The Cameron-Sarkozy special relationship
In an ornate state room at Lancaster House, the leaders of France and Britain sat side by side and signed two treaties on defence and security.
On the surface it was like so many treaty signings: the asides between David Cameron and Nicolas Sarkozy about the pens, the handshakes and applause from French and British ministers occupying the front rows.
David Cameron spoke of President Sarkozy as "my good friend; a great leader and a good friend of this country".
President Sarkozy in turn said to the British leader: "I admire your courage, David, your vision and that of your government."
The claims made for this new era of military co-operation were ambitious.
After all, both countries in the past had attempted to work together. But Nicolas Sarkozy said the planned co-operation was "unequalled in our history".
David Cameron spoke of two world-class armed forces working closer than ever before.
The president said later that the fact that Britain and France had taken such a step was a historic event enabling both to make savings.
David Cameron described it as "a special relationship".
The scale of what is being attempted - from sharing aircraft carriers, to having a joint reaction force, to the testing of nuclear components - is different.
The need to trim defence budgets has brought both nations to this point although the expected savings have yet to be set out.
Both leaders, aware of potential domestic critics, claimed this was not about weakening their countries as powers.
As to the question of whether the French president would allow a French carrier to be used in some future conflict, say in the south Atlantic, he was elusive.
Mr Sarkozy said it would take a "hell of a crisis" for Britain to deploy its aircraft carrier. He couldn't imagine it would be done trivially.
He insisted that "our values are the same, our interests are shared".
It did not fully answer the question of what would happen if the two nations disagreed about the use of armed force which has occurred as recently as Iraq.
And what if there was a change of government?
The president said that both he and David Cameron saw beyond the democratic scan of their two governments. He said he relied on common sense. Britain was France's closest neighbour.
This partnership will underline that Britain and France are the two biggest military powers in Europe.
This agreement was not negotiated at European level but between two nation states.
Indeed President Sarkozy had a slight dig at Brussels. In reference to a question, he spoke of European Commission President Barroso or Council President Van Rompuy leading a French/British force.
He said that nobody could have that idea and he added that he was not in favour of "a plethora of bureaucrats".
Mr Sarkozy said he had had a number of frank exchanges with European officials.
On the question of the EU budget he said that when "my dear David" put the question of the budget on the table at the last Council meeting in Brussels we "both leapt at it", referring to himself and Angela Merkel.
He supported either an overall budget cut or a limited increase.
But he did not give any undertakings to support Britain keeping its rebate.
The French president recognised that the Common Agricultural Policy was not popular in Britain: he understood the British red-lines and promised only not to be confrontational.
The chemistry between the two leaders appears good.
A special relationship has been launched on the need to find spending cuts.
This is an entente cordiale that will be tested, as always, by events.
But two military powers also accepted today that alone they no longer have the means to project their power globally. They need to co-operate not at a pan-European level but as two national states with long military traditions.
~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~29~RS~)
I'm 
© MMX
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
They are trying to keep their Security Council seats !
Complain about this comment
@ 1
They don't have to try, they have veto.
Complain about this comment
When one speaks of a special-relationship one means something that extends beyond the current government to being part of the psyche of the two nations. You don’t need treaties to lock future governments of those nations into such arrangements; you can count upon the nations in a real special-relationship to permanently elect governments warmly disposed towards one another. This treaty is out of the blue, not featuring in the recent election campaign. It is not obvious that Cameron has any mandate for such a policy and certainly no mandate to bind future British governments by treaty.
Cameron is on manoeuvres here. He, like Tony Blair, cannot resist the whiff of smoke-filled rooms and the temptation to sell-out of the long-term interest of the country in a bid to cosy up to important foreign leaders. We have had enough of that type of politician who has done so much to discredit politics in this country. One Tony Blair was bad enough; we don’t need this clone.
Complain about this comment
"As to the question of whether the French president would allow a French carrier to be used in some future conflict, say in the south Atlantic, he was elusive."
And what else did you expect? :-)))
Complain about this comment
Politicians like Cameron seem to regard international treaties as a gloried press release; something to be issued at the end of meeting to indicate the meeting had some purpose. Treaties bind states in perpetuity and prevent us electing future governments to change them. They are inherently undemocratic.
We should have almost no new international treaties unless there is consensus between all main political parties that the measure is not only good for the time-being but will remain so in all foreseeable circumstances. Temporary budget difficult fail to qualify on those grounds.
Complain about this comment
Does this mean that the brits ( so the americans let's not kidd ourselves) can have access to the Laser Mégajoule facility ( the testing of nuclear components part of the agreement) just like that ?
Can't have secrets between friends , right ?
Complain about this comment
#2 Benefactor
-- Good reply !
--- Life is unfair and unrealistic.
Complain about this comment
This agreement might be fine whilst the two signatories are in office but what happens if you get someone like Blair (a religious "loose cannon") - in either the UK or France? How can these two here foresee the separate (but linked) futures of their own countries' armed needs?
I would have thought joint weapons research and development would have been more effective. But I don't have to trim my defence budget.
Complain about this comment
Slightly off-topic, but I have noticed that the term "special relationship" (quotes and all), are often applied when reading about politics - notably British politics. I was under the impression it referred to UK/US ties. Perhaps this is an attempt by Britain to tie itself closer to Europe instead?
Regardless, it should be interesting to see how this situation develops. I can see how this might work in a cost-savings point of view. From a logistical standpoint, however, I am unsure of whether such a deal would work efficiently or effectively.
Complain about this comment
Cameron is totally brain dead to do this with the French, Sarko is a spent force, to go with him is a crazy scenario, the BBC say it shows a level of confidence not seen in recent history. Nor in any history concerning the French. Even the French can't believe this judging by their media, HOOK, LINE and SINKER.
Complain about this comment
Better a partial military sharing with the French than Labour's intention of placing all Britain's defences in the hands of the EU. At least in a joint operation or intervention on behalf of the UN or Nato, only limited forces would be involved by mutual agreement, leaving plenty of firepower for the direct defence of Britain's interests.
Complain about this comment
Bad news for Britain --the bill is in Euros !
Complain about this comment
Good move!
This special, defence relationship goes to the heart of Britain's relations with the United States as well as Europe.
To tell you the truth, the development took me by surprise (not an easy thing to do).
Yet, when I read about the debate over the Governmemt's Defence Review, something important felt missing. It most certainly wasn’t the
overreported American consternation; the endless American questioning: “Will Britain be able to maintain her Nato obligations?...Will Britain be able to maintain her Nato obligations?...”
This new special relationship suggests a moving away from the United States as far as
- maintenance of British nuclear submarine fleet,
- reducing the existing Trident fleet from four to two submarines and
- throwing Britain’s nuclear future into the French special relationship – AND BY EXTENTION INTO THE EU.
The Coalition Government delay in renewing Britain’s ageing Tridents was the hint I think I missed that Britain was planning a new option, a different defence relationship.
I am so pleased that Britain’s defensive ties with France and Europe are likely to intensify.
Cameron met with Sarkozy in May where the idea of future co-operation was discussed. Sarkozy is now in London – different place, same topic.
How are the Eurosceptics taking this? I doubt if they will play dead without taking a shot across a French helm.
It’s a poorly kept secret that the European Union is planning a new combined European defence force; this planning already has the tacit support of Germany and Italy. The Europeans are looking forward to seeing see a more isolated United States beginning to emerge, giving them hope that a more independent European foreign & defence policy.
