FORUM.1

14 Nov 1989 - 23 Nov 1999

Topics

  1. gde.smo (1029)
  2. svet (145)
  3. jugoslavija (470)
  4. ljudska.prava (244)
  5. stranke (652)
  6. vlada (61)
  7. novine (51)
  8. bonton (105)
  9. trac (66)
  10. literatura (128)
  11. muzika (358)
  12. pokretne.slike (70)
  13. strip (30)
  14. devojke (343)
  15. klub (282)
  16. sport (264)
  17. zvezde (60)
  18. price (65)
  19. civilizacija (74)
  20. vazduhoplovstvo (74)
  21. religija (90)
  22. razno (273)

Messages - svet

svet.1 dejanr,
čao mi je što sam se javio SEZAM-u tek sada, jutros sam slučajno slušao CNN o intervenciji i da je tada bilo radno vreme, mogli smo da budemo izuzetno ažurno informisani. U međuvremenu su svi na vestima čuli da su američke vojne snage noćas u 01 izvršile intervenciju u Panami. Međutim, mislim da je ovde zanimljivo saopštiti ono što se čulo na CNN-u a *nije* pomenuto u našim izveštajima, dakle neka vrsta američke verzije događaja. Kažu da je pre par dana ubijen nenaoružani američki oficir u zoni kanala, da je Norijega objavio rad Sjedinjenim državama i proglasio sebe za "vrhovnog vođu" Paname. U intervenciji je učestvovalo 12,000 američkih vojnika koji su bili stacionirani u zoni kanala kao i 9,000 specijalaca koji su se iskrcali brodovima i padobranima. Napad je izvršen na više tačaka i sa vojne strane je uspešan utoliko što je otpor praktično slomljen *osim* u blizini glavne kasarne gde se i dalje vode borbe. Cilj operacije nije potpun jer general Norijega (čije je hapšenje i dovođenje na sud pod optužbom za šverc droge) nije uspelo (kažu da Norijega menja boravište svake noći po nekoliko puta). General Pauel je rekao da je Norijega trenutno begunac (fugitive) i da će se prema njemu postaviti kao prema takvome. U prvim satima intervencije zakletvu je položio u maju izabrani predsednik (Norijega je te izbore docnije poništio) koji je po volji Sjedinjenih Država (borac za demokratiju, naravno) koji sada, kako izgleda, uz podršku američkih snaga obavlja svoje zvanične funkcije. žinjenica je, međutim, da je tok operacije očito sporiji nego što je planirano - predsednik Buš je jutros održao govor koji je, prema mišljenju komentatora, pisan tako da odrazi potpuno završenu operaciju a onda na brzinu prepravljen tako da pokaže da borbe još traju. Nepodeljeno mišljenje izveštača je da će intervencija biti završena vojnim uspehom mada svi sumnjaju da će Norijega biti uhvaćen tako lako kako to tvrdi general Pauel. Mišljenje State Departmant-a je da će neke latinoameričke zemlje koje su bile u veoma zategnutim odnosima sa Norijegom podržati inter- venciju ali će se u nekim drugim javiti averzija prema (još jednom) mešanju USA u njihove poslove. Što se gubitaka tiče, do jutros u 12 po našem vremenu poginulo je 9 američkih vojnika, 32 su ranjena i jedan nestao. črtve sa panamske strane još nisu poznate.
svet.2 dsavic,
Nisam pratio dogadjaje u Panami ali znam da dok je Karter bio na vlasti da su u Panami stavili eksploziv pod kanal i da su ga jedino tim adutom zastitili. Dusko
svet.3 sasa,
HI Dejane. Kada pratis USA intervencije, da li si u medjuvremenu obratio paznju na ono blize u susedstvu? P.S. Opet zaboravih da "kresnem" drajver za tipkice.
svet.4 vkostic,
Ima jos ludaka po svetu koje treba ukloniti, a ne samo Norijegu. Gadafija, na primer, pa onoga u Rumuniji, pa u Kini, itd, itd, itd.
svet.5 dejanr,
>> Kada pratis USA intervencije, da li si u medjuvremenu obratio >> paznju na ono blize u susedstvu? Naravno... ali to nije u CNN-u pa valjda nije važno... Šalu na stranu, o događajima u Rumuniji jednostavno nema dovoljno podataka da bi se razložno diskutovalo. Ali kada ih bude...
svet.6 vkostic,
>> ... o događajima u Rumuniji jednostavno nema dovoljno >> podataka da bi se razložno diskutovalo. Ima podataka da jos jedan Staljin u krvi gusi revolt naroda. Dovoljan razlog da se pitamo u kakvom to "civilizovanom" svetu zivimo. Mislim da bi u najmanju ruku mogli da prekinemo diplomatske odnose sa tom zemljom. Kad smo mogli sa Izraelom, zasto ne sa Rumunijom?
svet.7 sasa,
Pa, realno bi i mogli prekinuti diplomatiju sa Rumunijom. Šta bi izgubili? Malo donjeg veša koji neki ljudi švercuju! Nikad mi to neće biti jasno. žovek otvori vrata kola da ubaci šta je kupio i u tom trenutku - ode kaput i sl. Posle mesec dana, eto ti njega opet tamo.
svet.8 dejanr,
>> Mislim da bi u najmanju ruku mogli da prekinemo diplomatske >> odnose sa tom zemljom. Za mene je večna zagonetka zašto Jugoslavija održava diplomatske odnose sa Albanijom koja je verovatno (uz Severnu Koreju) najtota- litarnija država na svetu i koja nas, što je još mnogo važnije, stalno na sva usta pljuje i pokušava da nam pocepa zemlju. Zašto je toliko nezamislivo da ih pošljemo u ... i zatvorimo granicu i zašto je sa druge strane toliko teško uspostaviti odnose sa Izraelom, Južnom Korejom ili Južnoafričkom Republikom koje u poslednje vreme preživljavaju značajne promene u pozitivnom smeru i od kojih bismo, što je opet mnogo važnije, mogli da imamo i nekakve koristi. Dejan PS Što se Ruminije tiče, SKJ je privremeno prekinuo odnose sa rumunskom partijom i neće pozvati njihovu delegaciju na vanredni kongres. Eto, pokazali smo im!
svet.9 vkostic,
Prema novim vestima, Radio Moskva javlja da je u Rumuniji, u Temisvaru, poginulo 2000 ljudi. Proporcionalno prema broju stanovnika, to je daleko vise nego u Pekingu !!! Ni u Panami nije nista bolje - 1000 poginulih.
svet.10 sasa,
>> PS Što se Ruminije tiče, SKJ je privremeno prekinuo odnose sa >> rumunskom partijom i neće pozvati njihovu delegaciju na >> vanredni kongres. Eto, pokazali smo im! Ala su se dečki uzbudili zbog toga! Da je njima jesti pa i da se brinu zbog kongresa. Inače SYSOP se nije oglasio na poruku: "No, no dečki" od A.M. šta bi?
svet.11 vkostic,
>> Inače SYSOP se nije oglasio na poruku: "No, no dečki" od >> A.M. šta bi? Predlazem da tog saljivcinu sto se ulogovao u sistem ako Ante Markovic pod hitno unapredimo za jedna nivo!
svet.12 sasa,
> Predlazem da tog saljivcinu sto se ulogovao u sistem ako Ante > Markovic pod hitno unapredimo za jedna nivo! Sram te bilo Vlado, pa za to ime ide i SYSOP LEVEL (nema veze ko je stvarno pod tim.
svet.13 zzivotic,
Ne, Ante nema SYSOP nivo! Tek ako obori inflaciju na 13% možemo da razmislimo da li da dobije nivo 15. I to ćemo da aktiviramo VOTE!
svet.14 dejanr,
Slušao sam Antu večeras na TV i mislim da je održao veoma dobru konferenciju za štampu, prilično je ubedljiv što se mera tiče... Po mom mišljenju, nivo 50 mu ne gine... ako to sve bude radilo!
svet.15 dejanr,
>> Ima jos ludaka po svetu koje treba ukloniti, a ne samo Norijegu. >> Gadafija, na primer, pa onoga u Rumuniji, pa u Kini... Ludak manje! Nadam se samo da neće uspeti da pobegne!
svet.16 sasa,
>> I to ćemo da aktiviramo VOTE! Slažem se, samo, da li će VOTE biti spreman do tada? :-) P.S. Šta kažeš Dejane?
svet.17 dejanr,
>> Šta kažeš Dejane? Kažem da je ovo prvi i sasvim sigurno poslednji put da se najavi nešto što nije gotovo. Od sada, kada nešto bude, onda ćemo o njemu!
svet.18 sasa,
>> Kažem da je ovo prvi i sasvim sigurno poslednji put da se najavi > >nešto što nije gotovo. Od sada, kada nešto bude, onda ćemo >> o njemu! Eto, Dejan se malo i naljutio :-). Nemoj bre, šala je šala!
svet.19 dejanr,
>> > Ima jos ludaka po svetu koje treba ukloniti, a ne samo Norijegu. >> > Gadafija, na primer, pa onoga u Rumuniji, pa u Kini... >> Ludak manje! >> >> Nadam se samo da neće uspeti da pobegne! Nije uspeo! Inače, zanimljivo je da je žaušesku po struci bio opančar (kažu da otkad je postao car nikada nije ni privirio u neku fabriku obuće... svrbelo ga nešto). A što se njegove žene velike naučnice tiče, ona je bila nekakva bolničarka ali je posle postala doktor, inženjer, akademik, predsednik akademije, objavila hiljade naučnih radova iz hemije... Eto kako na žene blagotvorno deluje brak! Mada kad malo razmislim baš i ne deluje - eto kako je uvažena gospođa akademik završila!
svet.20 ilja,
žitao sam šta je predložio Bora Đorđević po pitanju oduzimanja ordena žaušeskuu - kaže, dobro, neka se njemu oduzme orden ali nek se oduzmu i ordeni onima koji su mu ih davali!
svet.21 vkostic,
Ovih dana prisustvujemo propasti jedne ideologije (komunisticke) i raspadu jedne imperije bazirane na toj ideologiji (Sovijetskog saveza). Takve stvari tesko prolaze u miru. Sta mislite, da li ce biti rata?
svet.22 bojt,
>> Ovih dana prisustvujemo propasti jedne ideologije (komunisticke) >> i raspadu jedne imperije bazirane na toj ideologiji (Sovijetskog >> saveza). Takve stvari tesko prolaze u miru. Sta mislite, da li >> ce biti rata? Prisustvujemo mi toj propasti već 4-5 godina. Neko radikalniji bi rekao da prisustvujemo već 70-73 godine. SSSR jednostavno mora da se raspadne jer je to najnakaradnija državna tvorevina na kugli zemaljskoj. Pitanje je samo kako i kojim tempom a da ne bude rata. Po meni, od SSSR-a (koji je uz Vojvodinu jedina država na ovom svetu koji nema svoje ime) će najverovatnije ostati Ruska Federacija, koja je ionako ogromna. Ostali će kud koji mili moji. Ako stvari budu pametno vodjene, ne verujem da će biti rata pošto ga zapad ne želi (bar tako kaže; ja mu naivan verujem).
svet.23 dejanr,
>> Ovih dana prisustvujemo propasti jedne ideologije (komunisticke) >> i raspadu jedne imperije bazirane na toj ideologiji (Sovijetskog >> saveza). Koliko čuh, Jeljcin je izabran za predsednika ruske republike. Poznato je da je on po ubeđenjima prilično liberalan i da nije baš previše na strani Gorbačova (a poznato je i da nije protivnik votke :) ). Da li to nešto menja?
svet.24 vkostic,
>> SSSR jednostavno mora da se raspadne... >> Pitanje je samo kako i kojim tempom a da ne bude rata. Problem sa raspadom SSSR-a je u tome sto je to jos uvek najmocnije vojna sila na svetu - dovoljno mocna da svet pretvori u prah i pepeo. Mene plasi da Rusi ne izgube zivce, pa naprave neko tesko sranje. A plasi me i mogucnost da vojska preuzme vlast i sprovede politiku gvozdene pesnice. To bi onda znacilo povratak na hladni rat, regionalne sukobe, itd. Jos gore, to bi ozivelo komuniste po celoj istocnoj evropi. >> Ne verujem da će biti rata pošto ga zapad ne želi. Zapad uporno (i naivno) igra na kartu Gorbacov. Pri tome ne vidi da Gorbacovu visi mac nad glavom, i to visi na trulom koncu. Kada pre ili kasnije Gorbacov bude smenjen, pitanje je da li ce Rusi nastaviti politiku razoruzanja i mira. A zapad ce tada biti VRLO slab. Bez raketa srednjeg i kratkog dometa (koje su upravo u fazi unistenja), zapadna evropa nena ama bas nikakve sanse protiv ruskih tenkova i pesadije. Sto se tice samog Gorbacova, ja mu ne dajem sanse da opstane. Etnicki sukobi, pokreti za otcepljenje, i narocito KATASTROFALNA ekonomska situacije igraju protiv njega. I jos se naso na udaru kako reformatora tako i konzervativaca, a ni vojska ga ne obozava. Ni jednima ni drugima ni trecima ne odgovara ono sto on radi. Pozdrav, V.K.
svet.25 jvalant,
>> Bez raketa srednjeg i kratkog dosega evropa nema ama bas nikakve sanse protiv ruskih tenkova i pesadije. Pa, nisu ih imali ni Afganistanci. Pozdrav, Janez
svet.26 dejanr,
>> Bez raketa srednjeg i kratkog dometa (koje su upravo u fazi >> unistenja), zapadna evropa nena ama bas nikakve sanse protiv >> ruskih tenkova i pesadije. I pored uništenja, na svetu je ostalo sasvim dovoljno raketa da se isti više puta uništi.
svet.27 bojt,
>> Sto se tice samog Gorbacova, ja mu ne dajem sanse da >> opstane. Etnicki sukobi, pokreti za otcepljenje, i >> narocito KATASTROFALNA ekonomska situacija igraju protiv >> njega. I jos se naso na udaru kako reformatora tako i >> konzervativaca, a ni vojska ga ne obozava. Ni jednima ni >> drugima ni trecima ne odgovara ono sto on radi. Jeste, samo on nije mutav. Misliš li da bi on opstao do sada da nije postavio svoje ljude na ključne pozicije u vojsci i državnoj bezbednosti. Ako je išta u toj zemlji savršeno onda je to policijski aparat, mislim onaj tajni. Vrlo je mala verovatnoća da neko u ovom trenutku "skine" Gorbačova (puč), a u nekoj legalnoj proceduri sam ubedjen da takva mogućnost za sada i ne postoji. Sve u svemu, on radi daleko sigurnije nego što je radio, na primer, Džao Ci Jang (a i nema Denga na nebu). Bye the way, komunizam na dalekom istoku je jedan od najkomičnijih (sem za one koji žive tamo :( ). Ne znam da li znate, ali u Usatvu "Demokratske" Narodne Republike Koreje je upisano da se predsednik države *odredjuje* *nasledno*. Posle "Velikog" vodje Sunga doći će njegov sin "Dragi" vodja i tako dalje. Prava dinastija sa komunizmom kao vladajućom ideologijom! Stvarno su daleeeko stigli. Ili Pol Pot koji je dosta bukvalno shvatio komunističku tezu o ukidanju klasa pa ih je dao baš bukvalno istrebiti.
svet.28 dejanr,
>> Jeste, samo on nije mutav. Misliš li da bi on opstao do sada >> da nije postavio svoje ljude na ključne pozicije u vojsci i >> državnoj bezbednosti. Pa, ni Hruščov nije bio "mutav" kad je nadživeo i nasledio staljina. I on je verovatno postavio ponekog ponegde. Pa ipak...
svet.29 dejanr,
Evo šta na BIX-u pričaju o tome (tek su počeli): ========================== tojerry/russia #401, from moneysmith, 1338 chars, Wed May 30 17:38:28 1990 There is/are comment(s) on this message. -------------------------- TITLE: Yeltsin wins it. With Boris Yeltsin elected president of the Russian SSR over the strongest opposition Gorbachev could mount politically, it would seem that things may just be shaken up even more over there. Yeltsin views Gorbachev's reforms as too little and too slow. News from Kazakhstan is that the former leader of the coal mine strikes - not a communist party member - is now the political leader out there. Armenians are raising more hell than crops this spring, and the Baltics have banded together as a collective bargaining unit diplomatically. Meanwhile Bush and Baker seem to feel that Gorbachev is the man with whom to carry on far-reaching negotiations despite the distinct lame duck look of his leadership. At best, he is point man for an unclear coalition of powers, despite his nominal vast new reach. One member of the Russian legislature that voted for Yeltsin characterized Gorbachev as a king with no subjects. Other stories are emerging about Moscow drawing back certain strategic weapons in order to be sure that they are in very safe hands and behind very safe borders. Hardly seems that Baker and Bush have a whole hell of a lot to negotiate, nor any reason to believe that much of what is agreed upon will be viewed as binding on any potential successor/successors/coalition that may emerge. ========================== tojerry/russia #402, from hvanderbilt, 608 chars, Wed May 30 18:57:20 1990 This is a comment to message 401. There is/are comment(s) on this message. -------------------------- Boris Yeltsin didn't waste any time. Today he called publicly for the Russian Republic to effectively secede from the rest of the USSR and to immediately negotiate new bilateral agreements with the other individual republics, starting with the Baltic states. He also called for the Soviet government to resign - this is the central government in Moscow, the one presided over by Mikhail Gorbachev. I've heard Yeltsin described as a windbag and a troublemaker who doesn't stand for anything in particular beyond himself. It sounds as if there's more to him than that, but exactly what remains to be seen. ========================== tojerry/russia #403, from glass, 49 chars, Wed May 30 19:03:02 1990 This is a comment to message 402. There is/are comment(s) on this message. -------------------------- Looks like the SSRs aren't U'ed anymore.... <BG> ========================== tojerry/russia #404, from hvanderbilt, 344 chars, Wed May 30 19:10:39 1990 This is a comment to message 403. There is/are comment(s) on this message. -------------------------- Yeltsin called for it, he didn't set the legal wheels in motion. But yeah, Gorbachev better not stick around the U.S. too long, or he may not have a job when he gets back. Yeltsin sounds like he's appealing to yahoo russian nationalism, and from what I hear that is a powerful force over there. I hope Comrade Boris knows what he's doing. ========================== tojerry/russia #405, from mbutler, 249 chars, Wed May 30 19:13:20 1990 This is a comment to message 404. -------------------------- Classic move, waiting 'til the Big Guy is on a world tour to float your trial balloon. If he hurries home, you gain credibility and he loses face. If he doesn't, you find out who your friends are with reduced risk, and he may *still* lose face...
svet.30 kale,
>> ... zapadna evropa nena ama bas nikakve sanse protiv ruskih >> tenkova i pesadije. Ruski vojnici su se u Avganistanu osećali kao oslobodioci i dobročinitelji tamošnjeg naroda (vojska spremala klopu i za sebe i za tamošnju sirotinju u istom kazanu). Kad bi običan Rus upao u neki grad (ili samo u seosku kuću) na Zapadu, ja mislim da bi se on totalno demoralisao. Običan Rus kupuje izlizane farmerke kao nešto jako poželjno. Ja otišo u Minhen, pa me šarenilo izludelo. Nemcima su ona kola koja su kod nas "statusna" *sasvim* obična. U radnjama svašta, i ono što nisam znao da postoji. SSSR znam samo iz priča, a to što sam čuo zvuči sirotinjski i u odnosu na nas. Najrealniji mogući razlog za zaoštravanje odnosa SSSR-SAD vidim u kretanju (bivše) DRN ka NATO. Izgleda da to kod Gorbačova može da prođe (uz malo cenkanja oko Litve, tehnologija i tako to). Da je u USA neki "Regan" možda bi bilo frke i zbog pribaltičkih republika. Rat se vodi *parama* i idealima. žak i u ratu Irak-Iran je dostignuta cena mrtvog neprijatelja od $1000000 (milion), iako su korišćeni i bojni otrovi, i iako su neki jurišali u smrt, pardon, u raj. Što se ideala socijalizma tiče, kod Rusa su davno oslabili. Oni *nama* poodavno zavide na slobodi i blagostanju. U eventualnom ratu, mislim da SSSR može da izvuče najviše pirovo nerešeno (čitaj: sve u 3 lepe () materine ). To niko normalan ne bi uradio. Doduše, nekad i nenormalni dođu na vlast. Pozdrav, Kale
svet.31 dpozaric,
>> Ovih dana prisustvujemo propasti jedne ideologije (komunisticke) >> i raspadu jedne imperije bazirane na toj ideologiji (Sovijetskog >> saveza). Takve stvari tesko prolaze u miru. Sta mislite, da li ce >> biti rata? ****** HOCE, HOCE !!! U IME NARODA (?) JA VAM TO GARANTIRAM !!! *** (Hihihi...) Drazen.
