L'menexe,

Comment on return of Matthesson.
His post was then wiped.
I was refering to your earlier comment on PC-censorship. See 11:29-ish post.
Russian's response to M was simularly dealt with.
If you stop people talking you make them worse-I think. After all y'all listen to me,sometimes.

Sianara(?)

Ps are you correcting spelling?

Rebels shot 68 Chechen elders and are charging people to leave . Anyone care to comment?

Rebels shot 68 Chechen elders and are charging people to leave . Anyone care to comment? Sounds like what KLA was doing in Kosovo

Start a war and hope no-one gets hurt......
Tass? Igor? another Website?
Please, where did this come from?
And what does it mean to you?
(IRA have just returned the bodies of people they killed in the 1970's. Maybe England should invade again?)

Russia is finally showing more humanity than the Rebels- Commendable.

Kim

bpemya

It just shows that the militants only care about their own interests people do not count.Also people going back in Russian controlled areas.That information from Newsworld International.

Milititians don't care about civilians. They need civilians for cover. Soon there no gonna be civilians in town. We will catch them all and cut their balls. What are whores are they anyway. They must die.

hi kim,
nah, it'd take too long to correct all the bad
spelling here...and ah aint no englich teechur
neethur.

sayonara, luv.

Kim Arx,
I agree with your views relating to Serbia. I've read countless instances of Serbs who have denounced already-elected officials (mostly Croatian) during the initial fall of communism in Yuogoslavia. The representation of government was fabricated through methods of coercion. The irony to these cases (Kosovo and Chechnya) is that these issues have surfaced after the fall of comunism. Of course, Chechnya had problems with Russia and the Soviet Union for years. The fate of Yugoslavia was interesting. Why did Yugoslavia have such a problem with change when Hungary, Romania, Poland and other Eastern Bloc countries have a relatively easier time during this moment of transition. I understand the importance of Kosovo to Serbs (hell, I should know this because of their battle against my forefathers). Some people cannot view Milosevic's faults in the least. They're so anti-Western that this man is seen as a lamb. I know people from Serbia who don't agree with his politics. I also know that his leadership is one of those freak occurances which lead to the question of why he attained power in the first place. The sources of information I have encountered point to solid evidence of Milosevic's use of bullying tactics to acquire office and selecting personal acquaintances to fill certain roles within government. In saying all this (which may seem a dichotomy), I was TOTALLY OPPOSED to the bombing. I felt there should have been a more civilized approach to the situation.

A moment of silence please for author Joseph Heller (Catch-22). Thanks.

You can or cannot recognise my points - Your choice, - but, please, chose words - You're "read" sometimes matthesonish. If You prefer blurred meanings mind that, it's not a face-to-face here open for extra-lingual means and immediately resolvable guesswork.
Now look you've finally done it, get rid of the extreme right wing and I come over all pro-western. Is it an ultimatum from Royal Highness? What made You think I'm an extreme right-wing? Can noncompliance with Your views be treated right-winged? Not enough real right-wingers on both sides present here? When to expect gunboats?
A pro-Russian sentiment was sure to invite a pro-Serb one. It's a practically invincible position, that can be ruined by intergovernmental arm-twisting or brute force only. And holds water.
Accusations of blanket propaganda on the Western part? Why not? There are three main TV ch. in CIS. As regs. Serbia and Chechnya - the first one - ORT - can be called a conservative one; the second one - RTR - can be viewed as mediator; the third one - NTV - trouble-stirrer. CIS citizens have three points of view to ponder over and make a choice. And it's something I hadn't seen over CNN, BBC, SKY et. al., voices of reason were just attic squeaking.
As to Serb "aggression" I attribute the word to the above point and deliberate biased raking of suitable info. I may be considered biased depending on presumtions. You too.
Present Kosovo as an isolated incidence of Serbian aggression,conveniently overlooking Serb attrocities in the former Yugoslavia, because "everyone was doing it" Why don't we hear about everyone doing it in the first place then? Only Serbia? Where's CNN-Pravda-BBC consortium? I guess, because "everyone" immediately became islands of "prosperity" and unbridled "democracy".
Ah, concentration camps. Is it about the BBC crew, headed by Penny Marshall, that filmed a gaunt Moslem from within the wire-fenced plot, while that man was outside? Thanks to German reporter, some already know. Is a person supposed then to beleive anything that might follow? But noone cared - fingers were itchy on bomb-releases. UN didn't care because of the spineless Anan. NATO's NATO, 'nuff said. But Russian support of Serbia? Nice twist. Who dares to call it a "support"? When Russia put it's signature on actions against Serbia? I still consider it a grave mistake echoing now.
"Post-comunist" leaders. I personally object to naming the former Eeast Block "communist" - there was no communism there. But, what the hell. All's not gold that glitters didn't work for them, should've been wearing sunglasses and thinking. What Westerners get our of this? A backyard for dumping surplus into and getting cheap workforce out of. And ...
Michael Kashobla bla - seen any peer critics? A nice show of respect (for the source too) on Your part. (Will consider it.). So ...
Give me a few days and I will prpose a reading list of my own from properly referenced material in Oxbridge catalogues- I have found it hard to use info off the net in papers-as they tend not to be properly referenced or critiqued It sounds, that You did Your reading already, "properly referenced and critiqued", resulting in the contents of enumerated Steps of Your previous post, and Your "peer" in critique is no-more-no-less a Professor of Psychology Jamie Shea himself. Curtsy.