I for one would deeply welcome this.
Complain about this comment
#10 - Buzet23
"Cameron is totally brain dead to do this with the French".
Oh, I don't know. The nuclear agreement seems to be about testing warheads which rely on delivery systems which, in the UK's case, can't be used without Washington's say so and is out of date before it is paid for. As for the carrier sharing, the French need somewhere to land their plane and the Brits need some purpose for their floating airbase. Get real, this is all over bar the shouting and the sooner we stop pretending we are global superpowers and start spending our money on things which matter like credible and effect conventional forces, the better off we will all be.
Talking of the "brain dead" -
I see QOT thinks the 'bill is in Euros' is bad news for Brits. Payment is in sterling, QOT. What goes around comes around. Still, you keep enjoying taking the mickey if it pleases you. One day we might do the same if we ever find out where.
Complain about this comment
13. BluesBerry
"The Europeans are looking forward to seeing see a more isolated United States beginning to emerge, giving them hope that a more independent European foreign & defence policy.
I for one would deeply welcome this."
As would I.
That closer military co-operation with other European countries would make it more difficult for future PMs like Blair, who would want to mount crusades (implications totally intended) is an added bonus.
Complain about this comment
Great news! Extending the logic, why not a United States of Europe - bring it on!!
A l'eau c'est l'heure!
Complain about this comment
'Force majeure' me thinks. Will there be a referendum? Did not Winnie offer a Union with France? and implicitly support a 'United' Europe. Ernie Bevin found another solution, 'NATO', now performing in Afghanistan, and George Marshall a Plan which kept the Empire going. But is is it not about time we faced up seriously to the choice at least for the next 25 years. Go it alone but where?' Stick with USA (who don't really want us)? or face up 'to being European'?
Complain about this comment
Dear Bob Baker #16 : re "A l'eau c'est l'heure!" Is that a mangled French quotation from Shakespeare's Julius Caesar.?
"There is a tide in the affairs of men that if taken at the flood leads on...."
But they were beaten!
Complain about this comment
#16. At 7:30pm on 02 Nov 2010, Bob Baker
With the French the water will evaporate like Scotch mist, so much for the time.
#14. At 7:23pm on 02 Nov 2010, threnodio_II
The two new carriers should never have been ordered in the first place, if it wasn't the McClown trying to play favours with his Scotch mates they never would have been. They don't even have planes to fly off the damm things, only helicopters, what on earth the UK would do with a French carrier is likewise, merde alors.
Complain about this comment
#16 - Bob Baker/#18 - cping
LOL - keep it up!
Complain about this comment
#19 - Buzet23
That is not my point. My point is that we are painfully overstretched conventionally because we persist in persuing global power status. That might make sense if we were to stop wasting vast sums on nuclear capabilities which have never been tested, will never be proven and will never be used. Worse yet, its justification lies in a scenario which is totally anachronistic. The colonial legacy of both countries suggests that the odd aircraft carrier might not go amiss but Trident? For heaven's sake, what a criminal waste of money.
Complain about this comment
19. Buzet23
"with his Scotch mates"
Laphraoig, Bhunnahabhainn, Talisker, Glenfiddich ......
Complain about this comment
It´s like Grandma and Grandpa sharing one set of false teeth !
Complain about this comment
#23 - quietoaktree
"It´s like Grandma and Grandpa sharing one set of false teeth !"
I know it is frightening but try to stay calm, call the emergency service and sit quietly.
Where do you want them to come?
Complain about this comment
The CAP is not popular in Britain ????
---where did that nonsense come from ?
Complain about this comment
#24. At 9:31pm on 02 Nov 2010, threnodio_II
Be gentle with him, after all he said many blogs ago he was in finance and now he shown he has every attribute necessary to be a true merchant banker par excellence, poor guy.
Complain about this comment
To Grandma Threnodio and Grandpa Buzet c/o BBC Hewitt Blog.
Complain about this comment
´The CAP is not popular in Britain´ ?
If this a hint-- then the British taxpayer will pay the elite Land Owners directly.
-- Financial EU ´musical chairs´ has just been announced ?
Complain about this comment
I do not know if this is good news or not. In Greece we have a saying which very roughly (directly) and precisely in meaning says: "Out of having none, even Mary becomes good enough". Well this new "entente cordiale" between Britain and France reminds me of that. Europeans for some 30 years now failed to do the most basic thing and British and French gather together to do it on a bilateral way. Linearly this is simply the next best thing to nothing.
However, one wonders about the timing. Yes, yes it is all about crisis, reducing budgets and all that - but why on earth do I think that this all has to do not so much with mundane financial crises but with bigger games in the world sphere. If anything, it is an interesting evolution especially for France which for long has been playing on all fronts (France at the same time approaches Russia, even on military matters - so how one would translate the British-French co-operation? Complex stuff)
Complain about this comment
#29 Nik
-- Delusions of grandeur.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
The snake and the fool. Snarko's body language in the second photo says it all. Leaning back to distance himself, pointing two accusatory fingers at the macaroon, and a look that seems to tell you he's thinking "I'll bet I've already got this rube in my hip pocket." The day France comes to Britian's defense with an aircraft carrier in the South Atlantic will be the day hell freezes over. One way or another, this "friendship" will cost Britain something. With the French it always does.
Complain about this comment
Marcus
How are your tea bags ?
Complain about this comment
May God save us from our America !
Complain about this comment
30. At 11:06pm on 02 Nov 2010, quietoaktree wrote:
"""#29 Nik
-- Delusions of grandeur."""
Hahah... but I was speaking of Greece, not USA!
Complain about this comment
Nik, we've got an expression in Russia "countries of Antanta". I think it's that "entente" mentioned by Mr Hewitt. But it's something times 1st world war ... I think Need to look it up ... in wiki ... someplace ....
Like, really - "Antanta", again? :o))))))
It's time Petrograd a thing.
Complain about this comment
Found it, wiki in Rus. says:
(sorry I will google-translate it :o), too lazy :o)
Besides, English-Russian google is well trained by now and improves every day.
Entente (Fr. entente - agreement) - the military-political bloc, Britain, France and Russia, created as a counterweight to the "Triple Alliance»; formed mainly in the years 1904-1907. and completed the demarcation of the great powers before the First World War.
The term originated in 1904, initially to refer to the Anglo-French alliance, and used the expression l'Entente cordiale («hearty agreement") in short-term memory of the Anglo-French alliance in 1840., Who bore the same name.
Creation of the Entente was a reaction to the creation of the Triple Alliance, strengthening Germany and attempts to prevent its hegemony on the continent originally from Russia (France originally occupied the position of anti-German) and then by England. The latest face of the threat of German hegemony was forced to abandon the traditional policy of "splendid isolation" and go to - but also traditional - Block policy against the strongest power of the continent.
Especially important stimulus for this choice of England has served the German naval program, as well as the colonial ambitions of Germany.
In Germany, in turn, this turn of events was announced as the "environment" and served as a pretext for further military preparations that are declared as a purely defensive.
Confronting the Entente and the Triple Alliance led to the First World War, where opponents of the Entente and its allies was the unit of the Central Powers, in which Germany has played a leading role.
[Edit] Key dates
1891 - formalized agreement between the Russian Empire and the French Republic, the establishment of the Franco-Russian alliance.
5 (17) August 1892 - signed a secret military convention between Russia and France.
1893 - concluded a defensive alliance between Russia and France.