svet.32 bojt,
>> Pa, ni Hruščov nije bio "mutav" kad je nadživeo i nasledio >> staljina. I on je verovatno postavio ponekog ponegde. >> Pa ipak... Da, ali Hruščov nije imao Rat Zvezda za vratom, dok je Rat Zvezda stvorio Gorbačova i jedan je od najjačih faktora koji ga održavaju na vlasti.
svet.33 vkostic,
>> Da, ali Hruščov nije imao Rat Zvezda za vratom, dok je Rat >> Zvezda stvorio Gorbačova i jedan je od najjačih faktora koji >> ga održavaju na vlasti. To je vrlo zanimljiv stav jer je Gorbacov MNOGO popularniji na zapadu nego u sopstvenoj kuci. Uz to i Hruscov je imao svoj Rat Zvezda u obliku Kubanske raketne krize. Pozdrav, V.K.
svet.34 vkostic,
>> Najrealniji mogući razlog za zaoštravanje odnosa SSSR-SAD >> vidim u kretanju (bivše) DRN ka NATO. Da, to je tempirana bomba koja ce kad-tad eksplodirati ako se danas ne postupi razumno. Promene koje su nastale na istoku su potpuno razorile sistem besbednosti NATO-Varsavski pakt koji je ipak obezbedio Evropi 40 godina kakvog-takvog mira. Pozdrav, V.K.
svet.35 vkostic,
>> U eventualnom ratu, mislim da SSSR može da izvuče najviše >> pirovo nerešeno (čitaj: sve u 3 lepe () materine ). To niko >> normalan ne bi uradio. Doduše, nekad i nenormalni dođu na vlast. Crveno dugme je tu. Dovoljno je da ga jedan ludak pritisne, pa ode mast u propast. A ponekad je dovoljno i mnogo manje od jednog ludaka. I dva pametna su sasvim dovoljna. Pogledaj Hruscova i Kenedija. Jednog su Ameri obozavali, drugi je svoju zemlju oslobodio staljinizma. Pa opet su njih dvoje za malo izazvali nuklearni rat. Pozdrav, V.K.
svet.36 vkostic,
>> Ruski vojnici su se u Avganistanu osećali kao oslobodioci i >> dobročinitelji tamošnjeg naroda (vojska spremala klopu i za >> sebe i za tamošnju sirotinju u istom kazanu). Prvo, nisam bas siguran da su se osecali kao dobrocinitelji kada se na njih pucalo iz svih oruzja. Drugo, Rusi su u Avganistanu pocinili takva zverstva i masakre da bi im i sam Hitler pozavideo. Pozdrav, V.K.
svet.37 bojt,
>> >> Da, ali Hruščov nije imao Rat Zvezda za vratom, dok je Rat >> >> Zvezda stvorio Gorbačova i jedan je od najjačih faktora koji >> >> ga održavaju na vlasti. >> >> To je vrlo zanimljiv stav jer je Gorbacov MNOGO popularniji >> na zapadu nego u sopstvenoj kuci. Uz to i Hruscov je imao svoj >> Rat Zvezda u obliku Kubanske raketne krize. Moram da pojasnim zašto mislim da je Rat Zvezda stvorio Gorbačova, tj zašto ja smatram da je indirektno Regan stvorio Gorbačova. Naime, iz Drugog Svetskog Rata Crvena Armija je izašla kao daleko najjača vojna sila u domenu brojnosti i konvencionalnog naoružanja (a to je i danas). Nemačka je izgubila na Ruskom frontu i Rusi su praktično dobili taj rat. Kod nas nije mnogo pisano o tome, ali u kasnijim izjavama nekih državnika i obaveštajaca ima indicija da je Staljin od kraja 1944. pa do 6.8.1945. bio dosta zaokupljen mišlju da osvoji *ceo* svet. Za tu njegovu nameru pre svih su saznali engleski obaveštajci. Koliko se sećam, plan je bio da se sa jedne strane proguta Evropa a da se sa druge strane, preko Aljaske, izvrši invazija na Ameriku. Od te zamisli se ohladio kada je 6.8.1945. spoznao da Amerikanci imaju atomsku bombu. Medjutim, znajući za Staljinov naum, žerčil je insistirao kod Ajzenhauera da se Sovjetskom Savezu odmah (to je bilo u jesen 1945.) postavi ultimatum: Ili bezuslovna kapitulacija ili pečurke. Nije uspeo da ga ubedi pre svega zato što je Ajzenhauer u to vreme dosta cenio Ruse, kao i zbog toga što je raspoloženje Američkog javnog mnjenja bilo da ne treba ulaziti u nove sukobe. Elem, to je stavljeno ad acta sve do 1947 kada su Rusi ukrali atomsku bombu, a tada je već bilo kasno. Od 1947. do početka 80-ih dešavao se jedan cikličan proces koji je bio posledica Američkog sistema odbrane i *sprečavanja* nuklearnog sukoba: 1) Zahlade se odnosi, Amerikanci počnu da se naoružavaju k'o blesavi a prema SSSR-u se uvede zabrana izvoza bilo kakve više tehnologije. Bez viših tehnologija (posebno visokih) tehnologija SSSR je primoran da prilično tapka u mestu sa razvojem nuklearnog naoružanja. I tako Amerikanci steknu prednost, najčešće u raketama srednjeg i kratkog dometa. 2) Onda Rusi počnu da kukaju i onda dodje Detant (SALT x). Sklope se sporazumi o ograničenju ili smanjenju broja raketa. Rusima se za skuupeee pare prodaju tehnologije. 3) Amerikanci stoje. Koristeći dobijene tehnologije Rusi prave nove rakete i krišom ih razmeštaju gde god stignu (najviše u žehoslovačku i NDR). I tako Rusi steknu prednost, uglavnom u raketama srednjeg i kratkog dometa (u inter-kontinentalnim Amerikanci su uvek bili u prednosti - što je sigurno - sigurno je). Stvar ubrzo izadje na videlo. go to 1 E sad, pri prolazima kroz ovu petlju prosečan Amerikanac nije osećao da mu išta fali (jer su skoro sve pare ovog sveta uglavnom njihove), dok se prosečnom Rusu bukvalno otkidalo od usta. Sve to je, uz potpuno pogrešne ekonomske postulate sovjetskog društva, dovelo do permanentnog zaostajanja, pa čak i nazadovanja SSSR-a u odnosu na Zapad. Kada se početkom osamdesetih pojavio Regan sa programom "Rata Zvezda" "iskočilo" se iz petlje zato što SSSR taj program nikako nije mogao da prati tehnološki, a pogotovu ne da ga izdrži ekonomski. Kao posledica toga u vrhu SSSR je bukvalno zavladala histerična oluja koja je, potpomognuta "samrtničkim" vladanjam Andropova i žernjenka (okorelih "tvrdih" momaka) po Brežnjevljevoj smrti, izbacila jednog reformatora kao što je Gorbačov zato što je to stvarno bio *jedini* mogući izlaz u toj situaciji. I zato mislim da je Regan stvorio Gorbačova. Pozdrav, Bojan.
svet.38 dejanr,
Juče sam preneo početak diskusije na BIX-u koja je unekoliko slična ovoj našoj i koja se takođe bavi samitom super sila, trećim svetskim ratom, mogućim, raspadom SSSR-a, Jeljcinom itd. Pošto verujem da ima zainteresovanih, sledi današnji razvoj događaj na BIX-u - bojim se da ga ima dosta (jedno 30K) ali je zanimljiv! Pozdrav, Dejan PS Sorry ako u današnjim porukama sa BIX-a ponegde ima "đubreta" - danas se do tamo moralo drugim putem a na njemu nema MNP-a...
svet.39 dejanr,
========================== tojerry/russia #406, from dr_john, 147 chars, Wed May 30 20:08:02 1990 This is a comment to message 401. There are additional comments to message 401. -------------------------- I rather suspect that the potential instability of the regime may be the major topic of conversation, whether or not it's addressed that directly. ========================== tojerry/russia #407, from rhsmith, 254 chars, Wed May 30 20:11:36 1990 -------------------------- TITLE: HITTING THE FAN? Note loud noises emanating from both parties to the summit even before the opening round. Could the unification of Germany inside NATO be considered a "hare-brained scheme" when somebody gets home empty-handed? ========================== tojerry/russia #408, from dr_john, 28 chars, Wed May 30 20:12:47 1990 This is a comment to message 402. There are additional comments to message 402. -------------------------- Gawd, this sounds familiar! ========================== tojerry/russia #409, from dr_john, 157 chars, Wed May 30 20:14:18 1990 This is a comment to message 403. -------------------------- The National Anthem's gonna have to go, too: "Unbroken Union of free-born Republics, great Russia has wielded forever to stand... and all that ;-) ========================== tojerry/russia #410, from a.lane, 630 chars, Wed May 30 21:06:13 1990 This is a comment to message 404. There is/are comment(s) on this message. There are additional comments to message 404. -------------------------- Historically, and especially over the past seven decades or so, what has helped keep the USSR afloat is that "yahoo Russian nationalism." When the Germans were in danger of pulling off Barbarosa, Stalin allowed the Orthodox Church to be revived -- under strict control of course -- and it was the idea of "rodina" (homeland) instead of "partiya" (The Party) that kept a backbone in the Russian defenders. My reports are of extreme shortages in the USSR in everything. Things have never been quite so bad in decades, certainly not when compared to the height of Brezhnev's reign. Things will get better, though. Cheers... ========================== tojerry/russia #411, from a.lane, 52 chars, Wed May 30 21:06:45 1990 This is a comment to message 405. -------------------------- The name Khrushchev comes to mind in that regard... ========================== tojerry/russia #412, from athomson, 283 chars, Wed May 30 21:36:56 1990 This is a comment to message 401. -------------------------- A pick: the weapons being withdrawn aren't strategic in the usual sense of the word. Just what the Soviets call "tactical" and "operational-tactical" -- merely one to ten or twenty Hiroshimas in yield apiece. Not more than a couple of hundred WW II explosive-equivalents in all... ========================== tojerry/russia #413, from athomson, 44 chars, Wed May 30 21:39:49 1990 This is a comment to message 410. There is/are comment(s) on this message. -------------------------- how are they going to get better, and when? ========================== tojerry/russia #414, from moneysmith, 396 chars, Wed May 30 22:35:42 1990 This is a comment to message 402. -------------------------- The people who have reported that Yeltsin is just a windbag seem to be the ones that described George Bush as a wimp and Michael Dukakis as a budget balancing miracle worker, so I don't think it means much. What is probably more important that Yeltsin himself is the fact that more than 50% of the Russian parliament voted to put him in the office, and over Gorbachev's handpicked apparatchik. ========================== tojerry/russia #415, from moneysmith, 1025 chars, Wed May 30 22:45:31 1990 This is a comment to message 413. -------------------------- Things will get better in Russia when they allow private property for locals and outside investors alike. They've wasted most of this century finding out that the locals are tired of working for nothing, and there's no way at all to attract outside investment if they can get nothing from it. Contrast to East Germany, where the old communist factories are being sold off to corporations to come in, remodel, create jobs, and take home some profits in convertible currency. GM bought a Wartburg factory from which it plans to send 150,000 Opels per year. Philip Morris bought a cigarette factory to produce the six most smoked brands. GE bought a light bulb plant down in Hungary that will have better than a 40% market share in the EC. Outside of Dick Gephardt, who wants to put 300 million Soviets on the American welfare rolls, there is no support for US aid to the USSR from government, nor should there be. Private sector investment is another thing, but that means private ownership of the means of production. ========================== tojerry/russia #416, from jndunlap, 39 chars, Wed May 30 23:25:19 1990 -------------------------- TITLE: Where is Mr. Borkovsky? - arky ========================== tojerry/russia #417, from rdobbins, 293 chars, Wed May 30 23:29:17 1990 This is a comment to message 404. There is/are comment(s) on this message. There are additional comments to message 404. -------------------------- Me, too. After all, the KGB controls the _warheads_ . . . I think that Gorbachev _had_ to disown Yeltsin in order to keep his job. Gorbachev will disagree with Yeltsin, but I think that deep down inside he supports Comrade Boris, and that he will tacitly manoeuvre to Yeltsin's advantage. ========================== tojerry/russia #418, from david42, 726 chars, Thu May 31 00:44:58 1990 There is/are comment(s) on this message. -------------------------- TITLE: Pivot Points In my opinion we are now entering the critical phase re' the USSR. There is a real danger of wide swings based on trivial events. (Don't forget how quickly things happened in China last year). I sincerely hope things turn out alright. I personally feel that the US should do anything and everything possible to assist the Soviet Union economically. We helped Germany and Japan at the end of World War II - it made all the difference in the years to come. The Soviet Union has lost a war - with itself. If we don't help in significant and posit-ive ways, we pave the way for another hitler-type in the Soviet Union. "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing" David M. ========================== tojerry/russia #419, from jfiegel, 70 chars, Thu May 31 01:57:02 1990 This is a comment to message 418. There is/are comment(s) on this message. There are additional comments to message 418. -------------------------- We helped Japan and Germany after we had disarmed them. John ========================== tojerry/russia #420, from a.lane, 1133 chars, Thu May 31 02:42:24 1990 This is a comment to message 418. There are additional comments to message 418. -------------------------- Interestingly enough, the US has been doing a great deal for the USSR economically over the past several decades. The best thing that we could do is insist on divestiture of state-owned operations into private hands. Although folks don't like to dwell on this, the situation in the USSR is basically that of chickens coming home to roost. Central planning doesn't work. There's a joke I remember from my time over there. Two men are walking down the road and one turns to the other and says, "Gee, you know, it must be true, what they say about the Soviet Union. Truly it is the richest nation on the planet." His buddy's jaw drops and he replies, "What! Are you nuts? What makes you think that?" "Well," says the first, "everyone's been stealing from the State since the Revolution, and there's still something left to steal!" The problem is, that now there's almost nothing left. Environmentally, the USSR is a shambles. Industrially and agriculturally, it is medieval. Every year factory workers are sent to farms to harvest potatoes. The rich, the nomenklatura, get richer, everyone else, poorer. Cheers... ========================== tojerry/russia #421, from jpistritto, 596 chars, Thu May 31 03:08:25 1990 This is a comment to message 418. There is/are comment(s) on this message. There are additional comments to message 418. -------------------------- Critical difference: Japan and Germany surrendered before getting help. If the Soviet Union wants Marshall-Plan style aid, it better go a bit farther before expecting it. I can think of a few minimum items: 1) Evacuate East Germany, and allow it to union with the West, as part of the Nato Joint Military Command 2) Stop blockading the Baltics, and get the interior ministry troops out. Allow russian settlers to return to the RSFR. 3) Dismantle EVERY LAST ONE of those SS-18s (and SS-26s), that bloody radar at Krasnoyarsk (sp?) and even then, it probably isn't a good idea... ========================== tojerry/russia #422, from rsimonsen, 52 chars, Thu May 31 03:37:40 1990 This is a comment to message 404. There are additional comments to message 404. -------------------------- Perhaps the Russian version of Populism ? --Redmond [Nastavak sledi]
svet.40 dejanr,
========================== tojerry/russia #423, from moneysmith, 1211 chars, Thu May 31 07:15:52 1990 This is a comment to message 417. There is/are comment(s) on this message. -------------------------- I don't know about the "secret admiration" angle, but I think Yeltsin's elevation to Russian president has prevented that civil war a lot of people have worried about. That would have been a very great danger if Yeltsin had *not* been able to achieve office. The present situation is a classic case of "LBJ's Theorem" - in slightly sanitized version, better to have the guy inside the tent spitting out than outside the tent spitting in. Now Yeltsin can't be completely at odds with the government because he is an integral and powerful player in the government, and must bear some of the pressure for solutions and do some placating of irate public sentiment while some sort of process goes forward. Yeltsin's bargain for votes included the idea of working within a constructive coalition. I'm not sure what that's going to look like, but that's where the power battle will be thrashed out. Neither Gorbachev nor Yeltsin gains anything by crying for blood in the streets of Moscow, and both have a vested interest in true civilian government, not a shift to some paramilitary action by the KGB. The trouble is economic, not just ideological, though the ideology gets in the way of economic solutions. ========================== tojerry/russia #424, from moneysmith, 1685 chars, Thu May 31 07:30:55 1990 This is a comment to message 418. There is/are comment(s) on this message. -------------------------- Tienanmen Square was a showdown between masses of oppressed street people and the forces of government. The USSR will democratize, and has taken major strides down that path already, and will also continue to decommunize the economy. The United States government absolutely should *NOT* "...do anything and everything possible to assist the Soviet Union economically." Our economic assistance to Japan is a strained parallel at best; Japan first surrendered unconditionally, completely demilitarized under US supervision, was occupied by the US military, and Douglas MacArthur wrote them a brand new constitution, drafted and enforced their economic and industrial plans, and dictated who should and should not be in either governmental or industrial positions of power. The USSR is not going to allow any of that, so we absolutely should not throw government money at them out of our own deficit-ridden budget. Even the famous "lifetime jobs" of Japanese corporations were not an invention of Japanese culture or convention - Doug MacArthur imposed that on them as law to limit the powers and prerogatives of powerful Japanese industrialists and employers. Akio Morita of Sony said that the first great surprise to him when he was opening Sony America was finding out that US employers actually had the right to hire and fire employees. The Soviet Union is a reputed superpower. It sits astride eleven time zones of resources that need only support 300 million people. If it drops its imperialism and deals only with Russia, it still has 2/3rds of the territory and only half the population, and they can darned well feed themselves without going on welfare from the West. ========================== tojerry/russia #425, from gregd, 131 chars, Thu May 31 09:43:02 1990 This is a comment to message 423. There is/are comment(s) on this message. -------------------------- Ronald Reagan ran against the gov't in 1984. I don't think making Yeltsin part of the gov't will tone him down at all. ---Greg ========================== tojerry/russia #426, from bwebster, 420 chars, Thu May 31 11:04:43 1990 This is a comment to message 404. There is/are comment(s) on this message. -------------------------- >...better not stick around the US too long... Today's paper quoted Yeltsin as saying that he'd like the changes to be in effect before Gorbachev gets back from the USA. Also saw a report somewhere (WSJ?) that large numbers of native Russians are emigrating from the outlying republics back into mother Russia. I recall saying late last year that the end of 1990 would see a united Germany and a Soviet federation.... ========================== tojerry/russia #427, from bwebster, 186 chars, Thu May 31 11:08:25 1990 This is a comment to message 421. There is/are comment(s) on this message. -------------------------- Actually, I think the real solution (*especially* now that Yeltsin is Pres of Russia) is to invite Russia (and any other Soviet republics) to join NATO if certain conditions are met.... ========================== tojerry/russia #428, from hga, 366 chars, Thu May 31 12:03:13 1990 This is a comment to message 424. There is/are comment(s) on this message. There are additional comments to message 424. -------------------------- Time frame problem: Tienanmen Square happened after the CPC reversed liberalization; if someone tries the same in the USSR, who knows what will happen, besides the obvious significant increase in violence? Gorby has taken an interesting tack by doing the opposite of what Deng et. al. did in pushing political reform before economic, and this is pretty significant. ========================== tojerry/russia #429, from moneysmith, 477 chars, Thu May 31 12:47:40 1990 This is a comment to message 425. -------------------------- No, Yeltsin won't tone down. Neither will he ever declare a civil wa. That's the point. Despite media propaganda to the effect that we need to deal with Gorbachev lest some nasty hardliner make things worse, we are seeing that Gorbachev *is* the nasty hardline communist. The only folks waiting to take over are the Russians, Lithuanians, and other such people. If they can do so within the system, then Gorbachev need not become the cause of either civil or foreign war. ========================== tojerry/russia #430, from moneysmith, 92 chars, Thu May 31 12:49:05 1990 This is a comment to message 426. There are additional comments to message 426. -------------------------- Economically, a federation will work better than a perpetuation of communism ever could. ========================== tojerry/russia #431, from moneysmith, 96 chars, Thu May 31 12:50:06 1990 This is a comment to message 427. -------------------------- >...if certain conditions are