seeing as how borders int he USSr didn't matter).

[KarakurT]

Intervention of Russia in affairs of close neighbours looks quite naturally. Safety of Russia depends on political orientation of these countries. And intervention of the western countries, is especial the USA, means the further easing and without that weak Russia. They do not want, that such big country again became strong, they are afraid of it, and want to disorganize Russia then to take hold of its rich resources. It is a cruel politics. Especially in relation to the country which has exempted the world from fascism!
(Sorry for curve English)

[Not the Face!]

Originally posted by KarakurT@Mar 25 2005, 12:20 PM
Especially in relation to the country which has exempted the world from fascism!

I've said it before, and I'll say it again. There's almost no appreciable difference between fascism and stalinism.

[KarakurT]

Yes. Stalin was not much better Gitler, but stalinism has destroyed much less people, than fascism. And many began to forget that mainly Russia has destroyed fascist Germany. (It deviates from the subject).

[Big War Bird]

Freedom is on the march yet agian!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Siena72]

Originally posted by KarakurT@Mar 25 2005, 12:46 PM
Yes. Stalin was not much better Gitler, but stalinism has destroyed much less people, than fascism. And many began to forget that mainly Russia has destroyed fascist Germany. (It deviates from the subject).

he he he...
Form what I read - stalinism have destroyed way more people than Hitler.
Stalin saw Hitler as a friend (like to like), until Hitler attacked.

So no need to rewrite history.

[RusskiSoldat]

Yes. Stalin was not much better Gitler, but stalinism has destroyed much less people, than fascism. And many began to forget that mainly Russia has destroyed fascist Germany. (It deviates from the subject).

Actually you are wrong, although I do respect Stalin as he actually accomplished something and his intentions on how many people to kill weren't set nearly as high as Hitler's. No point in arguing with the westerners here about it.
Esli tyi Russkiy to zapishis v Russian Federation (eto organizatziya dlya russkih na etom sayte), napishi ob etom k Trancecrusader

[The_Enigma]

Stalin by far killed more people then Hitler. I believe 10 million people died when Stalin brought all of the land under the state. :blink

However you need to get Stalin a lot of credit, like Hitler he did bring his state out of the trouble it was in and did bring it foward.

[Profler]

However you need to get Stalin a lot of credit, like Hitler he did bring his state out of the trouble it was in and did bring it foward.

He was also canny enough to stay in power (even if it appears he may have been poisoned), his nation lived on, molded in his image. Hitler's was utterly destroyed.

[RusskiSoldat]

Even if Stalin was poisned he lvied to 73. At 73 you're an old man, and he had ruled for around 30 years (in 1924 Lenin died and he and Bronstein (Trotsky) competed for power for several years).

[meh_cd]

Stalin was a butcher. A fantastic ally in WWII, but a butcher nonetheless. Of course Germany's loss of WWII could also be chocked up to Hitler's arrogance, I mean come on, invading Russia and then mucking up the plans as it happens.

But anyway, Russia was awesome in WWII. A lot of people like to say that they did nothing, or they did everything. I'd say they did more than their fair share for a good time.

[Siena72]

Originally posted by The_Enigma@Mar 25 2005, 04:21 PM
Stalin by far killed more people then Hitler. I believe 10 million people died when Stalin brought all of the land under the state. :blink

However you need to get Stalin a lot of credit, like Hitler he did bring his state out of the trouble it was in and did bring it foward.

what brought state forward was an idea - idea of equality. If you look at French revolution, Russian revolution - although they were very different - they did have a large amount of positive and negative about them. These were major moves in human history. It is a big mistake to see only good about them, but it is also a mistake to see all bad about them.

Stalin and Hitler came to power at turmoil in each of their countries. They ruthlesly consolidated power in their countries. Where Hitler user rasist ideologies to rally Germans to a histerical point - Stalin was not so subtle - he used fear to scare more powerful Russians and Soviet ideology as well as fear for the masses.

I feel sorry for Russians who have to make such person as Stalin into their hero. It is a fitting hero for Putin to popularise - fits his goals, but really not a person worth making into a hero for the whole Russian nation.
Stalin may look nice from a far, when he is long dead and all you see is an image of an ugly face on the same podium as Western leaders - but if you were starved to death in Sibir, or be tortured to death by NKVD, or were forced to commit suicide to please him, or would have to live in fear all your life - I don't think you would like him all that much.