1904 - the signing of the Anglo-French agreement.
1907 - the signing of Russian-British agreement.
These agreements have actually formalized the establishment of the Entente.
Complain about this comment
Re 32. MAII wrote:
"One way or another, this "friendship" will cost Britain something. With the French it always does"
Could you please provide an exemple of something the US gave for free to the UK... And Syphilis from sailors during WWII does not count!
Complain about this comment
37. WebAliceinwonderland
Of course, in those days "monarchs" were by birth instead of election. The heir to the British throne was a noted Francophile (especially in connection with Parisian "houses of pleasure"). I don't think similar factors would have been involved in the current arrangements.
Complain about this comment
Commodious, you want to know what the US gave the UK for free? How about your whole damned country back three times at vast cost to Americans in money and blood. How about bailing Britain out of WWI, WWII, and preventing the USSR from taking it over during 50 years after WWII? How about a huge loan with 2% interest and a 60 year payback after WWII to help it rebuilt itself. Was it worth it? In my opinion no. We in America would be far better off had we left it to its own fate.
BTW commodious, except in the rare case of rape, when it comes to the transmittal of venereal disease, it takes two to tango in case you never learned that.
Complain about this comment
--✄-- This agreement was not negotiated at European level but between two nation states.
♥●●٠·˙˙ The chemistry between the two leaders appears good. ˙˙·●●♥
They need to co-operate not at a pan-European level but as two national states with long military traditions. --✄--
Welcome to Good Chemistry Baking, where we are happy to be EU gluten-free! We make all of our baked, military, goods on-site each day so you can enjoy it all without fear of EU cross-contamination
Whether you must follow a EU gluten-free diet or just want to try something EU yummy and new, we are here to serve you!
Complain about this comment
"But two military powers also accepted today that alone they no longer have the means to project their power globally."
EUpris: We would be able to defend ourselves better if we were not paying for the rubbish called the "EU".
This looks to me like more manipulative behaviour from "EU"-Mole Cameron. I presume that the idea is to merge our armed forces to such an extent that even further unwanted "EU"-integration seems logical and unavoidable and that the current level of unwanted integration seems irreversible.
It will never be too late to free ourselves. It will be more difficult the longer we wait but it will never be too late.
Complain about this comment
It won't work.
Complain about this comment
Give us a referendum on this deal.
If not then we should set to work now on undermining it.
Complain about this comment
321. At 10:53pm on 02 Nov 2010, quietoaktree wrote:
"When the SU asked Britain to send condoms (to assist their war effort), Churchill told to send the largest --and label them ´small´.
--- they were the only size in Britain not rationed ?"
EUpris: It is only recently that I have seen larger condoms on sale in the UK.
Complain about this comment
(sic) "An ABC exit poll suggested that 88% of Americans believed the national economy was in bad shape - nearly as many as said the same just before Barack Obama was elected.
According to ABC's findings, 73% described themselves as dissatisfied or even angry (26%) about the way the federal government was working, compared with 69% in 1994, when the Republicans seized the House."
It would seem that the US citizens like their federal government as much as EU citizens like their unelected, undemocratic wannabe federal government. Yet despite that absence of support I'm sure that in both cases they will carry on as usual and ignore the voters as being an irrelevance.
Complain about this comment
reincarnation wrote:
19. Buzet23
"with his Scotch mates"
Laphraoig, Bhunnahabhainn, Talisker, Glenfiddich ......
You forgot my favorite: Glenmegrahi
Complain about this comment
"May God save us from our America !"
Thank God it's not YOUR America.
[written after Tuesday elections' results came in. :)]
Complain about this comment
Re #40. MAII
"preventing the USSR from taking it over during 50 years after WWII?"
Let's say that was not for free. It was a side-effect of the US policy who wanted to avoid communism expansion.
"How about a huge loan with 2% interest and a 60 year payback after WWII to help it rebuilt itself." Well that's not exactly free then is it? That's my point!
"it takes two to tango in case you never learned that." Yes but sometimes you get more than what you bargained for...
Complain about this comment
@MarcusAureliusII
The American contribution to WWI was minimal - don't take my word for it, take General Pershing's; he was quite clear that the USA couldn't have made a significant contribution until 1919 at least.
The world owes far more to Russia for beating the Germans in WWII.
The Cold War? Come on, now you're just being silly.
And all that aid in WWII didn't exactly come for free, did it? The price (dissolution of the British Empire to the benefit of the USA) was in fact pretty steep.
Complain about this comment
#50
And all that aid in WWII didn't exactly come for free, did it? The price (dissolution of the British Empire to the benefit of the USA) was in fact pretty steep.
Interest bearing loans that took 50 years to pay off, purely symbolic, to make the British never forget what they got for "free". Billions of dollars of intellectual property handed over for nothing in return. Insisting on gold for every tin of beans and box of bullets, demanding all the British bases in the Caribbean, withdrawing lend lease from a bankrupt ally the day the war was over, forcing the end of the largest Empire in human history , being in hock and dependent(financially and psychologically) to this day.
Does that sound "free" to anyone? My dear Father once told me , "You get nothing for free in this world, no matter what is says on the advert".
Complain about this comment
" The world owes far more to Russia for beating the Germans in WWII."
Are you writing this from a part of the world liberated by the U.S. Army or "liberated" by the Soviet Army?
[For it was Soviet Army, not the Russian one: with hundreds of thousands of Belorussians, Georgians, Kazakhs, Poles, Turkmens, Ukrainians, Uzbeks, etc., doing the dying in its ranks]
Complain about this comment
#45 EUpris
-- For the tourists !
Complain about this comment
Re #46 Buzet::
"Yet despite that absence of support I'm sure that in both cases they will carry on as usual and ignore the voters as being an irrelevance."
I doubt that 'business as usual' will continue in the U.S unabated.
Tea Party has been not so much anti-Democrat as anti-INCUMBENT movement.
Look, how many challengers supported by Tea Party were running during the nomination process against OFFICIAL Republican candidates.
And how many of the former prevailed.
Not only Democratic Party's establishment has been put on notice. :)
Complain about this comment
#52
You need to stop trying to twist other peoples posts. The point made was " The world owes far more to Russia for beating the Germans in WWII."
And he is absolutely correct. The point was not "who would it have been better to have been occupied by"
Complain about this comment
#52
You need to stop trying to twist other peoples posts. The point made was " The world owes far more to Russia for beating the Germans in WWII."
No I didn't.
It was not Russia which did more to defeat German in WWII.
It was SOVIET UNION.
Now which part of USSR you don't understand?
Unless you hail from EUSSR?
Complain about this comment
#54 Powermeerkat
Much like the British public, the American public are easily swayed by simple nationalism. By ´putting on notice´ does not imply they realize the problem -- and that is Globalization.
What remains of the unemployed manufacturing work-force MUST be quickly retrained --the jobs that have gone abroad - are lost to cheaper countries.
The Ms. Governor of Michigan has taken the lead in America (similar to some European countries), where the unemployed receive benefits and a two year $5000/yr. USEFUL retraining. If my figures are correct, 100,000 have participated in the scheme and 75,000 have found NEW jobs (NPR).
This costs money and government ´interference´.
If both the Democrats and Republicans ´get the tea-baggers message ´ Then God help us !
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
47. powermeerkat
"Glenmegrahi"
Biggs London Gin has been out of bond for longer.
Complain about this comment
quietoaktree,
As I've pointed out much earlier a term 'teabagger' pertains to a practitioner of a highly perverted, obusive sexual acts.