met... Yeah, no kidding. I'd love to see *those* negotiations. ========================== tojerry/russia #432, from david42, 261 chars, Thu May 31 12:52:30 1990 This is a comment to message 419. There is/are comment(s) on this message. -------------------------- It could be argued that the USSR has, for all practical purposes, ceased hostilities. But, your point is well taken. I just don't want a "wait and see attitude" play into the hands of those that could lead the USSR back towards war and hostilities. David M. ========================== tojerry/russia #433, from moneysmith, 809 chars, Thu May 31 12:57:47 1990 This is a comment to message 428. There is/are comment(s) on this message. -------------------------- Trying to stretch for a parallel between Tienanmen Square and Moscow is simply not well founded. The Chinese are far more homogeneous. The USSR is composed of about 100 separate nationalities and 15 legally separate republics. Boris Yeltsin isn't some street hippie - he was just elected President of Russia by a majority of the legislature of the Russian republic, which gives him the official legal status, not to mention political support, that was never enjoyed by anyone in Tienanmen Square. It's like trying to draw a comparison between Tom Hayden and John F. Kennedy - who was elected by an even slimmer majority than Yeltsin, by the way. Yeltsin isn't some lone radical. He has the backing of the majority of the Russian legislature. Hell, George Bush doesn't have that in the United States. ========================== tojerry/russia #434, from david42, 1143 chars, Thu May 31 13:03:13 1990 This is a comment to message 424. There is/are comment(s) on this message. -------------------------- Nonetheless, without economic aid commensurate with the size of the Soviet Union, a collapse can occur that leads to a democratically chosen "Leader". World War II could have been prevented if proper efforst were made 10 years before the outbreak of WWII. Or, have we learned nothing. Considering we were not in a shooting war with the USSR, they have done the closest thing to surrender I have ever seen. Perhaps the significance of what has happened in Eastern Europe has escaped everyone. This would be like California, Washington and Oregon succeeding from the Union and Bush saying "okay". BTW, I did not say government aid or money. I said economic aid. The USA is very strong due to all the foreign investment along with other factors. Aid to the USSR should be in the form of practical trade laws and let free enterprise - the world over - do the job. Japan has a LOT of free cash, the USA should work politically to get the USSR to allow viable investment. I am not big on spending government money. Let the government lay down paths, let free enterprise do the investing. This way, bad investments will be minimized. David M. ========================== tojerry/russia #435, from hvanderbilt, 179 chars, Thu May 31 13:03:41 1990 This is a comment to message 426. There is/are comment(s) on this message. -------------------------- If I were an ethnic Russian in one of the outlying republics, especially the moslem ones, I'd be thinking very hard about getting back to mother Russia while the getting is good. [Nastavak sledi]
svet.41 dejanr,
========================== tojerry/russia #436, from moneysmith, 920 chars, Thu May 31 13:05:57 1990 This is a comment to message 432. There is/are comment(s) on this message. -------------------------- >...lead the USSR back toward war and hostilities. Against whom, and paid for with what? Waged by whom, and supported logistically by what workforce? The armies of the East and West want simply to go home and live peaceful lives. Americans didn't enjoy Vietnam, the Reds tired of Afghanistan, and NATO and the Warsaw Pact nations want to settle in, do business, and get rich. The trend of present and future summits is to act as bomb disposal squads and settle on a global police function to keep bad neighborhoods like Iraq and Libya from messing things up. The one "problem" Gorbachev can't overcome is that nobody actually wants to blow up the USSR and the citizens there know it. That makes all the sacrifice pointless and abusive. As Soviet expansionism wanes, enthusiasm in the West for military action and advantage also wanes. It's going to move on to matters of business, economics, and diplomacy. ========================== tojerry/russia #437, from david42, 67 chars, Thu May 31 13:06:03 1990 This is a comment to message 433. There is/are comment(s) on this message. -------------------------- Just for the record, the Chinese are not that homogeneous, either. ========================== tojerry/russia #438, from david42, 629 chars, Thu May 31 13:13:23 1990 This is a comment to message 436. There is/are comment(s) on this message. There are additional comments to message 436. -------------------------- Never underestimate the power of "an inspired leader" to motivate people in ways that create real problems. One scenerio is a cival war in the USSR. Even one major nuclear explosion from one of the big dirty bombs could do real global damage. You have to remember that as few as 1000 people, defending their "homeland" in the USSR, could set off a chaotic condition that could lead to major damage caused by the theft (from the KGB) of a nuclear weapon and its use. I, for one, am not as confident in the failsafe characteristics of Soviet tactical and stragetic nuclear weapons as I am in the USA's failsafe systems. ========================== tojerry/russia #439, from moneysmith, 1372 chars, Thu May 31 13:15:40 1990 This is a comment to message 434. There is/are comment(s) on this message. There are additional comments to message 434. -------------------------- Germany had been stripped of all sorts of productive capacity at Versailles and reparations were being demanded besides, so Hitler looked very attractive when he initially appeared as a neo-nationalist and, lest we forget, an anti-communist, since even in the great depression, Germans feared the one thing that could make things worse. The USSR, on the other hand, controls 11 time zones of property and assets. the only reason they are not rich is mismanagament. The only war reparations they pay are of the sort that they have been paying in advance to build up massive agressive weaponry. They can stop paying that price any time they want to. As to financial aid, all they have to do is join the rest of the world in doing business with profitable corporations. Point one, however, is that the USSR must disarm. There is no reasonable alternative. The only reason Gorbachev backed off is lack of funds, and we can't afford to enrich the USSR while it still has 10,000 nukes aimed at the rest of the world and is trying to raise cash to upgrade a bunch of ICBMs. If they are crazy enough to let their entire country crash because they would rather build bombs, there's nothing we can or should do except to let them know how very crazy that path is. But any sort of trade or aid that passes to them at the point of a gun is not commerce - it is extortion. ========================== tojerry/russia #440, from moneysmith, 483 chars, Thu May 31 13:18:22 1990 This is a comment to message 435. -------------------------- Indeed. The Russian republic has the oil, the gas, the gold, and virtually the entire industrial capacity of the country. Kazakhstan has coal, which gives them a good position as a trading partner. The Ukraine was always historically a heck of a breadbasket and could be again, which gives them an economic role. Also a market where post-Chernobyl produce can still find buyers. But Mother Russia hold all the high cards in any commonwealth or confederation that might emerge. ========================== tojerry/russia #441, from moneysmith, 459 chars, Thu May 31 13:21:45 1990 This is a comment to message 437. -------------------------- Much more so than the USSR, and also much more so in terms of legal structure. The Soviet constitution, now that it is actually being treated as law rather than mere show, has been the basis for all of the secession talk. The three Baltic republics were glommed under the Hitler-Stalin pact that even Gorbachev has admitted to being illegal, and several individual seats are held in the UN by soviet republics. Communist China is a very different place. ========================== tojerry/russia #442, from moneysmith, 80 chars, Thu May 31 13:22:36 1990 This is a comment to message 438. There are additional comments to message 438. -------------------------- Kind of gives Gorbachev a very good reason to dismantle the nukes, doesn't it? ========================== tojerry/russia #443, from a.lane, 236 chars, Thu May 31 13:31:40 1990 This is a comment to message 434. There is/are comment(s) on this message. -------------------------- I am reminded of a saying that goes something like: "It is noble to try to save a drowning man. It is stupid to continue to do so if the man does not let go of his anvil!" Economic aid to the USSR will help only the nomenklatura. ========================== tojerry/russia #444, from a.lane, 139 chars, Thu May 31 13:33:11 1990 This is a comment to message 438. There is/are comment(s) on this message. -------------------------- ...major global damage? Hell, it wouldn't be picnic for folks around ground zero, but how do you figure major global damage? Cheers... ========================== tojerry/russia #445, from david42, 1558 chars, Thu May 31 13:35:49 1990 This is a comment to message 439. There is/are comment(s) on this message. -------------------------- Of course the USSR must disarm - that will take time. The European Economic community did not ask England to disarm when Engalnd joined. Why? Europe did not fear an English attack any more than the USA fears an attack from, say, France. As the USSR moves towards what we consider normal, disarming will occur. Gorbachev wants very clearly to disarm - has lots of reasons to want it. One of his problems with Germany re-unified is that this gives support to politcal elements in the USSR that want continued defense growth - to protect against Germany (instead of the USA). He has a better chance of succeeding in disarming if he doesn't allow a potential new (old?) enemy on his border. Remember, the USSR still smarts from their perception that the USA did too little, too late, in WWII to help them fight Germany. They may even be right on this point. Look at a Societ hardliners point of view. "Gorbachev wants me to reduce Soviet defense abilites while allowing a unified Germany. If Germany gets another dictator and attacks (and we have few nuclear weapons) then here is WWII all over again. And, we are expecting military support from the USA? Let's see, they have been our enemy for 40 years and during WWII they helped us after we were virtually destroyed. Gorbachev, who's side are you on?" No, I think the ball is in the USA's court to assist in promoting the success of Soviet reform. I don't want to give support to Soviet hardliners by inaction. BTW, this does not mean we fall all over ourselves ala "The Mouse That Roared" ========================== tojerry/russia #446, from david42, 70 chars, Thu May 31 13:37:28 1990 This is a comment to message 444. -------------------------- One of those big, dirty bombs will make Chernoble look like a breeze. ========================== tojerry/russia #447, from moneysmith, 537 chars, Thu May 31 13:37:54 1990 This is a comment to message 443. -------------------------- >...nomenklatura... The "surprise" is going to be that some of those same characters will be the ones to get rich anyway. It takes a great deal of guile and wile to survive and even rise in the rabbit warrens and briar patches of Kremlin politics, and some of those people are going to find business to be a virtual snap by comparison. Only the Marxist True Believers will find themselves to be obsolete and unemployable, but even they will probably find niches of one sort or another - possibly teaching aerobics in Santa Monica. ========================== tojerry/russia #449, from moneysmith, 1264 chars, Thu May 31 13:46:58 1990 This is a comment to message 445. -------------------------- The Soviets have studied a rather peculiar reading of the history of WWII. The massive losses had a couple of explanations. Their rotten economy did a poor job even then of providing food and medicine, and Hitler's blitz was in full cry well in advance of U.S. ability to wage war. Even with regard to resupply, the Murmansk run was the deadliest shipping lane going. Moreover, Stalin and Zhukov didn't intend to merely defend, which would have allowed lower casualty rates. They intended to overrun as much of Europe as possible while driving the Nazis back, and that was a brutal, bloody business. It was also a land war between massed armies with modern enough weapons to kill on a then-unprecedented scale. If Pearl Harbor hadn't been bombed, American isolationists might have delayed US entry into the war far longer, and even then, many wanted to focus on the Pacific instead of Europe. That, by the way, is one of the reasons Bush and the State Department want NATO to remain as an active force in some fashion. If the US ever absents itself from Europe, there is no telling how much the old isolationism could seep back in. Even "tiny" actions like Grenada and Panama have caused firestorms of indignation in the press about "another Vietnam." ========================== tojerry/russia #450, from jdow, 293 chars, Thu May 31 15:58:39 1990 This is a comment to message 436. -------------------------- Nobody? I have a strong suspicion that many of these breakawy republics and former satellites would at this time dearly LOVE to see Moscow and environs flattened ever so gruesomely. The Russians have trashed nearly everything they have touched with pollution and scorched Earth pullouts.
svet.42 dejanr,
>> Medjutim, znajući za Staljinov naum, žerčil je insistirao >> kod Ajzenhauera da se Sovjetskom Savezu odmah (to je bilo >> u jesen 1945.) postavi ultimatum: Ili bezuslovna kapitulacija >> ili pečurke. Šta li bi bilo da je taj ultimatum stvarno i postavljen i da se prema tome i ponašalo? Teško da bi ijedna zemlja (čak i da nije iscrpljena ratom) mogla da izdrži atomski napad - znači li to da bi kapitulirali? Kakav bi onda svet bio?
svet.43 dejanr,
Evo današnje porcije "propasti sveta" sa BIX-a. Zipovano - dosadilo mi da skraćujem redove. Mislim da ću častiti kad pređemo na novi SEZAM i redove od 80 znakova. russia.zip
svet.44 kale,
>> Prvo, nisam bas siguran da su se osecali kao dobrocinitelji kada se >> na njih pucalo iz svih oruzja. U toj zemlji još uvek postoje dve suprotstavljene strane. Da je vlast zavisila isključivo od Rusa, i da su svi bili protiv nje, nestala bi zajedno sa Rusima. Represiju je vršila i druga strana, bilo je zabranjeno uzimati klopu od Rusa (smrtna kazna). Tako su ruski vojnici mogli da veruju u ono što im se priča (da pružaju pomoć bratskom narodu) ili da sumnjaju u to. Kada bi kojim slučajem okupirali neku zapadnu zemlju, siguran sam da bi vrlo brzo počeli da se osećaju kao varvari, jer bi bilo sasvim očigledno da oni tamo ne mogu ništa da poprave. >> Drugo, Rusi su u Avganistanu pocinili takva zverstva i masakre da bi >> im i sam Hitler pozavideo. Da nisi preterao? Pozdrav, Kale
svet.45 vkostic,
>> Kada bi kojim slučajem okupirali neku zapadnu zemlju, >> siguran sam da bi vrlo brzo počeli da se osećaju kao varvari... Pa varvari su par puta opljackali Rim, a sjaj, kulturtura i bogatstvo tog grada ih ni malo nije sprecilo u nameri. >> >> Drugo, Rusi su u Avganistanu pocinili takva zverstva i >> >> masakre da bi im i sam Hitler pozavideo. >> >> Da nisi preterao? Nisam, ako je verovati zapadnim izvorima - a ja im verujem. Pozdrav, V.K.
svet.46 vkostic,
>> ....... >> ....... >> I zato mislim da je Regan stvorio Gorbačova. Da, potpuno se slazem sa tvojim rezonovanjem. I sami Ameri ceo proces sadasnjeg razoruznja pripisuju tvrdoj politici Regana. Pozdrav, V.K.
svet.47 balinda,
:: Pa varvari su par puta opljackali Rim, a sjaj, kulturtura i :: bogatstvo tog grada ih ni malo nije sprecilo u nameri. Kada je Hitler morao da se povuče iz Pariza, naredio je glavno- komandujućem da poruši *sve* pariske mostove iz (nekakvih?) vojnih razloga. Uopšte ne sumnjam da bi toga dana (nedelje?) to nešto i značilo ali (na sreću) odgovorni nemački komandant nije to učinio (što se onda moglo oceniti samo kao izdaja). Zašto? Zato što je kao mlad studirao u Parizu i čitava fašistička ideologija, a ni realna opasnost po sopstveni život, nije mogla da ga natera da učini takav varvarski gest. Tako su spašena 22 (!) pariska mosta a ne znam ima li negde spomenika jednoj ovakvoj hrabrosti?
svet.48 kale,
>> >> Kada bi kojim slučajem okupirali neku zapadnu zemlju, >> >> siguran sam da bi vrlo brzo počeli da se osećaju kao >> >> varvari... >> Pa varvari su par puta opljackali Rim, a sjaj, kulturtura i >> bogatstvo tog grada ih ni malo nije sprecilo u nameri. Postoji *ogromna* razlika između varvara i sovjetskih vojnika. Varvari su od rođenja učili da je način da se dokaže junaštvo i superiornost ubijanje, pljačka, silovanje... Ruskom vojniku je od rođenja tuvljeno u glavu da živi u demokratskom i naprednom društvu, koje svojim članovima pruža najviše što jedno društvo može pružiti. Ako taj vojnik treba da interveniše negde van SSSR objasne mu da to treba da se uradi da bi i drugima bilo isto tako dobro kao i njemu (to, uostalom, tako misli i Amer kad ide u rat). Dakle, varvar dođe, popali, popljačka itd i ponosi se time. A šta će Rus? Najprirodnije bi bilo da poželi da se vrati kući i pobije one koji su mu onemogućili da živi k'o čovek. >> >> >> Drugo, Rusi su u Avganistanu pocinili takva zverstva i >> >> >> masakre da bi im i sam Hitler pozavideo. >> >> Da nisi preterao? >> Nisam, ako je verovati zapadnim izvorima - a ja im verujem. Ovog puta ja im ne verujem. Verujem da je tu i tamo bio poneki masakr (i jedan je previše, naravno, ali kad već poredimo), a Hitler je *sistematski* uništavao narode po logorima. Imaš li možda podatke o broju poginulih u Avganistanu? Pozdrav, Kale PS Promašio si temu, odgovor je trebao u PROPAST SVETA. PPS Bilo bi lepo da SysOp obe poruke prebaci tamo.
svet.49 dejanr,
>> PS Promašio si temu, odgovor je trebao u PROPAST SVETA. >> PPS Bilo bi lepo da SysOp obe poruke prebaci tamo. Bilo je lepo!
svet.50 dejanr,
Evo i dalje polemike sa BIX-a - uključio se i jerryp, Jerry Pournelle. russia2.zip
svet.51 balinda,
:: Promene koje su nastale na istoku su potpuno :: razorile sistem besbednosti NATO-Varsavski pakt koji je ipak :: obezbedio Evropi 40 godina kakvog-takvog mira. Nuklearno naoružanje i "ravnoteža straha" zaista su obezbedile *svetski* mir. Dokaz za to su i (*samo*) unutrašnje promene u nizu iole ozbiljnih zemalja. Za neozbiljne još uvek su moguće vojne intervencije (Liban, Avganistan, Grenada, Panama itd.) Međutim, (može biti da sam naivni optimista) ne vidim zašto se ne bi našao novi oblik svetske ravnoteže? Ovako ili onako ne verujem da ikome pada na pamet da poseže za proverom bojeve gotovosti čak i praktično nepostojećeg Varšavskog pakta? Pogotovo što se on sam raspada. U velikoj meri svetski sukob se odavno pomerio ka ekenomskom polju a tu se u doglednoj bodućnosti ne nalazi SSSR. Zato USA više zanima Japan, ujedinjena Nemačka ili Evropa 92. žak se ide toliko daleko da se sporazum sa SSSRom gleda kao na ulaganje u budućnost protiv mnogo opasnijih "neprijatelja".
svet.52 balinda,
:: Uz to i Hruscov je imao svoj Rat Zvezda u :: obliku Kubanske raketne krize. Ipak bih rekao da je situacija mnogo jasnija sada nego u doba Hruščova. Naime, onda nije bio tako izgledan brzi propast planske privrede i totalitarnog režima. Ne treba zaboraviti tadašnju prednost SSSRa u istraživanju svemira (npr. Gagarin), zatim niz oslobodilačkih pokreta u raznoraznim kolonijama koje su još uvek listom tražile neke ako ne socijalističke onda makar socijalne koncepcije. Kasnije to ni najzaostalijim crncima nije padalo na pamet. Druga stvar je što je "otišao" Staljin i verovalo se da će SSSR krenuti krupnijim korakom, pa se u USA tek završavao monstruozni "lov na veštice" itd. Neki kompjuterski stručnjaci vole ga gledaju da je razvoj mikro- procesora presudno uticao na zaostajanje SSSRa. O tome sigurno ima mnogo kompetentnijih na Sezamu od mene. Navodno je tek tu presudno uticalo tržišno razmišljanje i velike serije. Dok je Amerikancima bilo isplativo da razvijaju neku tehnologiju (pa i kompjutersku) da bi je ugradili u električni šporet, Rusi su morali da prave pojedine primerke da bi ih ugrađivali na interkontinentalne projektile. Uz ogoman zaostatak u tehnologiji iz istih razloga, bilo je nemoguće i očekivati da se takva neravnopravna trka može večito izdržati! Ima čak mišljenja da je žestoka trka u naoružanju jedini cilj imala da Rusima izbije što više para sa dvostrukim efektom: da smanji fondove za razvoj i da izazove što veće nezadovoljstvo životom običnog građanina. Doprinos Regana i nije toliko presudan jer je "bitka" rešena mnogo ranije. Regan je možda samo to ubrzao i tome trebaju da se više raduju Rusi. Kažu da razvitak komjuterske tehnologije ide po eksponencijalnom zakonu, pa (ako je to tačno?) onaj ko počne da zaostaje, nominalno zaostaje sve više! Dakle, razumna koncepcija nema alternative nego da iznedri jednog Gorbačova!
