And what was the reason to attack Russia except imperialism and of thirst of power?

Aha. So it was Russia who attacked France grabbing towns and burning them.

Don't forget that frenches burnt most of Russian cities they occupied, Moscow, Smolensk, etc...

Some time after Germans were burning not only cities, but even food and fields to kill citizens (they were dieing of starvation).

So please tell me was Paris burnt by Russians, ah?

__________________
Please watch this:


Shocking video of results of Georgian attack on South Osetia
CNN is spreading propaganda!
American witness: "Not only Georgia, but also U.S. are responsible for the violence in South Ossetia"
Mark Almond: It's simplistic to cast Russia as sole villain in South Ossetia clashes

It’s a bit more complicated, I’m afraid. Today we witness the rise of “hard power(military factor)” in global affairs in general and Russia (like any other actor) adapts to this new situation. As for these “theory of fears to the nations”… It’s not in my rules to reject smth completely

To the point of absurdity: Western media accuse Russia of imperial style either when we sell resources to CIS countries at the lowest price or at the market price!

__________________
Tatiana Kuznetsova,
Political expert
http://www.finamrus.com/

Each country preserved its interest at the époque and now few things have changed. Due to Munich agreement Germany, Hungary and Poland received each a part of Czechoslovakia. ( Munich Agreement) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. According to the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact Germany and USSR divided Poland, Finland, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia and Hungary (Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ). Denying any of the fact is manipulating with history and presenting one-sided vision.
History-based strives usually bring to nothing.

__________________
Tatiana Kuznetsova,
Political expert
http://www.finamrus.com/

For me, there is no rise of "hard power", the military lobby has always been there, regarding Russia, Russia is trying to catch up its military grandeur of the USSR time, but what for?

France is always accused of selling weapons too, but that's something we shouldn't be proud of

__________________

THat, I have noticed.
Soviet Union had a nasty habit to rewrite unconvinient events and sometimes such propaganda was drawn as real event. That is why Finns and Russians clash in many historical things.

Opening the archives in the 90's was a very good thing, but I heard that those archives are once again locked up. Is that true?
For example Russian made document about Winter War was possible once those archives were open. It's very good document, tons of exellent information. "Winter War in Russian eyes"

Have done that, and also was keen on hearing my own grandfathers stories when he still lived. Also, these days the net is full of tales of the veterans. It is intresting to see that

It is surprising how sudden and quick the assault was. Mostly there is just a note in historybooks that `Barbarosa began ..,... and Soviet forces were hit hard, planes were on fields, military was unprepared.´ Good to hear how it is described there.

Well, Germans passing through Finland in the North knew full well where they were assigned, but Finns also knew that terrain up there would affectively halt any assaults and counter-attacks...

History is fasinating, in that aspect, I think. How different sides see events and how history is treated in the eyes of scholars and teachers. To compare same event in many differnt sides.

__________________
En uneksi. I do not dream.

Fennica, because of Finland over 1 millions of people have died of starvation in Leningrad.
So, Finns are fascist nation just as Germans.

__________________
Please watch this:


Shocking video of results of Georgian attack on South Osetia
CNN is spreading propaganda!
American witness: "Not only Georgia, but also U.S. are responsible for the violence in South Ossetia"
Mark Almond: It's simplistic to cast Russia as sole villain in South Ossetia clashes

Well, I agree. Which is why I objected when Oleg said that Russia had never attacked anyone. It is an untruth.

I don't claim to know Napoleon's reasons, I'm not a historian. I do know that it was Russia which initiated hostilities against France, and not the reverse.

Paris was not burnt by Russians, nor was France invaded by Russians. Nevertheless, Russians did kill Frenchmen and supported France's enemies. You shouldn't play with fire if you don't want to burn your fingers.

How's that, exactly?