If you want to discuss an issue of a swell of support for TEA (Taxed Enough Already) Party Movement you must do better.
Complain about this comment
Here is a very interesting interactive map site ---for the national and international warmongers among us !
http://newsinitiative.org/files/berkeley/us_military_abroad/homepage/
Complain about this comment
Apologies, I meant the USSR of course. The point still stands though.
Also - "The engagement the US entered with Europe starting with WWI was a very bad mistake with dire consequences"
Agreed.
Complain about this comment
#58
You wouldn't even have a country if it wasn't for the French. Talk about ingratitude.
Complain about this comment
#60 Powermeerkat
A very distinguished politician has also used the term on NPR ---with no ´bleeping ´censorship.
Would you prefer --Tea-dust bagger, washed-out tea leaves, tea dregs, soggy tea leaves, tea bags, soggy tea bags ?
I am sure we can agree on some acceptable derogatory term ?
Complain about this comment
Who removed Marcus´s #58 ???
I liked some of it !
---And posted #61 in reply.
I´ll bang their Acorns --the next time that happens !
Complain about this comment
Powermeerkat
´We are all in a gay party mood´
--would also not be acceptable in your part of the woods ???
Complain about this comment
For the EU to have capacity to stand up to PlanetPutin, UK & France can bring in Germany, Spain, Italy et al, and they will still find the Great Bear impossible to handle, without Uncle Sam.
And in the East Asian Community - with China, India, Japan, Korea, ASEAN plus USA + Australia + NZ - Europe is irrelevant; there is no bite that UK + France will have.
The only domain where UK + France militarily can matter is in the Arab World as the latter have burnt bridges with USA.
So, if it is EURABIA vs CHINDERICA, we all know who will win ?
UK must stay with USA, Australia, N Zealand, Canada et al on the Winning Side.
Wrong-footed again, Dave ?
Complain about this comment
@ 67 PlanetEnglish
China and India are not allies.
China and America are not allies.
Europe and the Arab world are not allies.
Despite some wishful thinking from certain posters America and Europe ARE allies.
Also, when it comes to conventional military power projection, China, Russia, India, basically everyone who isn't the USA, Britain and France is irrelevant. Even Britain and France are mostly irrelevant, hence the treaty mentioned in the blog post.
Which by the way, is a good idea.
Complain about this comment
So will this mean that we can go to war without our ships being sunk by french missiles? Or will that only apply if it is actually a french ship heading into the South Atlantic?
Am not really keen on this move despite the financial necessity behind it. Much though I love the French (I live near the big lily pad!) I don't think that the UK could really trust them politically if the going gets hot.
Complain about this comment
Does anyone know which nation will be doing the air traffic control???
Complain about this comment
67. At 3:04pm on 03 Nov 2010, PlanetEnglish wrote:
UK must stay with USA, Australia, N Zealand, Canada et al on the Winning Side.
+++++
It's exactly for this eventuality that the US has War Plan Red (I don't know what its present day successor is called).
Anyways Britain is by far America's greatest enemy -- it is the only one to have occupied Washington and burned the previous White House -- because it aims to use the powerful but (apparently) dumb America to further its dirty ends, at the same time all the while preparing to betray America and probably to realign itself with China but not before mortally stabbing America in the back.
Remember they acknowledged it themselves by adopting the following as their motto: "Britain has no permanent friends, only permanent interests".
No more PlanetBritain please.
Complain about this comment
Now that Britain and France have found a solution for themselves
--- the next logical step is to find a problem.
Complain about this comment
#71
"Anyways Britain is by far America's greatest enemy -- it is the only one to have occupied Washington and burned the previous White House "
LMAO, marcusaurelius is this your second account? Or is it Nik? Russia had its chance comrade. It lost. Move on and go pillage one of your neighbours.
Complain about this comment
72. quietoaktree
"--- the next logical step is to find a problem. "
Brilliant comment! :-)
Complain about this comment
Ultimately, it is simple. Is there any willingness in France or Britain to spend the money and time required for the desired level of armed forces, power projection, etc? And the answer to that is a very loud "No".
So, given that there is not enough cash or commitment to do it alone, what is the best option? And the answer is? Surprise, cooperation with France. As France is the best fit with Britain, in terms of size of armed forces, complementarity, and the need to strut on the world stage, this makes sense.
And to FreeBornJohn(no 3 and 5) and EUprisoner209456731(no 42-44), could I point out that you are NOT living in in a direct democracy like Switzerland, but in that peculiarly British version of "Representative Democracy". This may be defined as a system wherein you elect "..representatives who form an independent ruling body (for an election period) charged with the responsibility of acting in the people's interest, but not as their proxy representatives, nor necessarily always according to their wishes, but with enough authority to exercise swift and resolute initiative in the face of changing circumstances". The constant demand for referenda is downright un-British.
Complain about this comment
#74. At 5:52pm on 03 Nov 2010, reincarnation
Not really difficult for you and QOT, just look in a mirror.
Complain about this comment
The world owes far more to Russia for beating the Germans in WWII."
Are you writing this from a part of the world liberated by the U.S. Army or "liberated" by the Soviet Army?
[For it was Soviet Army, not the Russian one: with hundreds of thousands of Belorussians, Georgians, Kazakhs, Poles, Turkmens, Ukrainians, Uzbeks, etc., doing the dying in its ranks]
_______________
Powermeer, USSR of course.
Now, come to think of it (as you are writing) there has never been any figures who of the 15 republics of the USSR did what. I can't recall any discussion in Russian ? anything. to this day on that neither modern internet chats or ? anything formal.
the slogan throughout the war here, in the old Russian empire called temporarily USSR :o)))))), anyway it was:
We need one Victory
Just one - FOR ALL
And we won't care for the price!
Complain about this comment
#76 Buzet23
Wher´s Grandma -- do you have the teeth today --or are they still in the glass chattering and nagging at you ?
Complain about this comment
"Now which part of USSR you don't understand?"
powermeer, I think the same question can be asked of you. as you have hallucinations of "uzbek tajik kirghyz" etc winning that war.
Reminder: 7 Muslim USSR Republics /South were not occupied.
When one isn't occupied, and the war rages far away from home, the stimulus for fighting is far smaller But what am I, explaining to an American! :o))))))))))))))))
Well, in fact, sorry wrong. You always want to :o)))))))))
Well, let's say, normal people - don't.
Three slav Republics fought.
At that, Ukrainian in-put was limited by 2 factors.
1. They were occupied at once and stayed such throughout to the last year of war. Thus, their ability to fight was same as Europe rest.
2. They kind of joined nazi :o)))))) in heaps and crowds, and fought Russians :o)))))) - a minor detail you seem to omit.
Well, surely not the modern Ukraine, as they grabatised a bit extra :o))))) on divorcing us in perestroyka, half of their modern country, namely.
To this day Ukraine celebrates Victory day with Russia with a heavy heart :o))))) As a curtsy, once a year, to the wrong half of their population :o)))))) (Russians) The rest of the time during these past 20 years they are nagging that we should have left them alone, Germany-occupied, they'd be faring much better financially :o))))))))
Belarus showed never no signs of collaboration, but was the first entry country en German entry route from Poland side into the USSR, they were razed to the ground, suffered most of all USSR Republics, they were destroyed. Population (good half of which was Jewish( exported to death camps. The rest went to the forests as partisans and partisanned successfully throughout the whole 4 years of occupation. Belorussian partisans are a total glory and heroes in the USSR, for they undermined ammunition entry and stocks and back-up - all trains in-coming from Germany into USSR were ? attempted at :o) let's say, by Belorussian partisans in full neglect of own lives and many successfully derailed or blown up.