svet.53 balinda,
:: I pored uništenja, na svetu je ostalo sasvim dovoljno raketa :: da se isti više puta uništi. Da! Ali i dovoljno hemijskog, biološkog i svakog drugog sredstva i to u mnogo većem broju zemalja mimo "velesila". Ako bi se neka i slabije razvijena zemlja zainatila da uništi svet (i sebe naravno) vrlo teško bi je u tome sprečili. Pa čak i kad bi uspeli posledice bi bile stravične. :( Zato je interesantno i u samom pokretanju teme PROPAST SVETA da se na to gleda sa stanovišta vremena u kome šivimo, dakle propast sveta kao nuklearna katastrofa. Sećam se da sam svojevremeno pročitao jedno mišljenje o postanku sveta kome se sa stanovišta logike malo šta može zameriti. Naime, postavljena je sumnja u teoriju "velikog praska" sa argumentom da je čovek uvek u svojoj istoriji nalazio analogiju sa svojom savremenošću. Tako je teorija "velikog praska" i nastala u doba intezivnog korišćenja eksplozivnih materijala kao što je npr. dinamit. Po toj analogiji, postavljam sam sebi pitanje: Zašto bi propast sveta bio nuklearna katastrofa? Naizad, pošto smo još uvek debelo u hrišćanstvu, zašto bi PROPAST SVETA značilo bilo kakvo *naglo* fizičko uništenje? Može li se do propasti sveta doći kao što se gasi žižak ili to nije dovoljno zanimljivo za današnji Rambo stil? Pošto je već bilo govora o ovome u temi GDE SMO, samo da postavim pitanje šta podrazumevamo pod "propašću sveta". Ako je samo reč o propasti ove civilizacije, biće da u tome ima nekakve "kosmičke pravde". Naime, uz pretpostavku da se međusobno uništimo nuklearnim oružjem, nikome neće biti cilj da iskoreni sva živa stvorenja. Pitanje je čak da li bi se i imalo vremena za tako nešto? Mnogo je verovatnija mogućnost da bi negde ostali ne samo nekakvi oblici života nego verovatno i neki ljudi. Zašto sam pominjao "kosmičku pravdu"? Zato što bi proporcija "krivice" za ovu civilizaciju (ako bi dozvolila takvu propast?) bila obrnuto proporcionalna sa šansama da se takva sudbina izbegne. Verovatno bi neka plemena, u debelim džepovima Afrike, imale realne šanse da prežive (ako ne svi onda makar neki?) a oni zaista ne snose nikakvu odgovornost za jednu takvu katastrofu.
svet.54 balinda,
:: Od te zamisli se ohladio kada je :: 6.8.1945. spoznao da Amerikanci imaju atomsku bombu. Medjutim, :: znajući za Staljinov naum, žerčil je insistirao kod Ajzenhauera :: da se Sovjetskom Savezu odmah (to je bilo u jesen 1945.) postavi :: ultimatum: Ili bezuslovna kapitulacija ili pečurke. Amerikanci su iz Nemačke "pokupili" ljude koji su na razvoju nuklearnog oružja radili i vrlo brzo udaraju "glazuru" na svoj već dobro razvijen projekat. Rusi kradu planove ali za njihovo razumevanje treba više vremena. Prva nuklearna proba izvedena je 16. jula 1945. Kakva su to srećna vremena bila kad Staljin za to nije znao? :) Međutim, mene kopka jedan detalj. Potsdamska konferencija je bila zakazana baš za taj datum!!? Sada nastupa najinteresantniji trenutak! Ova konferencija, na kojoj je i odlučena sudbina posleratnog sveta, se odlaže za jedan (!) dan zbog bolesti Staljina (!?). Posebni emisar stiže sa podacima o uspešnoj nuklearnoj probi i Truman može mnogo bolje da pregovara. Staljin (izgleda zna) ali ne shavata značaj ili bezočno glumi (što ne bi bilo prvi put) i ništa od očekivane prednosti. Staljin ostaje mrtav hladan i nagovešteno nuklearno oružje kao psihološki efekat gubi svoju snagu. :: Elem, to je stavljeno ad acta sve do 1947 kada su Rusi ukrali :: atomsku bombu, a tada je već bilo kasno. Može biti da je to proruska propaganda, ali su Rusi (navodno?) kasnili sa svojom bombom svega 6 meseci od Hirošime? U ondašnjoj situaciji ko je mogao/smeo da reskira da li je Rusi već nemaju?
svet.55 balinda,
:: A ponekad je dovoljno i mnogo manje od jednog ludaka. I dva :: pametna su sasvim dovoljna. Pogledaj Hruscova i Kenedija. Jednog :: su Ameri obozavali, drugi je svoju zemlju oslobodio staljinizma. :: Pa opet su njih dvoje za malo izazvali nuklearni rat. E tu je bilo zaista gusto! Mislim da nikada nije bilo izglednija "PROPAST SVETA" nego tada. Sada je (po meni) ta opasnost najmanja od kada postoji nuklearno oružje. (?)
svet.56 vkostic,
>> >> >> >> Drugo, Rusi su u Avganistanu pocinili takva zverstva i >> >> >> >> masakre da bi im i sam Hitler pozavideo. >> >> >> >> Da nisi preterao? >> >> >> Nisam, ako je verovati zapadnim izvorima - a ja im verujem. >> >> Ovog puta ja im ne verujem. Verujem da je tu i tamo bio >> poneki masakr (i jedan je previše, naravno, ali kad već >> poredimo), a Hitler je *sistematski* uništavao narode po >> logorima. Imaš li možda podatke o broju poginulih u Avganistanu? Konkretne podatke nemam, ali evo jednog primera: Ulete Rusi u neko selo. Svo musko stanovnistvo se sakrije u podzemne kanala za navodnjavanje da bi izbeglo nasilnu regrutaciju za Avganistansku marionetsku vojsku. Rusi onda u te kanale naliju neku zapaljivu tecnost i bace sibicu. Takve masakre su potvrdili pripadnici raznih organizacija (uglavnom humanitarnih) koji su se tu zatekli posle dogadjaja. Pozdrav, V.K.
svet.57 vkostic,
>> Ovako ili onako ne verujem da ikome pada na pamet da poseže za >> proverom bojeve gotovosti čak i praktično nepostojećeg >> Varšavskog pakta? Pogotovo što se on sam raspada. Ne raspada se samo Varsavski pakt, neko i Sovjetski savez - u tome ja vidim najveci problem. Kao sto sam vec ranije rekao, ako Rusima pukne film, moze svasta da bude... :( Pozdrav, V.K.
svet.58 vkostic,
>> Samo da postavim pitanje šta podrazumevamo >> pod "propašću sveta"? Za mene je propast sveta ako ja propadnem. :) :) :) Dakle, dalje nuklearne projektije od mene! :) :) :) Pozdrav, V.K.
svet.59 bojt,
>> >> Elem, to je stavljeno ad acta sve do 1947 kada su Rusi ukrali >> >> atomsku bombu, a tada je već bilo kasno. >> >> Može biti da je to proruska propaganda, ali su Rusi (navodno?) >> kasnili sa svojom bombom svega 6 meseci od Hirošime? U ondašnjoj >> situaciji ko je mogao/smeo da reskira da li je Rusi već nemaju? Ja baš mnogo i ne verujem u to. Posle 1947. stvarno niko ne bi reskirao.
svet.60 bojt,
>> >> >> >> Drugo, Rusi su u Avganistanu pocinili takva zverstva >> >> >> >> i masakre da bi im i sam Hitler pozavideo. >> >> >>>> >> >> Da nisi preterao? >> >> >> >> Nisam, ako je verovati zapadnim izvorima - a ja im verujem. >> >> Ovog puta ja im ne verujem. Verujem da je tu i tamo bio poneki >> masakr (i jedan je previše, naravno, ali kad već poredimo), >> a Hitler je *sistematski* uništavao narode po logorima. E moj Kale... Pa oni su u samom SSSR-u činili takva zverstva kakva zdrava pamet uopšte ne može da prihvati. Na primer, neposredno posle oktobarske revolucije znali su da zbrišu i cela sela da bi ostalim selima dali primer. Na severu SSSR-a su vidjenije ljude u varošima i selima koja nisu baš pucala od sreće zbog nove vlasti gole vezivali za ulične svetiljke i polivali ih vodom tako da mesecima tu stoje kao ledeni spomenici koji upozoravaju. Južnije su praktikovali da vidjenije ljude strpaju u burad okovanu dugačkim ekserima i da ih naočigled naroda kotrljaju niz brdo. Posle su sita koja su ostala od tih ljudi držali danima obešene na trgovima. U zavistnosti od izvora (tj od zvaničnih sovjetskih pa do recimo Solženjicina) broj ljudi koji je pobijen radi "očuvanja" i "jačanja" komunističke vlasti kreće se od 4 pa do *60* miliona i to samo do 1939! Ne vidim iz kog razloga oni takav princip zastrašivanja nebi primenjivali i u Avganistanu?
svet.61 dejanr,
Evo i današnje porcija "ruske diskusije"... russia3.zip
svet.62 dejanr,
Ako ste mislili da se izvučete od današnje porcije poruka sa BIX-a na temu russia... russia4.zip
svet.63 balinda,
:: Za mene je propast sveta ako ja propadnem. :) :) :) :: Dakle, dalje nuklearne projektije od mene! :) :) :) Pozdravljam ovakav stav preživljavanja, ali pazi da dok tražiš pečurke na horizontu, ne zgazi te tramvaj, što mi izgleda znatno verovatnije. :)
svet.64 dejanr,
žita li neko ovo? Da ga prenosim i dalje? russia5.zip
svet.65 kale,
>> žita li neko ovo? Da ga prenosim i dalje? Yap! PS if only it could be ARC-ed ... ;->
svet.66 dejanr,
ARC? Zašto da ne... russia6.arc
svet.67 kale,
>> ARC? Zašto da ne... Hvala!
svet.68 dejanr,
Gorbi ode pa i diskusija na BIX-u posustaje. Verovatno će ovo biti poslednji "rep". russia7.arc
svet.69 dejanr,
Današnja porcija... russia8.zip
svet.70 dejanr,
========================== tojerry/russia #608, from rhsmith, 425 chars, Mon Jun 11 16:35:21 1990 This is a comment to message 606. There is/are comment(s) on this message. -------------------------- There are approx. 1000 legislators in the Supreme Soviet of the RFSFR. There were a lot of tactical abstentions. Consequently..both sides get to crow: Yeltsin got a 2:1 of those voting, and obtained higher vote total than during his election. By Gorby's lights, the vote did not achieve 2/3 of the chamber, and its legality can be challenged. (He -is- a lawyer, after all.) ========================== tojerry/russia #609, from moneysmith, 403 chars, Mon Jun 11 18:23:47 1990 This is a comment to message 608. There is/are comment(s) on this message. -------------------------- Interesting to see Gorbachev playing around the technicalities game like an ACLU staffer. At 544, a clear majority favors radical change and all those tactical abstentions wouldn't change that even if they were construed to be anti-Yeltsin. Of course, they didn't *vote* anti-Yeltsin, which has to lead to the impression that the 2/3 majority is probably there but not coming forward at the moment. ========================== tojerry/russia #610, from jerryp, 61 chars, Mon Jun 11 21:05:16 1990 This is a comment to message 604. -------------------------- Yes, they told Krup. And Farbenwerke. Have you read SPeer? ========================== tojerry/russia #611, from rhsmith, 13 chars, Mon Jun 11 21:07:40 1990 This is a comment to message 609. -------------------------- Exactly.
svet.71 dejanr,
Evo i "ruske priče" za BIX-a. Videćete da ima i YU priloga! russia9.arc
svet.72 balinda,
:: Evo i "ruske priče" za BIX-a. Videćete da ima i YU priloga! Eh, na žalost! Sad će se neko zapitati - Zašto? Zato što bih mnogo više voleo da je situacija takva da "naše" 23-godišnje lepotice (pogotovo intelektualke!) imaju razloga da svoju "reklamu" *prvo* predoče (recimo) Sezamu. Ovako temu PROPAST SVETA treba preimenovati u PROPAST YU ili SLOVENIJE, SRBIJE .... :(((
svet.73 dejanr,
>> Eh, na žalost! Sad će se neko zapitati - Zašto? Zato što >> bih mnogo više voleo da je situacija takva da "naše" >> 23-godišnje lepotice (pogotovo intelektualke!) imaju >> razloga da svoju "reklamu" *prvo* predoče (recimo) >> Sezamu. Ovako temu PROPAST SVETA treba preimenovati u >> PROPAST YU ili SLOVENIJE, SRBIJE .... :((( Probaj USERS FAJDIGA. Inače, Maja je bila i na SysOp sastanku. Pozdrav, Dejan
svet.74 balinda,
:: Probaj USERS FAJDIGA. Inače, Maja je bila i na SysOp :: sastanku. Naravno da sam "probao". Naizad, čemu bi i služila ona sasvim dobronamerna "sekiracija"? ;)
svet.75 dejanr,
========================== tojerry/russia #672, from srfleming, 230 chars, Mon Jul 16 21:29:30 1990 There is/are comment(s) on this message. -------------------------- TITLE: The Ukraine Anyone have more on the Ukraine declaring sovreignty (sp?) than Peter Jennings did tonight? 'Twould be a hard republic to blockade, unless the other republics don't mind getting even hungrier than at present. ========================== tojerry/russia #673, from royharv, 174 chars, Mon Jul 16 22:51:40 1990 This is a comment to message 672. There is/are comment(s) on this message. There are additional comments to message 672. -------------------------- My understanding is that the Ukraine made much the same declaration as Russia made a few weeks ago. I can only assume that these are less extreme than what Lithuania did. ========================== tojerry/russia #674, from rhsmith, 142 chars, Mon Jul 16 22:57:49 1990 This is a comment to message 673. There is/are comment(s) on this message. There are additional comments to message 673. -------------------------- Not by much. Ukraine law is now claimed superior to Union. Ukraine claims right to own money, claims right to own army. Who's next? ========================== tojerry/russia #675, from rdobbins, 205 chars, Mon Jul 16 23:21:49 1990 This is a comment to message 674. There is/are comment(s) on this message. There are additional comments to message 674. -------------------------- Yelsin resigns the CPSU, heads of Moscow and Leningrad city councils do the same, Ligachev announces his retirement . . . And now this. Interesting, indeed. Gorbachev is no longer in control of events. ========================== tojerry/russia #676, from rhsmith, 66 chars, Tue Jul 17 00:08:24 1990 This is a comment to message 675. There is/are comment(s) on this message. -------------------------- ....stuck inside the Kremlin with the Moscow blues again.... ========================== tojerry/russia #677, from w.hartung, 110 chars, Tue Jul 17 00:15:24 1990 This is a comment to message 676. -------------------------- I'm just waiting for the big rage of "Cold War World Maps". ^ Show your kids where the USSR was... ========================== tojerry/russia #678, from jpistritto, 163 chars, Tue Jul 17 05:20:25 1990 This is a comment to message 674. -------------------------- Note that the RFSR didn't claim the right to its own Army. So the Ukraine is now between Lithuania (actual independence), and Russia (law superior to Union law). ========================== tojerry/russia #679, from moneysmith, 1031 chars, Tue Jul 17 12:59:39 1990 This is a comment to message 672. There is/are comment(s) on this message. -------------------------- Interesting economic twists, vis a vis the Ukraine and the entire USSR. There are some very credible proposals floating around in the wake of the G-7 meetings to the effect that foreign powers should pursue trade agreements with individual SSR's, not on a bulk basis with the communist party, which would skim most of the benefits off for the military. Direct trade pacts with Lithuania, the Ukraine, or with Yeltsin in the Russian SSR would focus on consumer goods without handing everything over to the hardliners in the CP first. Yeltsin's withdrawal from the communist party has been followed by others, and they represent legitimate, elected popularly elected powers within the USSR. Secretary Baker has said that he doesn't think that dealing with opposition groups and anti-communist groups is "inappropriate just because it's the Soviet Union." While there has been no withdrawal of US support for Gorbachev and perestroika per se, we are certainly not sitting around ignoring the political realities of the USSR. ========================== tojerry/russia #680, from moneysmith, 462 chars, Tue Jul 17 13:04:09 1990 This is a comment to message 673. There is/are comment(s) on this message. -------------------------- One key difference is that Lithuania declared outright independence and included provisions under which Lithuanians dodged the draft. That led to Soviet troops seizing Lithuanian "deserters" and "draft dodgers" that had been ordered to report to Red Army service. Yeltsin's mode was to declare civil sovereignty, but to concede military matters to the central USSR powers. It steps up local authority and law, but is less than a declaration of independence. ========================== tojerry/russia #681, from rsimonsen, 203 chars, Tue Jul 17 16:35:32 1990 This is a comment to message 680. There is/are comment(s) on this message. -------------------------- However, note that the Ukraine has declared its right to its own army and currency. (i.e., if the translations of the news are correct). And the Ukraine is the second largest SSR in the Union. --Redmond ========================== tojerry/russia #682, from bwebster, 197 chars, Tue Jul 17 16:40:42 1990 This is a comment to message 681. There is/are comment(s) on this message. There are additional comments to message 681. -------------------------- A CNN report on the Ukraine declaration noted that seven SSRs have now declared some form of independence, or about half the total number. Wonder how long it will be until the rest follow suit.... ========================== tojerry/russia #683, from rhsmith, 331 chars, Tue Jul 17 17:13:35 1990 This is a comment to message 679. -------------------------- As a purely -technical- measure, breaking the SU into 15 linked economies is probably a very good thing. Faster communication of economic signals, therefore faster equilibration as each economy finds its niche. Also, there's a lot less spilt milk if one or two republics screw up, as opposed to Union as a whole. ========================== tojerry/russia #684, from rhsmith, 67 chars, Tue Jul 17 17:14:22 1990 This is a comment to message 682. There is/are comment(s) on this message. There are additional comments to message 682. -------------------------- You will know the jig is up when the Byelorussians pull out. ========================== tojerry/russia #685, from moneysmith, 753 chars, Tue Jul 17 17:26:55 1990 This is a comment to message 681. -------------------------- Interesting. With Gorbachev accepting the reality of a unified Germany in NATO and either a separate army in the Ukraine, or a policy of disarming Ukrainians to prevent the emergence of a separate army in the Ukraine (and if Bellorussia goes the same route as the Baltics and the Ukraine) that liberates Vilnius, Minsk, Kiev, and just about everything from Narva to the Crimea from behind the handywrap curtain. Sounds pretty ambitious to me. I suspect that some sort of confederation deal absolutely has to be struck. I don't imagine that they really want civil war, which means reform pressures are running high. Gorbachev just announced what sounded a lot like First Amendment press freedoms. Let's send Sam Donaldson over to finish them off. ========================== tojerry/russia #686, from moneysmith, 112 chars, Tue Jul 17 17:27:58 1990 This is a comment to message 682. -------------------------- Given that one of the seven is Russia, the question is whether or not the other six had anyone to secede from. ========================== tojerry/russia #687, from moneysmith, 798 chars, Tue Jul 17 17:34:51 1990 This is a comment to message 684. -------------------------- Given that Russia has "pulled out" after its fashion, I'd say the jigsaw is up already to a large degree. Also, the municipal leadership in both Moscow and Leningrad have severed from the national party, with the later already on record as being about to rename the city St. Petersberg. If the hardliners just quit kicking and scratching, they might find that they enjoy the 1990s. Latest reports from East Germany is that the old commies of the nomenklatura are cashing in like crazy cutting the business deals with the West. They were the guys that already had the contacts and ambition and they stand to make a real bundle in the turnover. Now if we can just get some serious commitments to quit building nukes and retiring the ones that are deployed. Smal, but rather important, detail.