__________________
When they come a wull staun ma groon
Staun ma groon al nae be afraid
Thoughts awe hame tak awa ma fear
Sweat an bluid hide ma veil awe tears

Oh, yeah, now read what you write. Looks like something very familiar, doesn't it?
Like the ''terrorists initiated hostilities against the US...The US is spreading democracy and freedom and is freeing populations from their ignoble tyrants...", eh? You are latent neocon, congratulations. Since that moment henceforth, any critics of the current US policies you emit, cannot be received seriously. If France would have been ruled by people like you and had enough power, the world would have the same cynic raiding-wars under the same hot speeches and appeals as wrote speechwriters of Mr. Bush.
Oh, yeah, the invasions ability of Germany was broken, and France safely invaded German lands. No nation would have ever admit such "justice".
and
Where the hell did I post the claim Russia never was the aggressor? Show us the number of my post where I did. Ah, understand, yes, plane primitive lies, typical for neocons to protect their shitty positions, like those there Ahmadinejad would-be said he want to wipe Israel out of surface of land.

I never claimed anything, I asked you a question. I resample it again. Why Russians and Germans must recognize themselves agressors in all wars while French, Americans, Brits and Israelis will always be our sinless judges?
If you want my claim it would be the following - either we all were agressors and served our own egoistical national interests or we all weren't. And in future please, don't refer to the claims of posters before they are been made.

lol...It was a joke, old bean.

I didn't mention justice, did I? It seems we don't communicate very well...

My bad. I was answering MilleVanille initially.

Now, What's this about France being your sinless judge? I readily admit that France is just as guilty as Russia of colonization and aggression. Certainly not more. We're almost not killing anybody at the moment. Well, maybe a few here or there.

Don't sounds very convincing. Few lines lower, here
you seem not to joke.
Not to mention that namely Napoleon brutally put out the Revolution and following your logic, he should have been the best counter-revolutionist friend of the monarchists, not the enemy.
Perhaps so. The point of mine was the Versaille has been the starter-reason for the WW2, because German nation was humiliated with this treaty. The Versaille treaty was from the beginning the treaty which didn't solved the conflict between European elites; instead of reaching reasonable status-quo of everyone's interests, it created the humiliative mechanism of forceful supression of German nation. You rejected it.

When you asked "Remember Poland?" at Mille, with my modest help we determined that you remember Poland-victim (of German-Soviet pact), yet you absolutely unacquainted with the Poland-aggressor of that very historical moment. Poland was under French-British patronage, and with Munich treaty French (PM D'Aladieu, sorry for loose wrong spelling) and Brits (Chamberlein) simply had given to their continental key-ally Poland to grab the patch of Czechoslovakia.
Next time you ask Russian "Remember Poland?", if you really admit our countries all were agressive selfish egoists, you should mention the Ribbentrop-Molotov treaty TOGETHER with Munich treaty, Versaille treaty, "Brest Peace" treaty (between Bolsheviks and Germans, 1918) and together with Pilsudski-Hitler pact. As all sides will be in the one spotlight, then only we will discuss our faults and level of aggression.

Be convinced, or not. It's no skin off my nose, either way.

It matters not. I'm not the Napoleon fan club. The point was, Russia attacked France. You know it, I know it, everybody knows it.

Well, sure. So what?

I am not giving a lecture on WW2 here (although clearly, you intend to give me one, well, why not, maybe some other time). I am objecting to MilleVanille's characterization of Russia as the perpetual victim of western aggression. That's nationalistic propaganda.

Finland was collaborating with Nazi Germany and made and gave everything for blockade of Leningrad.

The result was over 1 million of people who died of starvation in Leningrad (mainly women and children, because men were on front).

__________________
Please watch this:


Shocking video of results of Georgian attack on South Osetia
CNN is spreading propaganda!
American witness: "Not only Georgia, but also U.S. are responsible for the violence in South Ossetia"
Mark Almond: It's simplistic to cast Russia as sole villain in South Ossetia clashes

Of course, the murder of over 16 millions of Russian civilians and over 11 millions of fighters is a "nationalistic propaganda".

__________________
Please watch this:


Shocking video of results of Georgian attack on South Osetia
CNN is spreading propaganda!
American witness: "Not only Georgia, but also U.S. are responsible for the violence in South Ossetia"
Mark Almond: It's simplistic to cast Russia as sole villain in South Ossetia clashes