Well, who do we have more? 7 Muslim, 3 slav - 2 more Christian Republics - Armenia and Georgia fought tooth and nail.
The sad thing this days Georgia has totally given up on their past glory and practically handed the victory entirely to Russia, saying, like, thanks, we don't ewant asnything yours :o)))))) we shake off the dust off our feet :o) wash our hands :o))) so to say, and all.
You know they are busy destroying their own monuments to own 2ndWW heros round o'clock. The last one they blew up, it was a handsome structure, 30 metres high, 2 people standing nearby died in that blow-up, Russia protested hotly like there is nothing holy for you left, Georgia, at all! :o)))) but they are bent on proceeding :o)))))
So, as we have ab 1-2 million Georgians these days living in Moscow, who opetd to abandon their dear country after Perestroyka and re-locate to Russia - we are constructing a mini-version of the same Georgian monument in Moscow, one to one in outlook (a middle -ages Georgian warrior on his horse with a sword or something, sand in a long gown, various wild tigerts around - a very herpic look :o)))))) (nothing Soviet was ver in that monument , mind it, not a symbol. it' all Middle Ages;'s tyled, sybolicallyanyway we'll have a mini-copy for Georgians in Moscow to remember their Victory.
Armenia was true is true they never sway.
Now, 7 Muslim countries, 3 slav as I described, 2 more Christian (Georgia and Armenia) = 12. I lost 3 Republics/countries somewhere :o)))Aah! the 3 Baltics. :o)))))) Well, that's easy. I am sure, powermeer, even you won't write them onto the Russian side in the 2nd world war! :o)))))))
Yes, I think it's to Russia.
Complain about this comment
Who ever saw a Russian who doesn't want to celebrate the V-day with the whole USSR? kiss and cry and embrace them.
but they abandoned us entirely. While even in the 3 Baltics one can find 2ndWW heroes. very worthy kissing and embracing. but they impison them these days as occupants, in these moods! splashing the baby out with the dirty water!
and, like, what is a Russian do?
The victory in that war , like, fell into our hands hook and sinkert, or how Buzet says it? like that, in all its blissfull entireless and comopleteness, as only Belorussia and Armenia behave normal with regards to not forgetting that war. We didn't want it all - it's USSR's - but they left it to us, like an needed ? shells? like a snake skin! and crawled away :o))))))))))
And that's how it is now all ours. Not thanks to - but in spite of our will!:o))))))
You do know, we were feeling so lonely in spring party-ing :o)))))) last spring :o)))) that even called for NATO countries in :o))))) not to stay complete alone at the festive table :o))))))))
I don't think the guests, Britain, Poland, the USA and Francve complained later of Russian hospitality last spring, the 65th anniversary? We were awful glad to see all!
because it is the essence in it, the spirit - one - for all
Complain about this comment
The Muslim countries, powermeer, would have also celebrated the Victory normally, but you have mis-placed their brains completely :oi)))))))) in the last 20 years with different "flower revolutions", and I think they don't know themselves these days who they are, what are they doing :o))))))) and for what :o))))))0
Complain about this comment
We only had Turkmenistan, I think, on the Red Square last May, and even allowed them to hop around on a white horse, while white horses are normally a symbol of Fieldmarshal Zhukov, taking the Victory parade from the USSR troops, on return home, in 1945. Even Stalin didn't dare to sport a white horse on the Red Square parades never - it's Zhukov's thing entirely.
But Turkmenistan loves horses, they brought over their best eh pedigree home-grown product Turkmen horse, and their best rider, and had fun as much as they liked. In fact, was a good horse.
I think - come to the next Victory day whoever who fought, even on white elephants :o)))))) - we'll be happy to see.
Complain about this comment
As things proceed, we'll end up partying with Germans :o)))) on the V-day. Angela Merkel was already here on the Red Square last V-day.
All the rest seems to me have nearly forgotten it all :o(
Complain about this comment
I don't think the USA officially ever placed the question of money lending in war to Britain as some entries here state it "in vain; practically FOC, for nothing, 2 per cent neglectable interest" etc.
Should it be so, the British answer to the American invitation to join them in Iraq, Afghanistan, whatever, would be: Thanks no, but we'll gladly lend you money to fight where is important for you; will 2% suit you?"
Complain about this comment
OK, powermeer. To be fair, let's agree on "USSR fought; drive not to give up was Russian."
We simply needed it most of all. Such a defect :o)) - half Russia occupied. And - OUR Belorussia, OUR Ukraine, OUR Moldova, OUR Baltics. Jesus Christ I am forgetting the list of old property :o))))));
6 Muslim, 4 slav (Russia Belorussia Ukraine, Moldova), 3 Baltics, 2 Caucasus Christian (Armenia, Georgia)=15 but what does it matter now.
This reminds me :o) Japan made a scandal 2 days ago as "Russian President Medvedev dared to visit THEIR Kyril islands" :o))))))))))))called their ambassador off Moscow. We took ours out of Tokyo :o)))))That's all :o))))))))
Complain about this comment
As to Putinland, powermeer, a nasty thing, of course.
But to compare with the times when the world loved us suddenly, Yeltsin times, when we were giving out everything anybody will ask, sure we were liked much better! :o)))))just this way there won't be nothing left at home, so, sorry :o)
Well/ as a matter of fact, neither way there will :o))))))
Complain about this comment
69. At 4:16pm on 03 Nov 2010, Beavervalley wrote:
--"So will this mean that we can go to war without our ships being sunk by french missiles? Or will that only apply if it is actually a french ship heading into the South Atlantic?"--
From wikipedia:
"France provided political support, voting with the U.S. the resolution 502 requesting the departure of Argentinian troops. It also provided unofficial military assistance during the conflict giving the codes of the French missiles Exocet (used by Argentina) and Exocet's homing radar to the British Army. The French also organised military exercises with Britain consisting in simulated attacks from French Super-Etendard and Mirage aircrafts used by Argentina to allow British Harrier pilots to train against them. French and British intelligence also worked together to prevent Argentina to obtain more Exocets on the international market."
Complain about this comment
Since somebody from EUSSR was boasting here recently about Airbus behemot A-380...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-11691197
BTW. About a year ago another A-380 (of Singapore Airlines) also experienced an engine failure and had to return to Paris.
Complain about this comment
"I am sure we can agree on some acceptable derogatory term [for Tea Party supporters] ? "
And why does it have to be derogatory in the first place?
Just because majority of candidates the movement supported won, and majority of candidates endorsed by the Democratic Party lost?
BTW. No, I don't need, and am not looking for a derogatory term for Democrats.
They are as legitimate part of American political process and scene as anybody else.
A usage of derogatory terms hardly ever strenghtens a user's argument.
Wanna be for forceful?
Get some sticks and stones; and learn how to use them.
Complain about this comment
quietoaktree wrote:
Powermeerkat
´We are all in a gay party mood´
--would also not be acceptable in your part of the woods ???
I recall times when I could sing a song from "West Side Story":
"I am pretty and witty and GAY" without people eyeing me with suspicion or even disgust.
Not anymore.