svet.76 dejanr,
========================== tojerry/russia #688, from athomson, 206 chars, Tue Jul 17 21:49:07 1990 This is a comment to message 681. There is/are comment(s) on this message. -------------------------- The Ukraine has the wherewithal to be a major world power in its own right. Agriculture, heavy industry, aircraft industry, nuclear, space and rockets, shipyards, sea ports, etc. They make good tanks, too. ========================== tojerry/russia #689, from rhsmith, 177 chars, Tue Jul 17 21:52:54 1990 This is a comment to message 688. There is/are comment(s) on this message. -------------------------- If this keeps up, it may be time to -move- the capital of the RFSFR to a more geographically and economically central location....like Novosibirsk, for example... ========================== tojerry/russia #690, from athomson, 215 chars, Tue Jul 17 21:58:38 1990 This is a comment to message 689. There is/are comment(s) on this message. -------------------------- I wouldn't bet against St. Petersburg as the capital of the RSFSR, but Novosibirsk is pretty far removed from Europe and the historical Russian heartland. Maybe it can be the capital of the Siberian Federation. ;) ========================== tojerry/russia #691, from moneysmith, 202 chars, Tue Jul 17 22:37:29 1990 This is a comment to message 690. There are additional comments to message 690. -------------------------- Peter was the last one to move the capital, but that's when sea lanes through the Baltic were his only real way of staying "European." Moscow seems to be getting closer to Europe all the time anyway. ========================== tojerry/russia #692, from rdobbins, 150 chars, Wed Jul 18 02:05:04 1990 This is a comment to message 685. There is/are comment(s) on this message. There are additional comments to message 685. -------------------------- KGB is in a very precarious position right now. And _they_ have control of the warheads. Remember, they are the sword and shield of the Party . . . ========================== tojerry/russia #693, from rmwhite, 407 chars, Wed Jul 18 02:13:07 1990 This is a comment to message 692. There is/are comment(s) on this message. -------------------------- > they have control of the warheads. If the Soviet Union lasts the next 18 months without at least one city getting nuked it will be a miracle. If Gorbie & Friends had a bit of sense they would be trashing their nukes as fast a possible and try *very*hard to turn the SU into a non-nuclear nation (well, maybe keep just a couple to remind China to behave). Boy, do I wish we had some or all of SDI up! ========================== tojerry/russia #694, from rdobbins, 18 chars, Wed Jul 18 02:56:28 1990 This is a comment to message 693. There are additional comments to message 693. -------------------------- I'll second that! ========================== tojerry/russia #696, from bwebster, 133 chars, Wed Jul 18 03:08:01 1990 This is a comment to message 685. There is/are comment(s) on this message. -------------------------- >...Let's send Sam Donaldson over... What? That could be enough to make Gorbachev reverse his stand on freedom of the press.... ;-) ========================== tojerry/russia #697, from moneysmith, 293 chars, Wed Jul 18 10:15:52 1990 This is a comment to message 693. There is/are comment(s) on this message. -------------------------- Soviet cities getting nuked? Extremely doubtful. They have all sorts of means of force available to them against an unarmed population. Even against foreign uprisings in Hungary and Czechoslovakia they didn't need to do more than roll tanks. Against their own cities? No need for nukes. ========================== tojerry/russia #698, from moneysmith, 99 chars, Wed Jul 18 10:17:13 1990 This is a comment to message 696. -------------------------- It might. But I can't think of a better way to *test* Gorbachev's stand on freedom of the press. ========================== tojerry/russia #699, from glass, 210 chars, Wed Jul 18 11:53:55 1990 This is a comment to message 697. There is/are comment(s) on this message. There are additional comments to message 697. -------------------------- They might use nukes against each other's nukes. If there's a Soviet Civil War (and the potential for such is WAY too high for my personal comfort), it may take a long time to clean up the environment. <BG> ========================== tojerry/russia #700, from lwood, 255 chars, Wed Jul 18 12:26:47 1990 This is a comment to message 697. -------------------------- Even worse -- consider: CNN buys a Moscow TV station. Turner installs girlfriend Jane Fonda as manager. She rises to the top of the totalitarian hierarchy. Soon, the KGB is arresting fat people off the streets. It's a rain of terror against cellulite.... ========================== tojerry/russia #701, from a.lane, 67 chars, Wed Jul 18 13:38:48 1990 This is a comment to message 690. -------------------------- Novosibirsk is today the de facto capital of Siberia. Cheers... ========================== tojerry/russia #702, from moneysmith, 995 chars, Wed Jul 18 13:58:31 1990 This is a comment to message 699. -------------------------- >...each other's nukes... Soviet nukes are NOT under local control, any more than SAC bases are under the control of local mayors and county clerks. There are also meaningful distinctions between civil unrest, civil commotion, outright riots, and a real flat-out civil war. South Korean students have been firebombing police lines as sort of a routine after-school recreational activity for quite some time now, and even that is hardly a civil war. The USSR may see quite a bit of strife, but most of it has been in the form of divergent nationalities annoyed with each other and with the central government, but they are hardly beyond the police powers of the state to control, and most certainly not beyond the Red Army's military power to control. And whatever the debate over the rate and direction of change, there is no question that change is taking place in the USSR, which vents a great deal of the emotional dissatisfaction. None of that adds up to any credible nuclear risk.
svet.77 dejanr,
========================== tojerry/russia #703, from hga, 630 chars, Wed Jul 18 17:14:01 1990 This is a comment to message 702. There is/are comment(s) on this message. There are additional comments to message 702. -------------------------- One thing you aren't factoring in, Tom, is that the old standard way of supressing rebellion might not work this time. THere are only so many reliable troops, perhaps less than anyone thinks (there's only one way to find out for sure), and it doesn't take very many people to fire some missiles. Ruthless people in times past have been willing to put down rebellion by slaughtering the entire population of a city, so I think we can't entirely rule out this possibility. I think a lot of it depends on the reaction to Gorby's "reforms," including the possibility he'll change his tune even more in the direction of repression. ========================== tojerry/russia #704, from glass, 275 chars, Wed Jul 18 19:01:29 1990 This is a comment to message 702. There are additional comments to message 702. -------------------------- Remember, the army CONSISTS of these people. If they desert or engage in acts of sabotage, you can bet they can cause a lot of trouble. As for nuclear risk: we'll see. I find it hard to believe that none of the people with fingers on the buttons remember their roots. <BG> ========================== tojerry/russia #705, from moneysmith, 1370 chars, Wed Jul 18 19:11:45 1990 This is a comment to message 703. There is/are comment(s) on this message. -------------------------- One thing perhaps you should factor in - the will to live. As to the "ruthless people willing to put down rebellion by slaughtering the entire population" - for instance? I've been to Leningrad. While economic and cultural differences were pretty obvious, they were still all easily identifiable as homo sapiens, and I don't think that there is any chance at all that Gorbachev, Yeltsin, the KGB, or anyone else over there has either the mindset or the absolute unitary authority of Jim Jones, who was hardly a head of state. I'll stay way out on that speculative limb - the Russians aren't going to nuke themselves. And, barring any lemminglike surges over the border, or serious incursions by outsiders, they aren't going to nuke anyone else at the moment either. You can also rule out any large scale armed rebellions. They're not armed, nor is there much of anything to shoot at or for. The election of Yeltsin as de facto Russian head of state ended the last serious risk of armed insurrection. He was manifestly the people's choice, and he (and they) are concerned with consumer goods. Gorbachev will worry about foreign and international affairs. Only if the military tried anything Stalinesque, like a coup to overthrow Gorbachev, Yeltsin, and the rest, would the people rebel. And the military doesn't know how to feed and clothe them either. ========================== tojerry/russia #706, from athomson, 307 chars, Wed Jul 18 19:55:40 1990 This is a comment to message 697. There is/are comment(s) on this message. -------------------------- > Against their own cities? No need for nukes. Civil wars and secessional movements tend to blur definitions of "own." While I don't think that widespread or extreme violence is inevitable in the dissolving USSR, I don't think that it is all that improabable either. And they have so _many_ nukes... ========================== tojerry/russia #707, from athomson, 37 chars, Wed Jul 18 19:57:13 1990 This is a comment to message 700. -------------------------- The All-Union Vorkuta Fitness Club? ========================== tojerry/russia #708, from athomson, 275 chars, Wed Jul 18 20:03:38 1990 This is a comment to message 702. There is/are comment(s) on this message. -------------------------- It really depends on which nukes you are talking about. Strategic and operational-tactical weapons are under strict central control. Nuclear torpedos, SCUD warheads, and artillery rounds may be a different matter, and any one of those could make a fair mess of most cities. ========================== tojerry/russia #709, from athomson, 326 chars, Wed Jul 18 20:10:32 1990 This is a comment to message 705. There are additional comments to message 705. -------------------------- I think you have hit on the crucial stabilizing factor: there may lots of people in the Party, military, etc who loathe what Gorbachev is doing, but nobody is willing to take on the responsibility of fixing the truly profound mess the USSR is in. Now if they will only continue to _think_ that way, rather than _react_... ========================== tojerry/russia #710, from rmwhite, 670 chars, Wed Jul 18 22:08:01 1990 This is a comment to message 705. There is/are comment(s) on this message. There are additional comments to message 705. -------------------------- > the Russians aren't going to nuke themselves... But I wouldn't lay too many odds on a Ukrainian feeling the same way about the prospects of nuking a Russian...or a Kazak..or an Azerbaidzhanian. And while they have very good safeguards on their *strategic* nukes, their small tactical ones are considerably less secure -- especially those meant to be fired from artillery. An awful lot of those are currently in the hands of people who have spent a lifetime "protecting the Rodina" and are now watching their way of life crumbling about them. Which prompted my opinion that if Gorbie & Co had a bit of sense they would be trashing nukes right and left these days.
svet.78 dejanr,
========================== tojerry/russia #711, from rdobbins, 606 chars, Wed Jul 18 22:34:56 1990 This is a comment to message 705. -------------------------- The Army wouldn't do anything like that. KGB might. The three traditional pillars of the USSR have been the Party, the Army, and KGB. Now the Party and KGB are losing supremacy, the Army is ostensibly neutral, and a new force - the People - has arisen. The Party has the most to lose. As the "sword and shield" of the party (their actual motto), KGB has both the wherewithal and the predisposition to try and reverse the current course of events - which puts them squarely in conflict with the Army. This sort of internecine conflict could lead to the use of nuclear weapons in a Soviet civil war. ========================== tojerry/russia #712, from rdobbins, 153 chars, Wed Jul 18 22:36:38 1990 This is a comment to message 708. There is/are comment(s) on this message. -------------------------- The Strategic Rocket Forces are not a threat, I agree. The Navy and the Army and KGB tussling with each other would make for a very different scenario. ========================== tojerry/russia #713, from moneysmith, 127 chars, Thu Jul 19 00:42:57 1990 This is a comment to message 706. -------------------------- Many nukes, but few nuke controllers, and no end of conventional weapons with which to keep anyone from getting at the nukes. ========================== tojerry/russia #714, from moneysmith, 392 chars, Thu Jul 19 00:48:09 1990 This is a comment to message 710. There are additional comments to message 710. -------------------------- I'd love to see the Sovs trashing nukes, but I suspect that they are more likely to reinforce controls, safeguards, and security, even over those "little" tactical nukes. In this instance, the legendary paranoia of Soviet leaders and planners is almost reassuring. Hell, they don't even give most of their tank drivers roadmaps. Hard to imagine that they trust many of them around nukes. ========================== tojerry/russia #715, from moneysmith, 548 chars, Thu Jul 19 00:55:02 1990 This is a comment to message 712. There is/are comment(s) on this message. -------------------------- Speaking in monoliths, like THE Navy, THE Army, and THE KGB is where the logic falters. Gorbachev has turned over 90% of just about every institutional leadership bloc from the Politburo to the military high command, and even the most paranoid hardliners are more concerned with things like Germany and NATO than they are about nuking Kiev or Vilnius. There can be an enormous range of hardline mentalities without ever getting close to the sort of lunacy that would lead to outright civil war, much less nuclear civil war. Ain't gonna happen. ========================== tojerry/russia #716, from rdobbins, 129 chars, Thu Jul 19 01:07:19 1990 This is a comment to message 715. There is/are comment(s) on this message. -------------------------- Not true. The intstiutions themselves are still pretty monolithic. I certainly hope you are right about no civil war, though. ========================== tojerry/russia #717, from moneysmith, 1506 chars, Thu Jul 19 01:34:27 1990 This is a comment to message 716. -------------------------- >"institutions themselves" That's the concept I always regard as suspect. Armies are composed of people. If they are people of either conscience or cowardice, they hesitate rather than destroy. If they are devoid of emotions and only respond at the level of dumb obedience, conflicting orders also make them hesitate. There may be lots of pushing and strife, including conventional loss of life by conventional means. It's not a safe or orderly world out there. But civil war is a massive commitment in which there is a deep rift along a sharp divisive line. In the USSR, what you have is a general discontent about which nobody disagrees. There are merely variations among different parties as to the choice of solutions or the priorities to be assigned to reforms. The top leaders - Gorbachev and Yeltsin, to name two - are not the ones out of step with the people, and they are the ones at the centers of power. A good revolution comes along when it is the top leaders who have position and power and are out of step with the masses. Yeltsin is closer to the popular view, but removed from the specific powers that would scare the military. Gorbachev is more sympathetic to the concerns of the hardliners, and his KGB years have probably made him as good at watching his back as anything could. The generals couldn't overthrow him and hope to command obedience. And, bottom line, seizing power still wouldn't feed anyone. It would merely cut off hope of any cooperation from the west. ========================== tojerry/russia #718, from mfajdiga, 898 chars, Thu Jul 19 06:52:09 1990 This is a comment to message 710. -------------------------- I doubt very much that the soviets will nuke anybody, especialy themselves. Most people (even most quite high ranking ones) are *extremely* indifferent about their leadeshiop (as you are indifferent about the weather, god and similar things you cant influence).... Gorby, Yeltzin & co. are much *more* popular in the West as at home; especialy Gorby.... The people are wanting food, clothes and such *luxury* things as soap, cosmetics, good televisors and pocket radios, PC/XT`s ..... Some traditionaly enmical groups (like peoples in the Central Asia) are going to continue clering their issues with knives and rifles, not nukes .. That is my opinion, of course. I know some russians and ukrainians - they are much much more fatalistic people then americans (that is not communistic ideology, see 19th century poetry of them)..... Andrea
svet.79 dejanr,
========================== tojerry/russia #719, from hga, 568 chars, Thu Jul 19 09:50:26 1990 This is a comment to message 704. -------------------------- It's not so much a question of do "none of the people with fingers on the buttons remember their roots" (which is more relevent to a first strike against us), but if *all* of them remember their roots. What would a tactical (IRBM or shorter range) missile team do if the KGB says "deliver your warheads here or you and your families will be executed immediately." While I think/hope that the system is not poised for a return to Stalinism, I don't for a second believe that there aren't a fair number of sociopaths still in the KGB and other important institutions. ========================== tojerry/russia #720, from hga, 786 chars, Thu Jul 19 09:56:26 1990 This is a comment to message 711. There is/are comment(s) on this message. -------------------------- I'm not at all sure the KGB is "losing supremacy." As far as I can tell, they are the ones calling the shots; in fact, I think a valid interpretation of the whole Messiah Gorbachev mess is that this is a coup by the KGB against the party, which they decided had become irredeamably corrupt. Of course, things are getting a out of hand right now, but the Gulag has not been emptied, and it's still getting new victims (like at least one member formerly on the staff of _Glasnost_ magazine, which the KGB shut down (in the Soviet Union, I think they're publishing out of the US now)). You can also discern who's calling the shots by who's getting the really uncomfortable doses of "glasnost." It's the Party, and the Army, and not very much the KGB, at least the last time I checked. ========================== tojerry/russia #721, from agni, 205 chars, Thu Jul 19 19:35:52 1990 This is a comment to message 717. -------------------------- The people of conscience, have been Breed or executed from the Soviet populace The conditions, have worsend to the point that the Average man on the street. can see things falling down. Thus the protests. ========================== tojerry/russia #722, from agni, 130 chars, Thu Jul 19 19:39:31 1990 This is a comment to message 683. There is/are comment(s) on this message. -------------------------- gee, sort of like, Divided they stand, together they fall... Hum interesting reversal, well it is the other side of the globe. :) *New mail #14613 from: mfajdiga - HI!!!!* Type 'mail read' to view new mail ========================== tojerry/russia #723, from moneysmith, 209 chars, Thu Jul 19 19:47:30 1990 This is a comment to message 722. -------------------------- >divided they stand Not as strange as it seems. It has more to do with the nature of the central control of the communist party. If the central government were not communist, things might be different. ========================== tojerry/russia #724, from mfajdiga, 592 chars, Fri Jul 20 03:03:33 1990 This is a comment to message 720. There is/are comment(s) on this message. -------------------------- I was told an *anecdote* about the late General Secretary Juri Andropov. He held a Politbiro meeting where he sais something like that: `Comrades, the situation is critical. If we don`t change our system, the capitalist-imperialist bastards will in a few years be able to give more for army althought its only 6% of their GNP then we if we TAKE 100% of our BNP .. so - anyone here against democraty. If there is, he will be shot immediately!!!!!!!!! That is a joke (russian black humor), but there is a grain of truth in it.. (Old Juri was chairman of KGB before he become GenSec..) ========================== tojerry/russia #725, from moneysmith, 244 chars, Fri Jul 20 11:54:55 1990 This is a comment to message 724. -------------------------- That "joke" certainly reflects the economic case. Reminds me of some that I have heard about visitors to Tokyo and Bonn who say, "So this is what unconditional surrender looks like." Not much incentive for the Soviets to "win" the cold war.
svet.80 vkostic,
Neverovatno koliko se svet menja. Svetska sila koja je zarila i palila po svetu sada na kolenima moli od zapada ekonomsku pomoc. Kako to tumaciti drukcije nego kao "kataklizma komunizma" kako je neko lepo otpevao.
svet.81 dejanr,
>> Kako to tumaciti drukcije nego kao "kataklizma komunizma" kako >> je neko lepo otpevao. Sećate se šta je Regan svojevremeno reka - na smetlište istorije! A niko mu nije verovao...
svet.82 andrea,
Uhh, pa ameri se stvarno boje *self-nukinga* na ruskoj strani... Ehhh, kako se stvari menjaju...
svet.83 balinda,
:: Neverovatno koliko se svet menja. Svetska sila koja je zarila i :: palila po svetu sada na kolenima moli od zapada ekonomsku pomoc. Ako se ujutro pije šampanjac, dan može doneti malo dobroga? :( Nadam da je ovo *samo* veče jednog ružnog dana ljudske istorije.