Suleyman,

"The fate of Yugoslavia was interesting. Why did Yugoslavia have such a problem with change when Hungary, Romania, Poland and other Eastern Bloc countries have a relatively easier time during this moment of transition."

There are various ways in which a regime or government can legitimise its hold on power.
According to Holmes these are-:
1-traditional (monarch,religion)
2-charismatic (a leader who successfully leads a revolution)
3-goal-rational ( aim : a communist/capitalist utopia)
4- eudaemonic (you've never had it so good approach- economic prosperity as legitimation)
5- new traditional ( based on historical legitimation/Israel?)
6- legal-rational (democratic/legal framework)
7- outside recognition of national boundaries.

These forms are not mutually exclusive.

I'm not entirly sure why Hungary or Romania have survived as they have their own ethnic minorities-
but probably cause of points 5,6 and 7
Tcheckoslovakia - created between the world wars-
history of internal difficulties- on the one hand point 2 in the Chech republic on the other problems with point5.

Poland seems to have suffered more from being carved up by its more powerful neighbours, than being forced together. Point 5, point 2 (initially?)Point 6(if possible based on point 5) and point 7.

I remember in the early 80's a (then) Yugoslavian
telling my parents that when Tito died Yugoslavia would fall apart. His Charisma cannot be denied.
After his death the balance of power between the various ethnic groups became less defined, with fears of one group dominating another. Political infighting. breakdown of 2 and 5. Germany recognises Slovenia (possibly still over-exited from reunification)bang goes point 7 and Bob's your uncle.

Ok,this is a simplistic approach, but it seems to make sense. More sense than the X-file-like conspiracy theories of a hate campain against the Serbs.

Bombing was not so clever, who knows what might have been.

Kim

Kissie,

"Now look you've finally done it, get rid of the extreme right wing and I come over all pro-western. Is it an ultimatum from Royal Highness? What made You think I'm an extreme right-wing? Can noncompliance with Your views be treated right-winged? Not enough real right-wingers on both sides present here? When to expect gunboats?".


Before I comment on any of your other comments, which are always well respected by me. I think this is based on a misunderstanding of the Term "rightwing"- To me this means those leaning towards fascism,racism, etc.-Like Mathesson, Rambo, Texan. I certainly have not classed you or any of the Russians in those terms. Sorry that was an outdated term and I am aware that it has other implications in Eastern Europe- Bad choice of words.
What I actually was meaning was that now that Rambo,et al had gone,I felt the need to stick up for the West a bit, in a way I could not have done comfortably before. I am after all a Westerner and it would be hypocritical for me to agree that everything in the west was bad, just to suck up.

As for disagreeing with anyone, I reserve the right. Thanks. Is everyone who disagrees with you "Mathessonish"?

The disrespect for the source thing- as I explained, I was having difficulty shifting back and forth between sites, everytime I went back I lost what I had written- I was getting slightly annoyed by this, I'm sorry if I took this out on your source.

Coming to the Blurred language bit- actually there is something for which you could hold me in contempt. I am taking the mick out of your writing style- often a bit obscure- I thought deliberately- my mistake.
You are a forceful and opinionated person- I respect that- sometimes its a bit scarey to disagree with you.

Taking five
bye
Kim

The russian coutry is in a mess. But this mess started in Octobre 1917 if not earlier.
Russia has inheritated from soviet union not only a shattered economy but its actual ruling system and ruling mentality. Mafia and banditism is small in comparaison to the debilism that run this contry.
Any east-european will understand the term I'm using and anybody who has tryied to start a business in Russia will know what I mean.
With Yeltsin, a havy drunker, senile and physicaly and mentaly weakened as a president and Putin, an ex-KBG killer as PM, the situation is not to improve soon.
Russian poeple didn't support the first scandal run war in Chechenya. They do not trust or support anybody in the political arena.
NEVERTHELESS: This is another war. Now they have to deal with islamist guerrila infiltrating the teritory.
Also called mujahidins (by themselves) or wahabis (by russian authorities), they have little support by the local muslim population except in the mountains. Mashkadov himself has "litlle control on the rebel". Some of these warriors are even not caucasian born. (I 'm thinking precisely about one guy but I can't remeber his name).
Better to live in Russia than in a Taliban like islamist state even for muslims.
That's one of the reason the war is now popular among the russian population. Other reasons are the propaganda and the fact that Chechenya has worsen since 96 de facto independence.
Given all these funny charachters on the scene, I find laughable the call of the West for a political-solution-to-the-crisis. Especialy after what Nato did on serbia a few months ago!

I don't beleive tales of civilians allegedly killed by russian troops at least under russian command.

Chechens killed their own yesterday.(68)