And that's not because I am no longer pretty and witty. ;)
[BTW. I recall times when a word 'comrade' had a positive connotation as well: like, e.g. in "comrade in arms'. Unfortunately not anymore.]
Complain about this comment
"A very distinguished politician has also used the term on NPR"
No very distingushed politican would ever talk to NPR.
Particularly since that sectarian outfit's management has fired a very well known liberal black journalist - Juan Williams.
Fo merely stating on FoxNews that he's concerned when he sees Muslims in lines at airports.
[have seen Barack giving an interview to Fox News in the network's studio, though ;)]
Complain about this comment
"Does anyone know which nation will be doing the air traffic control???"
For Airbus 380s?
[An emergency landing in Paris a year ago due to an engine failure ; an emergency landing in Singapore yesterday due to an engine explosion.]
Complain about this comment
Benefactor wrote: "China and India are not allies.
China and America are not allies.
Europe and the Arab world are not allies."
Arabs and Persians (Iranians) are not allies.
[Even Shia and Sunnis are not allies.]
Han and Tibetans or Uighurs are not allies.
Caucasians (Chechens, Dagestanis, Georgians, etc.) and Russians are not allies.
Catalans and Spaniards are not allies.
Basques and the French are not allies.
Finally - horrible dictu! - the Flemish and Walloons are not allies.
[just as Hutus and Tutsis]
Complain about this comment
74. At 5:52pm on 03 Nov 2010, reincarnation wrote:
72. quietoaktree
"--- the next logical step is to find a problem. "
Brilliant comment! :-)
Keynesian economists and welfare-state promoters? :)
[I'll skip avid listeners of Wiederstands Radio]
Complain about this comment
"I think the same question can be asked of you. as you have hallucinations of "uzbek tajik kirghyz" etc winning that war."
Alice, you mean Uzbeks, Tajiks, Kirgiz, etc., were not fighting Nazis as soldiers of the Soviet Red Army? And dying in the process?
There sumre must be some misunderstanding.
[I grant ya: Bulgarians, Hungarians and Romanians weren't. :)]
Complain about this comment
"The Muslim countries, powermeer, would have also celebrated the Victory normally, but you have mis-placed their brains completely :oi)))))))) in the last 20 years with different "flower revolutions""
I am not sure who you meant, Alice.
Most Muslim countries in N. Africa allied with Nazis during WWII.
And we have not encouraged an islamist revolution in Iran.
Although we may yet encourage a counterrevolution there. :)
BTW. I hear that Tehran ayatollahs are very upset with Russians for not delivering them S-300 systems.
[Mr. Ahmedinnerjacket said yesterday some things about Russians one could not possibly repeat in the presence of women. :)]
Complain about this comment
AiW wrote: "But Turkmenistan loves horses, they brought over their best eh pedigree home-grown product Turkmen horse, and their best rider, and had fun as much as they liked. In fact, was a good horse."
Alice, you know, of course, that Mahomet's horse was called Burak?
Complain about this comment
This reminds me :o) Japan made a scandal 2 days ago as "Russian President Medvedev dared to visit THEIR Kyril islands"
You mean Chishina islands you call Kurils?
Like you call Haishenwai - Vladivostok?
Indeed, a scandal.
But don't worry: this too shall pass.
Along with potential Japanese investments in Russia's Far East and Japanese latest technology transfers. Japanese are strange people. ;)
BTW. V-day is in September of 1945. Not in May.
[May 8th is merely VE Day]
Complain about this comment
@ GenericName
"The American contribution to WWI was minimal - don't take my word for it, take General Pershing's; he was quite clear that the USA couldn't have made a significant contribution until 1919 at least."
From late 1917 on, US soldiers arrived in the hundreds of thousands every month. They filled the ranks of war-worn veterans with frech soldiers.
The same can be said about material assistance.
US troops played a vital role in the Hundred Days Offensive, which probably would have not succeeded without them.
But USA war aid goes back further. US banks almost exclusively borrowed money to the Enente, financing their war efforts.
That also was the main reason for the USA to enter WWI. To secure that the money be payed back.
Even if Pershing actually said that, which I highly doubt, the actual numbers speak for themselves.
Financial aid from the USA in both wars is often overlooked and/or dismissed, but it had a huge impact.
"Also - "The engagement the US entered with Europe starting with WWI was a very bad mistake with dire consequences""
This is mostly due to the failure of the USA to prevent a fair peace treaty, both in terms of reparation as well as war guilt.
Such a treaty most likely would have not happened without direct US intervention. I personally believe that German troops would have retreated from French territory at some point and a normal peace treaty would have been made.
But that`s mere speculation.
Complain about this comment
"BTW. I hear that Tehran ayatollahs are very upset with Russians for not delivering them S-300 systems.
[Mr. Ahmedinnerjacket said yesterday some things about Russians one could not possibly repeat in the presence of women. :)] "
_____________
Russia and Persia have never been bosom friends, and we are long-term eh looking people (backwards :o)))))) mostly :o)))))))))
Way too much trouble through the past 500 years fishing out our Armenians and Georgians out of there!
unpleasant memories. wars on that border, and then they had a habit to woosh smaller Christian neighbour inhabitants to captivity, as cheap labour at home, and then you need to buy them out no, no good memories, a long bad Russian-Persian record.
caused by troubles on behalf of Armenia and Georgia mostly.
Armenia, at least, was worthy it! can't say the same about Georgia after 08 08 08.
Modern good Russian - Iranian relations are explained very simply. Azerbajan post-perestroyka is a good Russia's neighbour, no troubles.
Half of Azerbajan lives in Iran :o)))))
we kind of grabatised ab 300 yrs ago? half of Azerbajan from Persia, it was all originally theirs, to be honest. Created an own Russian Azerbajan. But beyond the border , inside Iran, the same-size area is also still called Azerbajan! inhabited by the same Azerbajanee.
They are all freinds and relatives and cousins and ran back and forward non-stop non-visa, between ex Russian Azerbajan (modern country of Azerbajan), and old Azerbaijan (placed in Iran).
We can't quarrel with Iran, as Azerbajan is freinds with them and we are friends with Azerbajan. If you can catch this train of thought :o))))
But it is simply so, no more no less.
Good neighbours are deficit :o)))), and Azerbajan country is good neighbours, we take their interests into account.
External politics of people besieged :o)))))) by 19 good neighbours :o)))))) as Russia is, are not always very easy to comprehend so much at once :o)))))) powermeer.And why do you complain; you're also a neighbour, one of those crazy 19, 30 km across the straight is it? We are also taking you interests into account. Pity yours and Azerbajan's are kind of opposing each other lately, for Azerbajan wants Iran to stay un-touched by you and left as it is.
For us you are both in the "lovely neighbour" category, and it is kind of difficult for Russia to satisfy your contradictory to each other interests. Let's say we are working on it! :o)))))
_________________
Complain about this comment
"You mean Chishina islands you call Kurils?
Like you call Haishenwai - Vladivostok?
Indeed, a scandal.
But don't worry: this too shall pass."
Powermeer, no one but you ever heard this "shi"? "chi"? things.
While Kyrils and Vladivostok are quite known these past 2-3 centuries.
I think if there were ever any thing to remember , about "shi"? "chi"?we would. No one here suffers a memory loss, and things worthy noting go in parallel names, like Konig / Kaliningrad, Stalingrad and Volgograd, to say nothing of German-Polish towns' names.
So give me a break with "shi" "chi".