svet.84 dejanr,
========================== tojerry/russia #739, from mfajdiga, 326 chars, Sat Jul 21 11:16:11 1990 This is a comment to message 738. There is/are comment(s) on this message. There are additional comments to message 738. -------------------------- I'm sure it is not .. or some 10th grade paperback might come true. I also know that there are mostly light-water power plants in the USA, where the worst thing that can happen is sth. like Three Mile ISland (and security measures have been up after then..) Andrea P.S. It is awful to be lost in a megapolis at 2. a. m. :( ========================== tojerry/russia #740, from glass, 57 chars, Sat Jul 21 12:47:05 1990 This is a comment to message 732. -------------------------- This year's forecast: parly mushroom-cloudy.... ;-) <BG> ========================== tojerry/russia #741, from jerryp, 528 chars, Sat Jul 21 15:34:35 1990 This is a comment to message 739. There is/are comment(s) on this message. -------------------------- Be clear on TMI: the worst health violation of TMI was three workers exceeded their badge dose limits for the quarter and were sent home, with pay, for two months. If you had taken a radiation detector and wandered about outside the perimeter fence TRYING to stay in the most active place you could find, and had done so for the whole 3 months, you would have got something like the dosage from 3 chest x-rays, and that is at the perimeter fence, not 200 yards from it. The only real disaster was Thornberg declaring one. ========================== tojerry/russia #742, from mfajdiga, 551 chars, Sat Jul 21 18:18:50 1990 This is a comment to message 741. There is/are comment(s) on this message. There are additional comments to message 741. -------------------------- I agree with you completely.. btw, one of the more important differences between a graphite plant (like Chernobyl) and a lightwater plant is that if water starts geting hoter, it dams reaction in alightwater plant and excellerates it in a graphite plant ... It is very difficult (impossible, I would say) to scr.. things to the point of a similar thing as TMI, and 100% impossible to make it blow up (no graphite to catch fire and burn) .... But even Chernobyl would not happen if the operators there did not make *SEVERAL* regulations breaks!!! ========================== tojerry/russia #743, from pconnors, 684 chars, Sat Jul 21 20:02:49 1990 This is a comment to message 741. There is/are comment(s) on this message. -------------------------- I moved into the Three Mile Island area (two miles from the plant - I often spent Saturdays wanderin past the place) about a year after the accident, right when the cleanup was really beginning. It was both amusing and frustrating hearing the squawking that went on in the media and even at work when some low-grade gases (argon and xenon isotopes, as I recall, and perfectly harmless) had to be vented. People were leaving the area to "protect the children". Arrg. Me, I never worried about TMI. Now there was a muriatic acid spill a half-mile from my place once that got some adrenalin flowing... Anyway, I'd move back there in a minute, given an adequate ijncentive. ========================== tojerry/russia #744, from glass, 137 chars, Sat Jul 21 20:05:34 1990 This is a comment to message 743. There is/are comment(s) on this message. -------------------------- I'm amused about the argon and xenon isotopes. Both elements are non-reactive; it's doubtful that your body would even absorb them! <BG> ========================== tojerry/russia #745, from blade_runner, 104 chars, Sat Jul 21 21:38:56 1990 This is a comment to message 744. There is/are comment(s) on this message. -------------------------- Are there any books out along the lines of "Everything the media says is bad for you but isnt and why"? ========================== tojerry/russia #746, from moneysmith, 112 chars, Sat Jul 21 22:08:19 1990 This is a comment to message 745. There are additional comments to message 745. -------------------------- I believe there's one called "And That's The Way It Isn't" that covers media malinformation. Probably others. ========================== tojerry/russia #747, from kdavis, 1254 chars, Sat Jul 21 22:57:36 1990 This is a comment to message 742. There is/are comment(s) on this message. -------------------------- >Light Water Reactor vs Graphite Dear Andrea, I hesitate to go into this again because I spent SO much time in the past discussing this with SO many people, but I'll give it one more shot for your sake. The problem you're identifying with graphite moderated reactors is known as a "positive void coefficient" and the truly tragic thing about Chernobyl is that it is quite possible to design a graphite reactor with a negative void coefficient (I should know, I operated one for several years). Also, if you dig into the true facts in the Chernobyl accident you will find that, despite what the media insisted on reporting, the graphite did not "burn". It is damned near impossible to burn pure graphite. Oh yes, it was glowing quite red, but there was no exothermic graphite reaction. What burned was a large mass of zirconium and uranium. One last thing, and it's not that important, but I would like to clarify; Graphite reactors, as built to date, ARE light water reactors in asmuch as they use light water for coolant. Their main difference with what are commanly referred to as "light water" reactors is using the water as coolant only instead of coolant AND moderator. I hope this has been of some help and not too pedantic. -Ken ========================== tojerry/russia #748, from agni, 273 chars, Sat Jul 21 23:34:16 1990 This is a comment to message 738. There is/are comment(s) on this message. -------------------------- there is one plant in the US, with a similarly designed reactor core, as to the Chernobyl. It would be Very difficult to get the same set of circumstances in the USA as that had in the Chernobyl accident. But we could, indeed have the same thing happen. +Agni ========================== tojerry/russia #749, from alexs, 838 chars, Sun Jul 22 00:23:39 1990 This is a comment to message 748. There are additional comments to message 748. -------------------------- As I remember, the Chernobyl engineers were in effect trying to see how little coolant flow they needed to keep the pile operating reasonably. The first time the temperature alarms went off, they shut them off, because they knew they were exceeding specs. What the operators failed to do was to keep an eye on the gauges. As a result, things got really hot and output power went instantaneously to something like 30,000 times its nominal value. The Chernobyl accident was a case of gross human error, compounded by a design that would allow such a thing to occur in the first place and not handle the consequences safely. Better control systems would have helped on the first count, and a different basic design (for example water moderated) would have precluded such nasty consequences. Virtually all reactors in the US have both. ========================== tojerry/russia #750, from jerryp, 72 chars, Sun Jul 22 00:34:31 1990 This is a comment to message 745. -------------------------- ON that subject you cannot do better than subscribe to ACCESS TO ENERGY ========================== tojerry/russia #751, from jerryp, 246 chars, Sun Jul 22 00:36:24 1990 This is a comment to message 748. There are additional comments to message 748. -------------------------- What plant? I find that hard to believe, since Teller personally saw to it that no positive void coefficient reactor could be licenses, and had that written into public law. If you're correct, I'd like to know what plant you are talking about. ========================== tojerry/russia #752, from kdavis, 864 chars, Sun Jul 22 00:53:37 1990 This is a comment to message 748. -------------------------- If by similar you mean graphite moderated, there are at least nine such reactors in the United States (all shutdown). And yes, it would be more than just difficult to reproduce Chernobyl. 1)None of our graphite moderated reactors have been designed with a positive void coefficient. 2)I can personally assure you that had fundamental safety system procedures been even one tenth as disregarded as the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) report on the accident detailed, even the greenest rookie trainee in the control room would have told the test director he or she was full of excrement and called a halt to the process. 3)Due to (1) even following the whole stupid set of actions would have, at worst, resulted in the reactor shutting itself down and instigating a investigation that would probably still be going on till this day. -Ken ========================== tojerry/russia #753, from mfajdiga, 1025 chars, Sun Jul 22 01:57:29 1990 This is a comment to message 747. There is/are comment(s) on this message. -------------------------- Dear Ken, thank you very much for the explanation. BTW, when in third year of uni, I spent my monthly praxis as a *greeny* operater at our experimental Triga reactor , so I know a little bit about it.... BTW, we are having *great* problems with our Greens (led by the worst purgist (former) commie in the country) - it is *SOOO* easy to put in press n-->oo *stupid* accusations, that are commpletely without any ground, but very difficult to refute them (noone wants to read about technical details like void coefficients, physics and engeenering details etc. and the pro-nuclear-lobby is *BAD BAD BAD* by default... I am no nuclear physicist, but am now often atacked by former coulegues from secondary school (am supposed to cause Chernobyl, TMI, some french *acidents* and nuked Hiroshima) - no joke, since Albert is dead, those who share the same proffesion are *guilty* :))))) Any idea how to make a power plant run on human stupidity (that would be a Perpetuum Mobile of the first kind) ???? Andrea ========================== tojerry/russia #754, from kdavis, 388 chars, Sun Jul 22 08:44:34 1990 This is a comment to message 753. -------------------------- I did some of my initial training on a triga too. Fun, aren't they. It's strange to operate a reactor you can walk in look at the core while at full power. My class was doing fine until one of us referred to it as a toy reactor - instant ice from the permanent staff. I can definitely empathize concerning your "greens", we have a little anti-nuclear sentiment present here too. -Ken
svet.85 balinda,
Sa jednog kongresa američkih psihijatara, perspektive čovečanstva nisu tako izvesne, bar ne sa stanovišta današnje procene šta jeste a šta nije normalno. Naime, po ovim istraživanjima, odnos ludaka i zdravih se stalno pomera u "korist" ludaka. Tako je 1859. taj odnos bio 1:533, a već 1897. god. smanjio na 1:312. Godine 1926. odnos ludih prema normalnim bio je 1:150, a nakon Drugog svetskog rata, već je bilo 1:100. :((( Po ovoj analogiji, a sledeći ovu progresiju, po nekim proračunima 2138. godine svi ćemo biti ludi. Mene kopka činjenica, da će biti ludi i psihijatri koji će to da utvrđuju. ;)))))) No, da li će već kod odnosa 1:1 (pola ludih a pola ne) doći do revolucije ludih i proglašenja normalnih ludim? Odnosno šta će biti parametar o tome šta je normalno a šta ludo? Do sada je to bila snaga brojnosti! :(
svet.86 vkostic,
>> Regan je svojevremeno rekao... Meni se taj Regan oduvek mnogo dopadao. Cak sam skon da zaslugu za sve pozitivne promene u svetu (kataklizmu komunizma i razoruzanje) njemu pripisem a ne Gorbacovu. Pozdrav, V.K.
svet.87 vkostic,
>> Odnos ludaka i zdravih se stalno pomera u "korist" ludaka. Vrlo zanimljivo. Zapravo celo pitanje je kako definisati ludilo, ili jos gore, kako definisati zdrav razum? Zar mi svi koji kao manijaci sedimo pred tastaturom i kuckamo nekakve poruke tamo nekom SEZAM-u nismo u neku ruku ludaci? Zdrav covek ode u kafanu da se uz pice isprica, zar ne? Pozdrav, V.K.
svet.88 kale,
>> Meni se taj Regan oduvek mnogo dopadao. Ja sam negde na početku Reganovog drugog mandata razgovarao sa jednom Amerikankom i složili smo se da je on opasni manijak. Njegove akcije protiv Gadafija isl. su primer državnog terorizma. Ipak sam stekao utisak da je on umirio islamski ekstremizam. I pitam se da li je, sve u svemu, doneo svetu više dobra ili zla? Pozdrav, Kale
svet.89 kale,
>> Sa jednog kongresa američkih psihijatara, perspektive >> čovečanstva nisu tako izvesne, bar ne sa stanovišta današnje >> procene šta jeste a šta nije normalno. Naime, po ovim >> istraživanjima, odnos ludaka i zdravih se stalno pomera u >> "korist" ludaka. Tako je 1859. taj odnos bio 1:533, a već 1897. >> god. smanjio na 1:312. Godine 1926. odnos ludih prema normalnim >> bio je 1:150, a nakon Drugog svetskog rata, već je bilo 1:100. >> :((( >> Po ovoj analogiji, a sledeći ovu progresiju, po nekim >> proračunima 2138. godine svi ćemo biti ludi. Sigurno dobar deo tih rezultata ima svoj uzrok u povećanju broja psihijatara. ;) Šala na stranu, nekada su se opasni ludaci više nego danas tretirani kao kriminalci, a bezopasni se nisu ni beležili. >> No, da li će već kod odnosa 1:1 (pola ludih a pola ne) doći >> do revolucije ludih i proglašenja normalnih ludim? Odnosno šta >> će biti parametar o tome šta je normalno a šta ludo? Do sada je >> to bila snaga brojnosti! :( Pri odnosu 1:1 nema šanse da ludaci potčine ostale. Nisu svi ludaci skrenuli na istu stranu pa nema šanse da se ujedine oko nekog zajedničkog cilja. Osim toga, njihov glavni problem (ja sam totalni laik za temu :( ) je u tome što nisu sposobni da primereno reaguju na neku spoljnu pobudu - ili preteraju, ili podbace, ili pogreše. Pozdrav, Kale
svet.90 dejanr,
>> Zar mi svi koji kao manijaci sedimo pred tastaturom i kuckamo >> nekakve poruke tamo nekom SEZAM-u nismo u neku ruku ludaci? >> Zdrav covek ode u kafanu da se uz pice isprica, zar ne? Pa sad, sve je tu relativno. Ne kažem da nismo "učuknuti" :) ali razmotri i neke prednosti SEZAM-a nad kafanom: 1. U kafani "izjavu" čuju 2-3-4 čoveka. Ovde 2-3-4... stotina 2. Piće u kafani se plaća a SEZAM je džabe (ne za dugo...) 3. Od ostavljanja poruka niko nije dobio cirozu jetre 4. Ako se neko ne slaže sa tvojom porukom, ne može da pređe na fizičko obračunavanje. 5. Ima li još?
svet.91 dejanr,
>> Ja sam negde na početku Reganovog drugog mandata razgovarao >> sa jednom Amerikankom i složili smo se da je on opasni manijak. Ja se ne slažem, zapravo mislim da je on jedan od najvećih američkih predsednika. Pogledaj samo kako je promenio svet na "kapitalističku" stranu. Nije to, naravno, samo njegova zasluga (psihoistorijski zakoni, što bi rekao Asimov... bilo je vreme da se to desi) ali ostaje da se desilo u njegovo vreme. A što se "manijaka" tiče, ne znam odakle bi se to izvelo. >> Njegove akcije protiv Gadafija isl. su primer državnog >> terorizma. Pa šta? A za šta plaćaju onoliku vojsku nego da deluje kad im treba. Pitanje je samo da li deluje *uspešno* ili neuspešno; od Kartera na ovamo uglavnom je bilo uspešno! >> I pitam se da li je, sve u svemu, doneo svetu više dobra >> ili zla? Ja vidim mnogo toga dobrog što se desilo u njegovo vreme ili malo posle. Loše ne vidim praktično ništa (možda zato što sam optimista?). Šta je loše osim ako su malo stradali siroti Gadafi i Norijega za kojima mi puca srce.
svet.92 balinda,
:: Pri odnosu 1:1 nema šanse da ludaci potčine ostale. Nisu :: svi ludaci skrenuli na istu stranu pa nema šanse da se ujedine :: oko nekog zajedničkog cilja. Osim toga, njihov glavni problem (ja :: sam totalni laik za temu :( ) je u tome što nisu sposobni da :: primereno reaguju na neku spoljnu pobudu - ili preteraju, ili :: podbace, ili pogreše. HA-HA! Nadam se da sam i ja laik? :)))) Ali šta biva kada (ako?) odnos bude 2:1, 3:1 ....? S druge strane, ni "pametni" se baš lako ne "ujedine oko zajedničkog cilja". Šta kaže o tome istorija sveta, ili da ne idemo tako daleko, šta dokazuje naša Jugoslavija? Da budem sasvim u skladu naslova PROPAST SVETA, ima li više sukoba u ludnici među ludacima ili u životu među normalnim? Da li se ludaci više sukobljavaju sa normalnim ili sa sebi sličnijim? Itd. Zaista, zanimljiva dilema. Šteta što se neće javiti neko kompetentan? ;))))
svet.93 vkostic,
Dejane, ja zaboravio da na kraju poruke 46.67 dodam ono :), a ti je susuvise ozbiljno shvatio. Naravno da je SEZAM bolji od kafane inace nebi sada sedeo za tastaturom i kuckao. Pozdrav, V.K.
svet.94 kale,
>> >> Ja sam negde na početku Reganovog drugog mandata razgovarao >> >> sa jednom Amerikankom i složili smo se da je on opasni >> >> manijak. >> Ja se ne slažem, zapravo mislim da je on jedan od najvećih >> američkih predsednika. Pogledaj samo kako je promenio svet na >> "kapitalističku" stranu. U to vreme se te promene nisu videle. Videlo se samo da Regan ubrzava naoružavanje USA i zaoštrava odnose sa SSSR. U tome je bio veoma dosledan pa je izgledalo sasvim moguće da on priprema USA za predstojeći, a ne za mogući rat sa SSSR. >> >> Njegove akcije protiv Gadafija isl. su primer državnog >> >> terorizma. >> Pa šta? A za šta plaćaju onoliku vojsku nego da deluje kad im >> treba. Pitanje je samo da li deluje *uspešno* ili neuspešno; Ako bi se taj metod rešavanja međunarodnih problema ustalio, veliki bi delili svoju pravdu u svom interesu, a malim zemljama bi kao odgovor ostao samo novi terorizam. Smanjivanje broja terorističkih akcija koje je usledilo posle američkog atentata na Gadafija je (po meni) potvrdilo američku tezu da je Gadafi povezan sa terorističkim organizacijama. U ovom smislu bi se moglo reći da je Regan na državni terorizam odgovorio istom merom. Pozdrav, Kale
svet.95 dejanr,
>> Ako bi se taj metod rešavanja međunarodnih problema ustalio, >> veliki bi delili svoju pravdu u svom interesu U stvari, izgleda da je u svetu najčešće baš tako... malima se to ne sviđa al' ko ih pita ;)
svet.96 ncosic,
:: Smanjivanje broja teroristickih akcija koje je usledilo posle ::americkog atentata na Gadafija je (po meni) potvrdilo americku tezu ::da je Gadafi povezan sa teroristickim organizacijama. U ovom ::smislu bi se moglo reci da je Regan na drzavni terorizam odgovorio ::istom merom. To sto si upravo naveo (nemam obicaj da persiram na BBS-u) dokazuje da je on (zajedno sa kongresom) mogao to isto da uradi u bilo kojoj zemlji sveta. (kao sto je to Amerika vec vise puta ucinila) PitA¸3 nje¸a *űe da li ˝ůtolika moc samo jednoj sacici ljudi (kojih ima negde oko 500) pristaje. Dovoljno je da samo 300 od njih glasa za pa da se otpocne vojna intervencija u bilo kojoj (manjoj) zemlji. (Praksa je to potvrdila u Koreji, Vijetnamu, Panami, Libiji,...) Vece se zemlje izbegavaju iz ociglednih razloga.
svet.97 balinda,
[BORBA - 28-29. jul 1990.] "POSLEDNJI BALKANCI: Da li je korisno biti dovoljno strog prema sebi? Odgovori se razlikuju, ali su to Rumuni ove sedmice pokušali prvi put. Tačnije učinio je to "Romanul", list koji se najpre pita "kada ćemo ponovo postati normalni" da bi zatim utvrdio kako su stavovi Rumuna labilni, a prelasci sa "okrivljenog" na "žrtvu" nagli, bez trunke stida zbog ranijeg mišljenja. Ta brza promena mišljenja, kaže list, govori o o nedostatku karaktera i dubljeg razmišljanja, o potrebi da se u svakom trenutku živi bolje, bez obzira na cenu. "To govori samo o našem moralnom beskičmenjastvu i nedostatku bilo kakvog koncepta." Rumunski autori konstatuju potom da se ime Rumun u ovom trenutku veoma nisko kotira u većem delu civilizovanog sveta, podseća se da su Rumuni skloni svim vidovima šverca, samo da bi nešto ućarili, pa makar i najcrnjom prevarom i krađom. Kaže se i to da su Rumun govori preglasno u muzejima, da nije previše zainteresovan za nova saznanja, da teško prihvata lepo ponašanje, da je njegovo vrednovanje sveta mangupsko, praćeno nepoštovanjem postojećih ili tradicionalnih vrednosti. Na kraju sledi pitanje ne bez znatne doze cinizma - zar moramo da ostanemo poslednji Balkanci na Balkanu."
svet.98 dejanr,
žujem da je Irak (vojno!) napao Kuvajt. Šta mislite, hoće li američka flota (koja je tu u okolini i čiji je Kuvajt značajan saveznik) intervenisati? Sledi li opet rat na Bliskom Istoku?
svet.99 balinda,
Mislim da baš i nije lako odlučiti se na adekvatan "odgovor" protiv nekoga ko nije Grenada ili Panama. Reč je o možda sada vojno najjačoj sili na Bliskom istoku? No, pošto sumnjam da će se na ovome završiti, za pretpostaviti je da će se još neka arapska zemlja "setiti" (pod uticajem USA!) da treba nešto uraditi. Možda Saudijska Arabija? S druge strane moguće je i da se osuda međunarodne zajednice završi samo na rečima? :((( žini mi se da Iran potpuno otpada i pored nerešenih odnosa sa Irakom. No, za bilo kakav *odgovor* bilo bi potrebno da se Kuvajt kako-tako drži, što je očigledno izostalo. Ovako će teško biti braniti zemlju (čitaj interese!) koja ima marionetski režim i podržava Irak. Meni lično liči na svojevremenu okupaciju Sudetske oblasti u žehoslovačkoj. Zato sam pristalica da "zmiji odmah treba stati na vrat".
svet.100 dejanr,
Sad kažu na vestima: Bejker se dogovara sa Ševernadzeov i razmatraju se sve opcije uključujući i vojnu. USA i USSR će izdati zajedničko saopštenje !?
svet.101 vkrstonosic,
>> Sad kazu na vestima: Bejker se dogovara sa Severnadzeov i razmatraju >> se sve opcije ukljucujuci i vojnu. USA i USSR ce izdati zajednicko >> saopstenje ! Eh, da nam je neko ovo rekao pre pet godina, sta li bi mu odgovorili ?
svet.102 balinda,
žujem da je Sadam Husein ušao u demilitarizovanu zonu Saudijske Arabije. !!! Rekao bih da je napravio odlučujuću pogrešku? Nekoliko nezavisnih oblasti, inače *prebogatih* naftom, i jesu nezavisne zbog njihovog značaja. S druge strane, Saudijska Arabija je najveći američki pojedinačni snabdevač naftom. Rekao bih da se više nikako ne može završiti mirnim putem? :( Međutim, moja procena je da, sve i da hoće, Amerika može za tako nešto biti spremna tek za koji mesec, pa i tada verovatno preko posrednika? Predviđam da će izvestan vojni pritisak izvršiti prvo Velika Britanija, ali da to neće ni malo zbuniti Huseina. Ne znam precizno zašto, ali mi se ova kriza čini vrlo opasnom. Gotovo je za ne poverovati da je čitav svet ocenjivao pretnje Iraka prema Kuvajtu kao prolaznu epizodu. Mubarak je rekao "letnji oblak". A da je Sadam Husein uspeo da pripremi (i izvede!) takvu akciju bez da *savršena* izraelska obaveštajna služba (izgleda?) ne uspe da obavesti amerikance, dovoljno govori o velikom arapskom Hitleru koji se konačno ustoličio.
svet.103 balinda,
>> verovatno preko posrednika? Predviđam da će izvestan vojni >> pritisak izvršiti prvo Velika Britanija, ali da to neće ni malo >> zbuniti Huseina. Ha, dok sam slao prethodnu poruku, čujem na radiju da je Sadam Husein zarobio 35 britanskih vojnih stručnjaka iz Kuvajta!!? Pa da li je on normalan? Ovo se nikako neće dobro završiti. :(
svet.104 dejanr,
Irak se od sutra povlači iz Kuvajta, naravno verovatno ostavljajući neku marionetsku vladu. Ali mislim da je to povlačenje izazvano jučerašnjim sastankom Bejker/Ševernadze i da ta marionetska vlada neće dugo. Drugo, USA tu imaju ogromne vojne snage kojima se danas pridružuje još jedan nosač aviona i to Iraku ne može biti svejedno. Videćemo šta će biti. Šta mislite o mogućem uključivanju Izraela koji je malo dalje ali...?
svet.105 vcalic,
>>Drugo, USA tu imaju ogromne vojne snage kojima se danas >>pridruzuje jos jedan nosac aviona i to Iraku ne moze biti >>svejedno. Sudeci po onom sto rece Lazansky, a on valjda zna, US Army i pored sve sile koju ima u tom delu sveta, bez pomoci SSSR -a nece moci nista da uradi. Zato mozemo ocekivati zajednicku intervencije Amera i Rusa (?!!). Sa druge strane izgleda da se Husein nece libiti da primeni hemijsko oruzje, a ne bih se zacudio i da pripreti nuklearnim.
svet.106 dejanr,
>> Sudeci po onom sto rece Lazansky, a on valjda zna, >> US Army i pored sve sile koju ima u tom delu sveta, bez pomoci >> SSSR -a nece moci nista da uradi. SSSR-a.... ili Izraela? >> Sa druge strane izgleda da se Husein nece libiti da primeni >> hemijsko oruzje, a ne bih se zacudio i da pripreti nuklearnim. Mogao bi da pripreti ali bi mu to bilo glupo. Verovatno bi čak i njemu moralo biti jasno da postoje sile u svetu koje imaju *malo* više nuklearnog oružja od njega (ako ga on uopšte i ima) i da bi takva pretnja značila okretanje bukvalno celog sveta protiv Iraka a sigurno i kraj njegovog režima kada bi pokušao da upotrebi nuklearno oružje. Zapravo, svet ne bi mogao da dopusti da se to nuklearno oružje upotrebi i intervenisao bi na razne načine od kojih neki mogu da budu dosta efikasni...
svet.107 zeljkot,
Recimo, nuklearno oruzje?!
svet.108 dejanr,
Kako vam izgleda situacija u (anektiranom) Kuvajtu i Saudijskoj Arabiji? Na BIX-u kažu da će se rešiti sve u sledeća tri dana i mnogi misle da će USA udariti avionima i raketama na ciljeve u Iraku... Ujedno me zanima da li naši poštuju odluku (ovoga puta nije preporuka pošto ju je doneo Savet Bezbednosto) Ujedinjenih Nacija i da li su prestali da posluju sa Huseinom.
svet.109 dveselinovic,
Prestali da poslujemo? Zar mi sebi mozemo da dozvolimo da Sadiju oprostimo one milijarde dolara u neisporucenoj nafti? Pazi sada kada nam je isporuce ali po vecim cenama. Pa sa kim smo mi prestali da poslujemo? Decenijama nismo imali diplomatske odnose sa Izraelom, a jeli smo Jaffa pomorandze. Ne priznajemo Tajvan, a odakle je tvoja maticna ploca ili moj portabl? Imenjace, budi ozbiljan. Business is business, even with the Mafia. A Iračane će stvarno pojesti mrak, uprkos četvrtoj armiji na svetu po broju ljudi (1,7 miliona), sem naravno ako im ne priteknu u pomoć lokalni Alabanci, dobro uvežbani u Prištini i Podujevu.
svet.110 dejanr,
Pročitah baš sad na BIX-u da je Husein izjavio da je došlo vreme za Džihad (svetski rat) protiv nas nevernika i da je počeo prijavljivanje dobrovoljaca za tu plemenitu svrhu. Taj je stvarno zaslužio batinu!
svet.111 dveselinovic,
Mislinuklearnu batinu? žuvena izreka generala iz Pentagona: "Let's nuke the son-of-a-bitch!". Hajde da proglasimo Iračku teritoriju "povjesnim delom Hrvatske", pa da vidimo čija nana crnu vunu prede. Ima  űĐodan i Šeks da im nalupaju šamare.
svet.112 balinda,
Pa zar i okupljanje (celog?) hrišćanskog sveta ne podseća na adekvatan odgovor tj. na Krstaški rat? Neće valjda "socijalistički svet" izostati?
svet.113 kale,
>> Pročitah baš sad na BIX-u da je Husein izjavio da je došlo vreme za >> Džihad (svetski rat) protiv nas nevernika i da je počeo >> prijavljivanje dobrovoljaca za tu plemenitu svrhu. Trudi se da pridobije Arape i muslimane uopšte. Nije zgodno kad je ceo svet (sve države sveta) protiv tebe! Nego, zar Džihad ne znači "samo" sveti rat, ne nužno i svetski? Iranci su u rat sa Irakom išli u Džihad - ko pogine, direktno u raj (sa štampanom propusnicom u džepu (|-b) ). Pozdrav, Kale
svet.114 kale,
>> Pa zar i okupljanje (celog?) hrišćanskog sveta ne podseća na >> adekvatan odgovor tj. na Krstaški rat? Neće valjda "socijalistički >> svet" izostati? Socijalistički svet ima gomilu problema sa domaćom "religijom" i internim svetim i "svetim" ratovima. Doduše, spoljni rat dobro dođe da se zamažu oči da se ne vide domaći, valjda ga je zato Sadam i započeo. Pozdrav, Kale
svet.115 dpozaric,
>> Sudeci po onom sto rece Lazansky, a on valjda zna, >>US Army i pored sve sile koju ima u tom delu sveta, bez pomoci >>SSSR -a nece moci nista da uradi. Zato mozemo ocekivati >>zajednicku intervencije Amera i Rusa (?!!). Sa druge strane >>izgleda da se Husein nece libiti da primeni hemijsko oruzje, a >>ne bih se zacudio i da pripreti nuklearnim. Ma, mislim da sam procitao, ali nisam bas stopostotno siguran da Irak posjeduje nuklearno naoruzanje ??? Cini mi se da je to bilo u Startu prije nekoliko tjedana, i da se govorilo o tome da Husein prijeti siromaskom nuklearnom bombom, tj. kemijskim oruzjem. Da time napadne, ne bih ostao iznenadjen jer je Husein uistinu barem polovicno, a najvjerojatnije totalno lud.
svet.116 dpozaric,
>>Ujedno me zanima da li nasi postuju odluku (ovoga puta nije preporuka >>posto ju je doneo Savet Bezbednosto) Ujedinjenih Nacija i da li su >>prestali da posluju sa Huseinom. Koliko ja poznajem one bukvane koji sjede u foteljama (jos uvijek), nase puskice i ostalo jos uvijek putuje u tom pravcu, jedino mozda maaaaalo zaobilaznim putem.
svet.117 dpozaric,
>> Hajde da proglasimo Iracku teritoriju "povjesnim delom Hrvatske", >>pa da vidimo cija nana crnu vunu prede. Ima  űDodan i Seks da im >>nalupaju samare. Iako spomenuta dvojica pripadaju stranci koju ne podrzavam, ova mi usporedba Dejane, uz svo postovanje prema tebi, djeluje pomalo neozbiljno za ovo mjesto.
svet.118 balinda,
>> Trudi se da pridobije Arape i muslimane uopšte. Nije zgodno kad >> je ceo svet (sve države sveta) protiv tebe! Na sreću to ne ide lako. Arapska liga je usvojila rezoluciju protiv ipačkog napada na Kuvajt. Interesantno je da se nalazi i tekst: "na SVE potrebne načine pomogne oslobađanju Kuvajta". Egipatski dnevni listovi idu i dalje i tvrde da će se "združene arapske snage poslati i da se jedan broj zemalja već odazvao". E, sad da vidimo kako se arapski svet oko ovoga podelio. Tanjug kaže da su *ZA* rezulciju glasali: Saudijska Arabija, Kuvajt, Egipat, Sirija Oman, Ujedinjeni Arapski Emirati, Katar, Bahrein, Maroko, Džibuti, Somalija i Liban. *PROTIV* su (samo): Irak, Libija i PLO. (Nismo baš previše iznenađeni?) Nejasna je "srednja" grupa zemalja koja je izrazila izvesne rezerve prema rezoluciji: Jordan, Sudan i Mauritanija, a zatim i Alžir i Jemen koji su se uzdržali od glasanja i Tunis koji uopšte nije ni učestvovao u radu samita. žini mi sa da Husein nema previše razloga za slavlje? Doduše prebogati Kuvajt (treća zemlja u svetu po nacionalnom dohotku po glavi stanovnika) nije loš zalogaj. Ali meni se čini da će mu (pre ili kasnije) presednuti. Samo 600.000 stanovnika Kuvajta su starosedeoci. To je samo trećina ukupnog stanovništva!!! Ostatak su doseljenici iz ostalih arapskih zemalja (najviše Palestinaca - oko 250.000) i verujem da se ni oni ne osećaju presrećni što moraju svoje bogatstvo da poklone. Pri tome ima tvrdnji da su se Iračani poneli izuzetno surovo i da su čak i pucali na žene u mirnim protestima protiv nove vlasti. Zato se šuška o formiranju nekakvih odreda oslobodioca. Na stranu što je to verovatno jako neozbiljno, ali nešto tako se može uvek iskoristiti kao opravdanje za buduću/moguću intervenciju.
svet.119 balinda,
>> Ma, mislim da sam procitao, ali nisam bas stopostotno siguran da >> Irak posjeduje nuklearno naoruzanje ??? >> Cini mi se da je to bilo u Startu prije nekoliko tjedana, i da se >> govorilo o tome da Husein prijeti siromaskom nuklearnom bombom, >> tj. kemijskim oruzjem. Za hemijsko oružje nije uopšte sporno. žitav svet je video razorno dejstvo u ratu sa Iranom. Na stranu što je to onda lakše prošlo jer je bilo upotrebljeno protiv tada još omrznutijeg neprijatelja. (Tako je to kod našeg dvojnog morala.) U vezi nuklearnog ima dosta špekulacija. Par puta je pomenuto kako je sprečen izvoz u Irak pojedinih neophodnih delova. Po drskosti Huseina moglo bi se zaključiti da ipak čuva i jedan takav adut? No, takvo oružje ima svoju snagu samo u rukama ambicioznog ludaka i zato treba da budemo zabrinuti. Nikako nisam spokojan da će Husein (kada počne da gubi, a ja samo to mogu da predvidim) neće u očaju tako otići kod Alaha. Bojim se i da nas SADA od toga odvaja samo činjenica da je Irak dosta jak i da se ne treba očekivati brza promena snaga. Ja sam, još na početku, rekao da očekujem da je za to potrebno da prođu meseci. Naime, ne verujem da je iko dovoljno lud da brzopleto napadne četvrtu armiju na svetu? Sada se vrši samo akumulacija snaga i to još uvek (mislim?) samo u odbrambene svrhe. Tek kad snage u S. Arabiji (a i drugde) dođu makar na trećinu iračkih, moguće je očekivati krupnije zahteve od Iraka. Ako se zadovolje samo ekonomskim sankcijama (za sada tako izgleda) moguće je da to potraje godinama. Da se bavim diplomatijom, zalagao bih se za povlačenje snaga UN sa hiljadu km (ima li toliko?) dugim frontom prema Iranu. Ne, nije reč da od Irana preti napad, reč je samo da mu međunarodna zajednica ne treba čuvati leđa. Možda bi se nešto veći deo rezervnih snaga usmerio i na tu stranu. U dogledno vreme ne treba očekivati da bi to mogao iskoristi za ekspanziju ka Iranu. Tu se, svojevremeno, dosta dobro opekao. No, ko zna, moguće je očekivati i svakakva nova savezništva?
svet.120 balinda,
>> Koliko ja poznajem one bukvane koji sjede u foteljama (jos uvijek), >> nase puskice i ostalo jos uvijek putuje u tom pravcu, jedino mozda >> maaaaalo zaobilaznim putem. I ja sam u to ubeđen. Pri tome ne treba zaboraviti da se naši ljudi nalaze u Iraku praktično kao taoci. Na stranu da je razlog zašto ne mogu da izađu prekid svih linija sa Irakom. To vrlo malo može da uteši deo onih koji bi da se vrate. Jednostavno nemaju ni jedan način da izađu, dakle nalaze se u zatvoru. (It's that simple.)
svet.121 dejanr,
>> *ZA* rezulciju glasali: Saudijska Arabija, Kuvajt, Egipat, Sirija Oman, >> Ujedinjeni Arapski Emirati, Katar, Bahrein, Maroko, Džibuti, Somalija >> i Liban. *PROTIV* su (samo): Irak, Libija i PLO. (Nismo baš >> previše iznenađeni?) Irak, dosta prirodno. Libija, takođe me ne čudi. Ali ta PLO... dokle ćemo je više podržavati (ne mislim samo mi nego svi ti nesvrstani...)
svet.122 dveselinovic,
Što "neobiljno" i to ovde? Pa ta dvojica su poznati jastrebovi HDZ-a sa kojima se izgleda i sam Tuđman sve manje slaže, ili mu je bar sve teže da ih drži na lancu. Pokušaću da sažmem neke šale na njihov račun koje sam pročitao u inače briljatnim dodacima "Slobodne Dlamcije", pod nazivom FERAL TRIBUNE, na primer rečnik, po kome se izraz kapetna prevodi sa "satnik, poručnik kao "minutnik" a vodnik kao "sekundant", pa Jovanka Orleanka kao "Djevica Orleanka" a JOvanka BRoz kao "Djevica Broz", itd. Ako može "Slobodna Dalmacija" tako ludo da se zeza u novinama, zašto ne bih mogao i ja da kažem šta mislim? Uostalom, ako je neko neumesan, to nisam ja nego oni koji svoje "povjesne granice" vide odavde do Japana. Meni lično su i ove postojeće sasvim dobre.
svet.123 kale,
>> Naime, ne verujem da je iko dovoljno lud da brzopleto napadne >> četvrtu armiju na svetu? Sada se vrši samo akumulacija snaga i to >> još uvek (mislim?) samo u odbrambene svrhe. Tek kad snage u S. >> Arabiji (a i drugde) dođu makar na trećinu iračkih, moguće je >> očekivati krupnije zahteve od Iraka. Ako se zadovolje samo >> ekonomskim sankcijama (za sada tako izgleda) moguće je da to potraje >> godinama. Ni Regan nije napao libijsku armiju, a opet mu je napad uspeo. Ameri su sposobni za takva dejstva protiv kojih Irak nema ni odgovarajuću odbranu, ni načina da slično odgovori. Irak je do sada bio veliki uvoznik oružja, da li se neko sme usuditi da mu prodaje oružje ili pruža drugu podršku u trenutku kad to znači zaoštravanje odnosa sa celim svetom, a naročito njegovim ekonomski najmoćnijim delom? Iraku je posle rata sa Iranom ostala ogromna uvežbana vojska, ali i gomila ekonomskih i socijalnih problema. Neki oficiri su odbili da napadnu Kuvajt. I Iračanima je valjda dosta rata u kome se samo gubi, život, zdravlje ili (u najboljem slučaju) standard. Pozdrav, Kale
svet.124 kale,
>> Irak, dosta prirodno. Libija, takođe me ne čudi. Ali ta PLO... Uticaj PLO među samim Palestincima slabi u korist nekih ekstremnih muslimanskih snaga. Biće da su zbog toga postali "pravoverci" i "antiimperijalisti" k'o što su neki naši postali "demokrati". Pozdrav, Kale
svet.125 dejanr,
>> Uticaj PLO među samim Palestincima slabi u korist nekih >> ekstremnih muslimanskih snaga. Znači, od zla na gore :(
svet.126 balinda,
>> Irak je do sada bio veliki uvoznik oružja, da li se neko sme >> usuditi da mu prodaje oružje ili pruža drugu podršku u trenutku kad >> to znači zaoštravanje odnosa sa celim svetom, a naročito njegovim >> ekonomski najmoćnijim delom? A Jugoslavija? :(
svet.127 dpozaric,
>> I ja sam u to ubeden. Pri tome ne treba zaboraviti da se nasi ljudi nalaze u >>Iraku prakticno kao taoci. Na stranu da je razlog zasto ne mogu da izadu prekid >>svih linija sa Irakom. To vrlo malo moze da utesi deo onih koji bi da se vrate. >>Jednostavno nemaju ni jedan nacin da izadu, dakle nalaze se u zatvoru. (It's >>that simple.) Pa da, imamo mi vec takvih iskustava sa gospodinom Gadafijem, zar ne? Sjetimo se raznih (od strane nasih vlasti) zataskanih afera kad su nam ljudi jednostavno nestajali sa lica zemlje, bez objasnjenja. Pada mi na pamet jedan procitani clanak od prije godinu-dvije kad su zeni kao fol poslali les vlastitog muza, zaledjen. Zena pogleda i utvrdi da to NIJE njen muz. Vjerojatno se jos uvijek naganja sa Libijskim vlastima, ako nije izgubila volju. A nase su se diplomate KAO zauzele za to, samo da se nista ne objavi u stampi... vjerojatno u interesu nekih *visih* ciljeva. :((
svet.128 dpozaric,
>> Ako moze "Slobodna Dalmacija" tako ludo da se zeza u novinama, >>zasto ne bih mogao i ja da kazem sta mislim? Uostalom, ako je neko >>neumesan, to nisam ja nego oni koji svoje "povjesne granice" vide >>odavde do Japana. Meni licno su i ove postojece sasvim dobre. Ni ja nisam rekao da sam nezadovoljan postojecim granicama, a nije ni velika vecina ljudi koje poznajem. Licno nemam nikakvih pretenzija prema nekim drugim, *tudjim* ili *nasim* podrucjima, i zadovoljio bih se i sa manjim da mi ih je povijest ostavila. Onaj atribut neumjesnog odnosio se na to da je vec bilo situacija da je takav napis shvacen kao izazov, jer svi smo pod uticajem (vise ili manje) domace politike i svugdje postoji netko tko bi vratio ove ili one povijesne granice. Sjecam se da sam nedavno imao krace prepucavanje sa jednim sezamovcem (neka ne zamjeri sto se ne sjecam imena odnosno pseudonima) bas zbog toga sto je njegova poruka bila napisana tonom koji moze shvatiti ispravno samo netko blizak autoru. Da nismo civilizirani ljudi, bile bi pale i ruzne rijeci, no dogovorili smo se da smo se krivo razumjeli pa je sve ispalo ok. Kad smo vec kod razvikanog hrvatskog novogovora, meni se najvise svidja pojam *ukrudba* jedne novinarke (ne znam vise koje), a koji, pogadjas, asocira na erekciju :-)) Pozdrav, Drazen.
svet.129 kale,
>> A Jugoslavija? :( Pa, već je neki naš predstavnik objasnio da YU sa Irakom ima zaključene poslove u vrednosti od milijardu dolara. Međutim, ti dolari su prilično nesigurni, kao i oni koje nam Irak već duguje. A šteta zbog reakcija razvijenog sveta na našu eventualnu pomoć Iraku bi (za sada) bila vrrrrrrlo izvesna i VELIKA. Ne verujem da smo (baš) tolike budale.
svet.130 dveselinovic,
žuj, ja stvarno nikoga ne izazivam, bar ne namerno. A koga zanima ludo zezanje, stvarno treba da pročita "Feral Tribune", ja sam dobio jedno deset umetaka i doslovno sam se isplakao od smeha. Prema njima, "Jež" je k'o mutava baba, imaju momci duha na kilo. A kako samo zezaju Đodana, to nije normalno. Jedino što njih odvaja od svih drugih koje sam video (pored stvarnog humora) je njihova nezlonamernost - jednako zezaju i levo i desno, nema svetinja, ali sve bez pakosti. Toplo preporučujem. Ako neko moje dopise shvata kao izazov, da odmah pokopam sve ambicije za svađu: imao sam, imam i nadam se imaću i dobrih drugara u Zagrebu i kolega kojima sa zadovoljstvom kapu skidam od poštovanja. Za sada, i njih i mene boli d..e za razne manijake i kretene koji šaraju zemljom, k'o u filmu "Noć veštica". Pozdrav.
svet.131 dejanr,
Na BIX-u se, kao što možete pretpostaviti, dosta priča o eventualnom američno-iračkom ratu, naročito sa tehničkog i finansijskog aspekta. Ima li interesa da se diskusija prenosi i ovde? Za primer evo malo poruka iz konferencije financial/defense. ========================== financial/defense #14, from rgswartz, 232 chars, Fri Aug 17 01:21:20 1990 This is a comment to message 13. There is/are comment(s) on this message. -------------------------- xBC reported tonight that the logistic cost is expected to be $1.2 billion by the end of the month. With planes landing on the average of every 10 minutes it sounds a little more accurate than the Nightly Business Report's figure. ========================== financial/defense #15, from moneysmith, 480 chars, Fri Aug 17 06:11:07 1990 This is a comment to message 14. There is/are comment(s) on this message. -------------------------- Kuwaiti ambassador on CNN said that Kuwait is willing to lay out substantial amounts of its oil billions to defray the cost of foreign military forces. They've got upwards of $150 billion outside the country, so I suppose it would be reasonable for the US and other countries to talk money with them. The Japanese have also stated that they will be adding financial backing to the action, since the law prevents them from having much military or sending it out of the country. ========================== financial/defense #16, from jpistritto, 1162 chars, Fri Aug 17 07:00:59 1990 This is a comment to message 15. There is/are comment(s) on this message. -------------------------- There's an article in today WSJ/Europe which alleges that London based Kuwaitis are more than willing to start paying for military assistance. It doesn't say whether they've been asked. Word is over here that they may already be paying Turkey, by the way. I think the Kuwaitis appreciate the fact that Bush hasn't let this issue die, and is putting his people in harm's way to try and reverse the occupation of Kuwait. I think this is more than most Arabs, and particularly Saddam Hussein, expected. With the withdrawal of the Jordanians from any mediating roles, I think the way is now clear for direct military action, starting with the blockade. Unfortunately, it seems that virtually all diplomatic channels have been exhausted now (UN, Arab League, Jordan, PLO). The Algerians are still around, (and usually helpful in resolving crises), but from what I've been hearing nightly on Radio Baghdad, Saddam isn't interesting in talking. Now he's warning foreign pilots not to be shot down over Iraq, as the 'enraged Arab people' will kill them. What happens to those Brits and Americans in Kuwait City could be decisive here, and in the next day or so. ========================== financial/defense #17, from moneysmith, 1050 chars, Fri Aug 17 07:26:23 1990 This is a comment to message 16. There is/are comment(s) on this message. -------------------------- Since the US has been advising Americans not to voluntarily go to the hotels, as Iraq has requested/demanded, it sounds as though the thinking is to keep them dispersed, not concentrated. Should Iraq choose to try to round them up, that would be a defining act between protection and hostage taking, and that might well be the casus belli. A couple of episodes of Iraqi fighters flying toward Saudi Arabia, then retreating when US pilots radar-locked them, have happened. Such feints seem to be preliminary to contacts that will eventually result in shooting. The US now has Tomahawk cruise missiles on station in the gulf and satellites have been feeding data to the ships' computers for five days, picking out Iraqi targets. One report on the SCUD missiles is that, being liquid fuelled, it takes a day or two exposed on the launch pads before they can be fired. During that time they are vulnerable to attack. I suspect that the first fueling and/or arming that shows up in recon photos will also be considered justification for attack. ========================== financial/defense #18, from jpistritto, 1246 chars, Fri Aug 17 10:38:02 1990 This is a comment to message 17. There is/are comment(s) on this message. -------------------------- It doesn't take a day to fuel a SCUD, just an hour or so. Provided you're in position to fire to start with. 90 minutes tops. They used to knock these off at the Iranians day after day during the war. Now the Iraqis have a boosted Scud-B which has strap-ons or some such, and it might take a while longer to get that set to go. They only used a few of those at a time. Egyptians used the standard Scud-B on the Israelis in 1973, and didn't have days to set them up. The Iranians have the stock models as well. (check out the Scientific American article on Third World Missiles) Scuds aren't the big problem though. They've got some *GREAT* artillery systems that have a lot higher firing rate than the missiles. Missiles are a *VERY* expensive way to bombard a target, unless you're using munitions that have massive impact (like chemical or nuclear), or you don't have any other choice (no air force). The Iraqis threw missiles at Tehran (the boosted Scuds), but that was mostly for psychological impact. The impact crater from one of those rounds was smaller than a typical 155 shell would make (they had to lighten the payload a lot to get the range). I could see a few potshots taken at Riyadh, but nothing military significant. ========================== financial/defense #19, from msa, 257 chars, Fri Aug 17 14:30:50 1990 This is a comment to message 18. -------------------------- And when I think that this *GREAT* artillery is controlled by fire- leading systems (not made in but) developed and patented in Switzerland, I feel like heading towards Zurich and have a few explanatory words with the CEO of Oerlikon-Buerle. + Peter + ========================== financial/defense #20, from moneysmith, 251 chars, Fri Aug 17 14:40:57 1990 -------------------------- TITLE: German gas-sniffing tanks. Germany is lending the US ten tanks to the US. The "Fuchs" or "fox" in German, tanks are equipped to detect poison gas. About 100 US soldiers are being checked out on the operation of the tanks and detection gear.
svet.132 kale,
>> Na BIX-u se, kao što možete pretpostaviti, dosta priča o eventualnom >> američno-iračkom ratu, naročito sa tehničkog i finansijskog aspekta. >> Ima li interesa da se diskusija prenosi i ovde? IMA! Da ovi Ameri ne saopštavaju previše podataka javnosti? Kao ono o nemačkim tenkovima za otkrivanje bojnih otrova. Pozdrav, Kale
svet.133 dejanr,
>> > Na BIX-u se, kao što možete pretpostaviti, dosta priča o eventualnom >> > američno-iračkom ratu, naročito sa tehničkog i finansijskog aspekta. >> > Ima li interesa da se diskusija prenosi i ovde? >> >> IMA! Da ne bih "mučio" učesnike ove konferencije, otvorio sam novi read.only topic world.news i konferenciji NOVOSTI. Tamo je već prva zaliha diskusije o tehnološko/vojnim aspektima mogućeg američko-iračkog sukoba. Ako bude komentara, nastavljamo - toga ima na tone! Uzgred, na stranim BBS-ovima i mrežama su vojna pitanja (naročito o avionima, nuklearnoj tehnici itd) TOLIKO interesantna i proizvode TOLIKO poruka da prosto čovek razmišlja da bi otvaranje jedne teme tog tipa u FORUM-u moglo da bude dobra ideja. Razmislite! Pozdrav, Dejan¸│
svet.134 dpozaric,
>> Ako neko moje dopise shvata kao izazov, da odmah pokopam sve >>ambicije za svadu: imao sam, imam i nadam se imacu i dobrih drugara u >>Zagrebu i kolega kojima sa zadovoljstvom kapu skidam od postovanja. >>Za sada, i njih i mene boli d..e za razne manijake i kretene koji >>saraju zemljom, k'o u filmu "Noc vestica". Dejane, ne znam da li se sjecas, ali upravo sam ja bio cesto prisiljen odgovarati na slicne izazove, a i ja imam (i imat cu) dobrih prijatelja po citavoj Srbiji. Susjedi su mi Srbi (vrlo mnogo njih) i dobro zivimo zajedno, iako su u zadnje vrijeme bili malo uplaseni Kninskim zbivanjima. No, informirali su se malo bolje i sada je opet sve OK. Vidim da smo te dileme davno apsolvirali, pa da onda prestanemo o tome polemizirati. Zao mi je jedino sto nisam tako cesto u mogucnosti biti online na Sezamu, jer bi bilo bolje da ne odgovaram sa ovolikim zakasnjenjem. Ipak, vremena su malo vatrena za nase narode pa nije cudo sto ponekad plane iskrica. Nadam se da svejedno shvacas kakav sam i sto sam... :-)) Ambicija za svadju, dakako - nemam... Pozdrav, Drazen.
svet.135 balinda,
O agresiji Iraka smo već dosta diskutovali i pomenuli neke od uzroka koje su naterali S. Huseina na takav postupak i to u trenutku kad se i moglo očekivati da će međunarodna zajednica biti jedinstvenija nego ikada u čitavoj ljudskoj istoriji. No, ne sećam se da smo pomenuli da je Irak jedna od najzaduženijih zemalja i sigurno najzaduženija od svih arapskih. Ako se dobro sećam, negde sam pročitao sumu od oko 80-tak milijardi $. !!!? Naravno, glavni "krivac" je iscrpljujući rat sa Iranom. Ne govoreći o neophodnosti bojkota Iraka zbog pridruživanja svetu koji će nam još itekako trebati, nama je da se zamislimo da li možemo uopšte očekivati da nam jedan takav potencijalni davljenik uopšte može vratiti i pare koje nam duguje, a kamo li one za koje mu sada radimo? Ne treba zaboraviti da su najveći irački poverenici Japan i Francuska i da je za očekivati da se sigurno nađu ispred nas. Oho, koliko li ih još ima "ispred" nas za onih 80 mil. $ ? :(((( Dakle, predlažem da se demonstrativno napuste sva gradilišta u Iraku i da se zahteva i ošteta za nedovršene radove. Naravno da je nećemo dobiti, ali se prethodno može "prodati" spremnost za jedan takav zahtev. Dosta se govori i o delimičnoj odšteti za oštećene zemlje od strane Japana, Nemačke, USA i još nekih. Zar ne treba zauzeti što povoljnije "mesto" na toj listi? S druge strane čini mi se da u Iraku i radimo samo zbog kakvog-takvog "mira u kući". (?)
svet.136 dejanr,
>> S druge strane čini mi se da u Iraku i radimo samo zbog kakvog-takvog >> "mira u kući". (?) Ja mislim da mi radimo u Iraku, Libiji i na drugim odgovarajućim mestima poznatim po itd, itd zato što nas niko pametniji neće. I zato što kod njih niko pametniji neće da radi. Jedino ne razumem kako mi i dalje nastavljamo da poslujemo kada nam se godinama ne plaća ono što uradimo - kao da je važno da se na papiru ima posao a za pare, videćemo jednog dana... Ako stvarno tako posluju naši privredni giganti, onda *treba* što pre da propadnu i da na scenu izađu male firme koje će pre nego što misle o zvučnom imenu posla misliti i o tome kada će i da li će stići pare.
svet.137 dpozaric,
>>Ja mislim da mi radimo u Iraku, Libiji i na drugim odgovarajucim mestima >>poznatim po itd, itd zato sto nas niko pametniji nece. I zato sto kod >>njih niko pametniji nece da radi. Jedino ne razumem kako mi i dalje >>nastavljamo da poslujemo kada nam se godinama ne placa ono sto uradimo >>- kao da je vazno da se na papiru ima posao a za pare, videcemo jednog >>dana... Po meni, to je veoma lako razumjeti: nase su firme, odnosno "giganti", totalno nelikvidne, tehnoloski zaostale firme, ciji je kadar sa svojom obrazovanoscu na nivou na kojem je bio kad je zavrsio skolu za to sto radi, ako je ikad i isao u skolu. Samim tim, firme su nekonkurentne, a jos vise to pojacava cinjenica da nemamo trgovacke managere koji znaju nabaviti rezervne dijelove, opremu i alat tamo gdje treba, tamo gdje je najpovoljnije mjesto za nabavku. Umjesto toga, prodajemo za male pare nase proizvode koji su inace mnogo skuplji od istih prizvoda u ostalom svijetu, i time sebe upropastavamo samo zato da bi dosli do deviza. Cijenu tih deviza svi mi zajedno placamo. U tom vrzinom kolu profitiraju iskljucivo oni koji poslove sklapaju, i nitko vise, dakle, samo politicari. Cak te usluge i ne naplacujemo u cashu, nego u nafti. Tako su nas ugovori sa Irakom vezali na to da za rad vrijedan 18 dolara dobijamo 1 barel nafte, koji je vec mnogo godina unatrag na slobodnom trzistu kostao cak i mizernih 11 dolara !!! Zar mi da financiramo razvijeni svijet ? Da, da, upravo je tako. Nismo li i Sovjetski Savez desetljecima na taj nacin financirali, gdje su kamate od klirinske trgovine, od duga koji imaju prema nama ? Nema kamata i nece ih nikad ni biti jer se u tom vidu trgovine i ne obracunavaju !!! ... jos jedna pametna izmisljotina socrealizma ... >>Ako stvarno tako posluju nasi privredni giganti, onda *treba* sto pre >>da propadnu i da na scenu izadu male firme koje ce pre nego sto misle >>o zvucnom imenu posla misliti i o tome kada ce i da li ce stici pare. Iskreno se nadam da ce do toga doci, no svejedno treba vremena dok vlastodrsci (ne politicki, vec ekonomski) sidju iz svojih fotelja. Polozaj im svakako prija, i tesko ce se dati zbaciti iz njih...
svet.138 balinda,
Pa, ovo je neverovatno. Iako sam već pomislio da me više nizašta ne mogu iznervirati, evo ih opet. :((((( (Ovo bi bolje "leglo" u temu gde.smo, ali je povod iračka agresija na Kuvajt, pa neka ga ovde.) Iako se ceo (normalan!) svet trudi da, i ostankom u svojim ambasadama u Kuvajtu, pokaže da se ne miri sa, kako se to obično kaže, "flangrantnim kršenjem međunarodnih konvencija", mi smo se našli da pokažemo da smo samo "evropska ispostava džihada". :( naime, "naš" amasador (ne sećam se imena, ali "miriše" na muslimansko, ima li i to nekakve veze?) je napustio ambasadu Jugoslavije u Kuvajtu i otišao za Bagdad!!!! "Objasnio" je da je "rad otežan jer se *ISPRED* ambasade nalaze jake vojne snage Iraka, pa nema smisla da sedi tamo". ????? On, zna šta ima a šta nema smisla? Ambasadori (odavno!) imaju *samo* zadatak da "održavaju ravnotežu između šoljice za kafu u jednoj i tacne sa kolačima u drugoj ruci." ;) Naravno, ovde mislim da nema reči o naivnosti, već o nečijoj *zloj* nameri. (?) Možda da napomenem da je naša ambasada u Kuvajtu jedna od retkih koja je pošteđena ukidanja struje i vode. Kako li je ostalim zemljama koji ostaju tamo i pored neuporedivo težih uslova? Mislimo li tako u Evropu? Ja sam odavno "Srbin u ostavci", `oće li me naterati da budem i takav Jugosloven? :(
svet.139 vkrstonosic,
Javili su na radiju, da je ambasador vracen iz zdravsvenih razloga, a ime mu je inace vrlo muslimansko :)
svet.140 dpozaric,
Gledao sam upravo Dnevnik i cuo da su se Bush i Gorbacov dogovorili da ce zahtijevati postovanje Deklaracije OUN (itd) kao preduslov diplomatskog rjesavanja krize u Zaljevu. S druge strane, Husein je i prakticki bacio pred svijet svoj tvrdi stav da ne zeli napustiti Kuwait, i da ce ga braniti do posljednjeg casa. Sto mislite, jesu li to posljednji Sadamovi dani, ili kako ? Po meni, Bush bi se rado poigrao rata, jer mu je to jedinstvena prilika da se proslavi, kao i svi dosadasnji americki predsjednici. S druge strane, mislim da je u neku ruku i "dobro" sto do toga dolazi, jer je probijen led u trazenju zajednickih interesa i ciljeva SAD i SSSR-a. Sada ce ih, vjerujem, biti daleko lakse naci, posto su i u jednoj i u drugoj drzavi na najboljem putu da razbiju ideoloske barijere i predstave koje gradjani "gaje" jedni prema drugima. Zao mi je svih tih ljudi koji ce tamo (vjerojatno) izginuti, no mislim da je vrijeme da se stane na rep Arapima i njihovoj samouvjerenosti. U protivnom ce svaka banana-drzava u buducnosti sarati okolo u potrazi za kojim izvorom nafte.
svet.141 vcalic,
>>Po meni, Bush bi se rado poigrao rata, jer mu je to jedinstvena >>prilika da se proslavi, kao i svi dosadasnji americki predsjednici. Meni se cini da je to Bushu i njegovoj ekipi jedina sansa da izvuce privredu iz stanja u koje je upala. Dok Husein nije poceo da radi to sto radi, stalno se pricalo da je americka privreda pred kolapsom. Ako dodje do rata, onda se cela privreda stavlja u sluzbu vojsci, i vrlo je moguce da Bush u tome vidi izlaz iz situacije u kojoj se SAD nalaze. Cak se prica kako su Ameri inscenirali celu frku, samo da bi spasli od recesije. Pozdrav, Vlada P.S. Da li ste citali Kremansko prorocanstvo? U izdanju iz 1986. pisalo je da je matori Tarabic predvideo kako ce postojati veliko carstvo preko velike vode, i kako ce jednog dana car postati caus (glumac na seoskim svadbama), a onaj koji dodje posle causa izazvace veliki rat. Obistinjava li se to predvidjanje cika Mitra?!
svet.142 bojt,
"U nizu sovjetskih gradova, pre svega u pribaltičkim republikama i u Zakavkazju, uklonjeno je u poslednje vreme više Lenjinovih spomenika. U Ukrajini se ovaj proces nastavlja uprkos zabrani republičkog parlamenta. Juče su u dva tamošnja grada spomenici skinuti, a na postament postavljene ukrajinske stare zastave. Pored uklanjanja spomenika, u više gradova po Sovjetskom Savezu promenjeni su nazivi ulica i trgova koji su nosili Lenjinovo ime, a na mesto njih postavljene table sa imenima heroja iz nacionalne istorije. (Tanjug)
svet.143 balinda,
Iračani su pojeli SVE jestive životinje iz ZOO vrta u Kuvajtu. :((( Mora biti da su već pojeli ceo zoološki vrt u Bagdadu, pa moradoše da okupiraju Kuvajt? ;)
svet.144 alazic,
HELP Interesuje me da li je neko gledao emisiju na III kanalu TVB gde je ucestvovao neki DR.MR.FR (i ono cuveno ─i.) Jovanovic. Sv▀ako ko je bilo sta cuo o njemu molim da mi se javi
svet.145 madamov,
Na vestima u podne čuh da je Margaret Tačer podnela ostavku na mesto premijera i da je istupila iz drugog kruga glasanja za kandidata konzervativne stranke.