I get disappointed every time you come up with something like this, as it only shows how un-fair and un-trustable allies you were, and I get disappointed as everyone does looking at people's how to call it unthankfulness.
You have always been encouraging Japan to review the results of the 2nd WW. From the moment you stopped needing us.
We've paid - taking our islands back - after a long couple of centuries interval, by blood. The bill has been paid.
"will pass with time" no sooner than Germany gets back their part of Poland.
come take it with sword if you wish, I don't think there is any other way, and surely it is not to press Russia.
Complain about this comment
AiW : "Half of Azerbajan lives in Iran :o)))))"
Azeris would say that one third of Iran should be in Azerbaijan.
There's something to it considering that Azeris are Turkic and Turkish speaking people, whereas Iranians are Persians speaking Farsi.
Oh, boy, it may yet flare up almost like a conflict between Belgian Flemish and Walloons. :-)))
Complain about this comment
I have to thank Powermeerkat for enlightening me in the story of the Kouriles which he insists are a Japanese land.
The history of the Kouriles is that these were small islands inhabited by the northern part of the Ainou people. The first non-Ainou power that entered war Russia, in the 18th century though they had not consolidated officially their power until the 19th century and it is then that Japanese enterred also as colonists.
Japanese not only were as foreign as the Russians on the Kouriles but actually they had enterred not as peaceful colonists as Russians had but as an occupatinal force. On the 100% of cases Japanese enterred the Kouriles or Sahalin, they exterminated or near-exterminated the local Ainou population with the particular barbarism that characterised Japanese of the times as shown later in Nanking. In WWI Japanese occupied the islands much to the bad fate of the locals. Finally in WWII Japanese waved bye bye to these islands they never treated as anything else as military bases for the control of the northern seas.
The Kouriles were never a Japanese land. They are simply military targets for the Japanese. They do not want them "back" for the simple reason the Kouriles were never theirs. They simply want to conquer them. What is most funny is that nowadays that Japanese have reduced (just a bit) their extreme racism agains the Ainou they pay the Ainou to as-if "ask back" their Kouriles islands... for the account of the Japanese daddy of course. Evidently some poor Ainou think that they will be better with the money given by their previous butchers. Pure tragedy.
Of course for Powermeerkat all the above does not count. Every lie and every propaganda and every genocide is ok, if it serves his country's (one that lies 10,000s km to the other side of the world!) interests.
Why so much hatred against Russians Powermeerkat? What have they done to you?
Complain about this comment
"Powermeer, no one but you ever heard this "shi"? "chi"? things."
Let's hope there'll be tishina.
BTW. Let bygones be bygones, but if you bother to study history you'll find out that for example Sakhalin's original population was Aino.
Since times immemorial.
[No, I won't go into Tsushima spelling. Or Hainshewai.
Although you must admit, Alice, Aigun is much easier to spell and pronounce than Blagoveshchensk. ;-)]
On a more serious note: I think it would be better for Russia to give Japan those 2-3 small insignificant Kuril Islands, and get a lot of Japanese investment in Russian Far East (which badly needs it) and modern Japanese technology in return. But that's just my personal view.
[Obviously ego and national pride is involved on both sides. :(]
Complain about this comment
powermeer, seriously - I don't think we need Japanese investment. mad as it sounds ;o) because normal people always do.
the way we manage ourselves presently - no good things will do us any good ;o)))))))) they'll vanish. with no use whatsoever for normal Russians in the future and at present. while islands will be gone.
that'll be same-sake Alaska :o)))))) we've burned our fingers on hot water, now are scared of cold milk ;o))
powermeer, land is something that is not made anymore :o), as my aunt reminded me once when I was at a loss what to want as part of father's how it's called, heritage.
even in the shape of useless wind-swipped rocks, I think it still holds true. for that matter, Japan on their 3,000 islands has heaps of such-like Northern rocks, un-developed, and un-inhabited by them either. not worth the money.
it's a symbolical matter for them, and practical for us - Pacific Fleet exit in between couple of those rocks out into the Pacific. a minor detail. water freezes dead in between most of those rocks. we need these 2 unfreezing ones safe, until climate on this planet changes for worse ;o))))))) I'd say. that's the time limit of the matter. 10 un-freezing Navy exit years in a row, by other rocks' side - and we might consider it.
Complain about this comment
103 Nik writes:
"Why so much hatred against Russians Powermeerkat? What have they done to you?"
Because he's Polish. Now do you see?
Complain about this comment
As to ainu - sure the Kyrils are their land. The Japanese have no historical claims to these, of the quality that Russia finds quality. Ainu, though, do.
But we find it kind of wild that Japan, who hunted, persectuded, ? detiorated in rights, diminished in quantity, and brough eventially brought Ainu down to insignificant current existing amounts - demands Ainu's Kyrils of Russia! They are the last people on earth who have moral right to do it, and so arrogantly.
The Jaopanese were destroying the Ainu's national identity on purpose - and that purpose was no Kyrils but Hokkaido , for a second. Because Hokkaido was the Ainu's main land, grabatised by the Japanese from them.
As matters stand currently, we can also search high and low :o))) and find a couple of Ainu-s still on our Pacific coast. At that ours will be authentic :o))))))), we didn't do anything with them, while current Japanese Ainu-s are all fifty-fifties at best, and more likely - 1/16, 1/32 Ainu - the rest - Japanese. For they encouraged their mixing up through the centuries, and changing on names to unrememberable degree dissolving them on purpose. As claimants for Hokkaido.
In perestroyka there was a lot of research done, re the elegant solution - announcing the Kurils "the Ainu Republic". Neither ours, nor Japanese, not offending to anyone a solution. But tghose Ainu are gone! :o)))))) exactly when you need them, once in a millenium! :o))))))))
Our side ones shrank for natural reasons, well "natural". We have simply all here shrank in amount; troublesome 20th century. wars and revolutions and civil war and hunger and Stalin and perestroyka and what not. That shore became pretty deserted, as you know, all who can got packed this side of the Urals.
On the Japanese side the Ainu are also, how to say, well. as authentic as a I don't know a Romanian restaurant band with balalaika passing for a Russian band :o))))) Well they don't do it. anymore :o))))) but that's how it is.
Complain about this comment
When the results of this census in Russia are published, we had one 10 days ago, I'll have a look if we have any Ainu left. There were observed, through the whole USSR censuses still, but in the really pathetic amount, type "25" :o)))))))) "17" :o))))))))
what can you do, they were never many on Kyrils. it's cold there. they used to keep to Hokkaido, like normal people.
Complain about this comment
And no, I don't know that Mahomet's horse was called Burak.
I had enough :o))))))))) in USSR time school, studying respective 15 Republics' poets and writers and saga-s and ballads and works of their home-grown medieval philosophers :o)))))))))
USSR school children were falling down from weight of "Literature" subject text-books carrying them like ants to the school and back :o)))))))))
Koran, to top it all, was not included :o)))))))))))), neither Christan writers, of any USSR local religions we were at least completely relieved :o))))))))
Complain about this comment
Azeris would say that one third of Iran should be in Azerbaijan.
There's something to it considering that Azeris are Turkic and Turkish speaking people, whereas Iranians are Persians speaking Farsi.
Oh, boy, it may yet flare up almost like a conflict between Belgian Flemish and Walloons. :-)))"
____________
nothing will flare up. unless you interfere :o))) of course
My source of news is very reliable :o))))))), local Azerbajanee taxi drivers :o)))))
They are all in praise of Iran and how nice it is there :o)))))
Honest, I asked several times what's so nice? on Eath? about Iran, and they said they steadily cross over there for shopping! for medical service! and simply they like it there and are welcomed by the Iranee Azerbajan. Never heard from them a bad word about Iran, well may be they don't go further than the adjacent part/the other Azerbajan? or things have become so real gloomy in our ex Azerbajan didn't figure out - but the modern Azerbajanee taxi drivers in St. Petersburg surely speak Farsi. I asked and not once - what language do you speak? trying to call their attention back to the road :o))))) as they are driving and chatting on mobile like there is no tomorrow
that's my polite way :o)))) to bring a driver back to his senses :o)
and they were all answering - "Farsi".
Can be they learn it additionally these days, on self-will, since Russia moved off away from them and now their key neighbour is Iran.
I think Iran is kind of charming our old Azerbajan in, not the other way around.
Complain about this comment
106. At 7:12pm on 04 Nov 2010, margaret howard wrote:
103 Nik writes:
"Why so much hatred against Russians Powermeerkat? What have they done to you?"
Because he's Polish. Now do you see?
++++++
I now see that you're as blind as a bat, Margaret.
Also, not every Pole is a meerkat by far, not even one of a "power" variety.
Complain about this comment
#94 Powermeerkat
I am sure you do not wish to give the impression of a cranially deficient human bean with sprouting deficiencies --do you ?
--Some of you contributions however, would make it difficult to disprove.
Complain about this comment
I do not mind powermeerkat standing against Russians. He has his reasons. But doing so on every single unrelated issue is kind of funny.
In this case :
107. At 7:24pm on 04 Nov 2010, WebAliceinwonderland wrote:
"""But we find it kind of wild that Japan, who hunted, persectuded, ? detiorated in rights, diminished in quantity, and brough eventially brought Ainu down to insignificant current existing amounts - demands Ainu's Kyrils of Russia! They are the last people on earth who have moral right to do it, and so arrogantly."""
P r e c i s e l y . I do not know whether people are really in knowledge of what the Japanese did to Ainou and how they treated them all along their history up to our days. I also find the Japanese as unacceptable. They have invaded China and genocided the Chinese at Nanking simply just for fun (there was not even any "national interest" reason like the Turks had in Minor Asia, they have not even asked a sorry today while it costs them nothing. They have genocided the Ainou on every single Kourile and yet it is on their name they ask the islands. This is like having NeoNazi Germans asking the rest of the lands from the Palestinians on the account of Jewish.
"""The Jaopanese were destroying the Ainu's national identity on purpose - and that purpose was no Kyrils but Hokkaido , for a second. Because Hokkaido was the Ainu's main land, grabatised by the Japanese from them."""
Precisely.
"""As matters stand currently, we can also search high and low :o))) and find a couple of Ainu-s still on our Pacific coast. At that ours will be authentic :o))))))), we didn't do anything with them, while current Japanese Ainu-s are all fifty-fifties at best, and more likely - 1/16, 1/32 Ainu - the rest - Japanese."""
Hehehe... the Japanese would consider even an 1/50th an Ainou... just like a redneck would consider black any guy with 1 African granmother back in the 1700s... Ainous were European-like people with no mongolic slit-eyes. Modern Ainous in Japan are mongolic-looking just like any other Japanese.
"""Our side ones shrank for natural reasons, well "natural". We have simply all here shrank in amount; troublesome 20th century. wars and revolutions and civil war and hunger and Stalin and perestroyka and what not. That shore became pretty deserted, as you know, all who can got packed this side of the Urals."""
While Russians have often been, "rude" to certain Siberian and Alaskan tribes, they never commited genocides and never reached the level of violence of the British in USA against local natives while in particular in the Kouriles and in Sahalin islands they were very lenient with the local populations. Communist pressure and violence first of all concerned Russians themselves and then others. Most of the 50 million victims of communists had been Russian patriots.
"""On the Japanese side the Ainu are also, how to say, well. as authentic as a I don't know a Romanian restaurant band with balalaika passing for a Russian band"""
Eheheheheh... well that is precise!
Complain about this comment
#113. At 00:40am on 05 Nov 2010, Nik
I was out Yesterday so did not appear on this blog, but having read your numerous diatribes with their usual mix of fact and fiction (fact being an irrelevant minority in them) I see I missed absolutely nothing.
You said "I do not mind powermeerkat standing against Russians. He has his reasons. But doing so on every single unrelated issue is kind of funny.
".
Did it not occur to you that this is precisely what you do but regarding the USA, British and any other country you have an irrational grudge against. What is so sad from the last days posts is that you consider yourself highly educated and knowledgeable, that is a 'god complex' or 'delusions of grandeur'. If you are representative of your country then why do you think investment went elsewhere, would any sensible investor invest somewhere where the population irrationally think they are directly related to god. No Nik, the investor would know that he/she is in an asylum and leave as quick as possible. Your country is poor for a reason, and it's nothing to do with any other nation.
Complain about this comment
87. At 09:29am on 04 Nov 2010, Benefactor quoted stuff from Wikipedia about how the French helped the Brits to defend themselves against Exocets during the Falklands War.
---------------------------------------
Indeed Benefactor, I was being a tad mischievous and recall hearing from naval sources that the Sheffield's missile defence system had been switched off while a particular communication system that it interefered with was being used.
Be that as it may, there are French people who jubilantly celebrated the successful Exocet missile strike. With allies like that, who needs enemies?
Complain about this comment
Re #115 Beavervalley
"Be that as it may, there are French people who jubilantly celebrated the successful Exocet missile strike. With allies like that, who needs enemies?"
Are you being a tad mischievous again? Do you have proof, or do you assume so because of your open dislike of the french?
I can say having lived a long time in England I can't recount the number of times the locals were cheering when something bad happened to the french...
Now I can see some french sailors not being too disappointed with the brits being on the receiving end of some french weapons, given the animosity between the two navies. That will make interesting discussion topics when they will share an aircraft carrier ;)
Complain about this comment
Hi Commodus
I'm not sure about the "open dislike of the french" bit. As commented previously, I love them dearly but wouldn't trust them politically! And yes, a french acquaintance told me about the cheering when, as it was perceived, french military technology triumphed over the british navy.
You are also right that that probably has to be put in the context of the hatred the french navy have for the british navy - the sinking of their fleet by the brits in WW2 rankled a tad....
Complain about this comment
Re 117. Beavervalley:
"You are also right that that probably has to be put in the context of the hatred the french navy have for the british navy - the sinking of their fleet by the brits in WW2 rankled a tad...."
Indeed, most french saw this as a betrayal and backstabbing from the british ally. Especially when you consider that Vichy France managed successfully to scuttle the fleet in Toulon when the German tried to grab it in 1942.
Now I'm not saying the brits where right or wrong in doing it, they had their reasons, but the result was to add to the animosity ...
Complain about this comment
114. At 08:26am on 05 Nov 2010, Buzet23 wrote:
... Your country is poor for a reason, and it's nothing to do with any other nation...
Buzet23,
If it's Greece you call poor how will you explain the fact that it's higher on the HDI (that's the human development index supposed to be a measure of general quality of life) than Britain.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1326712/UK-tumbles-quality-life-league-table-lags-Greece.html
It's Britain with its City scammers that the investors should avoid at all costs. Unfortunately there are still too many stupid people among them so Britain is not in a direct danger of an economic collapse (yet). Give it a couple more years...
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS