quote:

But there is a big difference between US engagements in W.W.II. (and the US was ‘begged’ to come many times before they actually did … oh, just by the way US got to Europe only because mainly they realized Staling might ultimately grab it all)

Yup. Hesitated for 4 years or so. Funny isn't it?
Why didn't America come to our rescue in September 1939? Well?

quote:

Hudson, please, you cannot judge Poland when this country was communist (or CR, same thing). Did you live there the time? Dou you realize what usually happened when somebody even slightly disagreed with Moscow (disobeying led to even worse punishment)?
For instance one of my uncles said only one sentence (he was trying to defend a farmer whose land was being expropriated) … the result was a force labor in uranium mines not only for him, but for all of his brothers; even my mom.
Yes, they tried to destroy you (and your family) so you either had to have your mouth shut or face the fact that you and your relatives go to jail and e.g. your kids would never be able to achieve higher than basic education. I am serious.

That's not all. What really has been going on is just being uncovered by historians who research and study documents recovered from the communist secret service- the so called "teczki"- secret files.
Thus so all the church scandals- from the secret files.
The attrocities that were happening in Poland during 1945-1989 are being uncovered only now and they are hair raising attrocities.

Does Jerzy Popieluszko ring the bell by any chance? Year 1984.

quote:

Originally posted by Honey:
To Hudson: yes, I agree that none of the countries are innocent. There is always something wrong, we all are just humans (and not everybody is just and honest either). But my point is that even if you think that UN is the most corrupt organization on this earth, it is an authority where nations have their say so – or they should have. Well, UN may be corrupt but show me a single country on this planet whose government is not. Or at least some of their officials are.

Well, considering that the UN is also the most secretive, dishonest, corrupt organization on this earth, not even the Soviet Union can beat its confidentiality statements. Keep in mind that the UN Human Rights Council has members on its board whose nations are notorious for human rights abuses (worse than the US, GASP). Personally, the US should refrain from sending representatives to such committees permanently. The UN international Criminal Court could not convict a person on a traffic violation unless politics enters the fray, and the judges are politically appointed: not exactly who you want on the bench, Thankfully, the UN is going down the same slippery path as that of its predecessor: League of Nations.

quote:

See, I would love to sweep my back door, front door, and all the windows but I know that this would be a job for Sisyphus. The communists ‘heritage’ shall not go away so quickly there. Sorry, this is not my fault but I will feel the injustice of history till the day I die (and do not forget that also the USA let this happen to my country, it was not only Churchill who was in Yalta in 1943).

1. Isn't this being hypocritical if you are not willing to sweep your back door, but believe everybody else should?
2. As for the Yalta Conference, the US did not let it happen. The world had already endured 7 hard fought years to end the Third Reich rein. Stalin did not obey the precepts of the Yalta Conference which asked for free elections. The worker's parties in Eastern Europe basically shanghaied the elections and the rest was history. We could not go to war with the Soviets on this technical matter. And besides, it could have been worse if Stalin sided with Adolf in 1941.

quote:

When there is something to be done, it should be done with consent of the majority of other countries, at least – and if you do not like UN, fine – establish a different organization, whatever.

No country needs consent of other countries to do what is in the best interest of that nation, including military action. That is not what the UN or any other international organization is defined.

quote:

Just one thing here; I am not sure when the Czech government was lying about the money (I would appreciate your specification) but I am sure that on 20.5.2006 something else happened that amused the whole world http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Vk9YIVK_bg - it took me time to find a video with English subtitles for you (well, they pronounce their names wrong, but it is OK, I guess). See, I am not saying my home country is perfect; I am just trying to say we prefer not to interfere in other countries’ matters.

It had to do with the economy which almost toppled the current Socialist government.

quote:

Finally, I do not fully agree with some of your descriptions – for instance about Kosovo. It was not the USA, it was NATO, UN units, KFOR and European Counsel who went there. Even Czech military specialists (we have e.g. experts for chemical weapons treatment) went there. Sure, there were Americans included too but everything was done AFTER consent of the majority of countries; it was not one country who decided to ‘settle the mess’ by itself. This is the point.

The Yugoslav wars have been going on since 1991. The US got involved in 1995 under the umbrella of the UN. The US did broker a peace treaty in 1994. And the main force under the NATO is US forces, particularly with Kosovo in 1999.

quote:

Once the USA starts to treat every single (even the smallest) country as a partner and will respect its rights and opinions fully and stop enforcing its will, then all the voices of criticism will stop.

The US may listen to those opinion, but they are no where binding. We may reject the opinion, we may accept the opinion, we may not act on the opinion, etc. However, the US will still seek to protect its vital economic and strategic interests. That would mean we will have to step on a few toes and ignore others, like every nation does. So, why the double standard?

quote:

Sure, this planet needs the USA and everybody should appreciate the help given! There were many conflicts in the history of this Earth and God bless all those who gave their lives in the name of freedom! But there is a big difference between US engagements in W.W.II. (and the US was ‘begged’ to come many times before they actually did … oh, just by the way US got to Europe only because mainly they realized Staling might ultimately grab it all) and US having its ‘private’ war in Iraq. This war was NOT approved by the UN.

And this is what the USA should realize – and I say it here because I love my new country. My husband was born here and my son too. If I did not love US, I would not have cared. On the other hand I do understand a few languages so and I am able to comprehend (unfortunately, maybe) what those other countries are saying about the USA. Sometimes it is good, sometimes not.

The US was basically isolationist prior to WWII. FDR did all he could, including violating the Neutrality Act, to help prepare the US for eventual war. It was not until the Pearl Harbor attack that got the US into war and that was on the premise to help Europe first even though Germany never attacked the US. But there is really no big difference between WWII and now. The challengers have changed names, but the same politics still remain the same. But this time, the US is constantly used as a guinea pig for others and is criticized no matter what we do.

quote:

And – just by the way – I have MA in International Trade, International Policy & Diplomacy. Not saying I cannot be mistaken … everybody makes some of those. But for sure I studied a little bit of international history.

Oh really, which region do you specialize? Which products?

quote:

P.S. and if you US guys went to Iraq, why is it you did not take their guns at the first place and prevent these guys from killing each other?

In Afghanistan, there are cultural issues that play an important part. First and foremost, the tribalism and what makes "a man" in their eyes that are most relevant. In Iraq, it is different. Most of the fighting is done by foreigners using the situation in their view of jihad. Added to this, the sectarian violence that has been bottled up for over 70 years is now coming full force, just like in Yugoslavia.

quote:

Originally posted by Hudson:
Well, considering that the UN is also the most secretive, dishonest, corrupt organization on this earth, not even the Soviet Union can beat its confidentiality statements. Keep in mind that the UN Human Rights Council has members on its board whose nations are notorious for human rights abuses (worse than the US, GASP). Personally, the US should refrain from sending representatives to such committees permanently. The UN international Criminal Court could not convict a person on a traffic violation unless politics enters the fray, and the judges are politically appointed: not exactly who you want on the bench, Thankfully, the UN is going down the same slippery path as that of its predecessor: League of Nations.

OK, if you think so … and what is going to be next? Absolutism?

quote:

Originally posted by Hudson:
1. Isn't this being hypocritical if you are not willing to sweep your back door, but believe everybody else should?
2. As for the Yalta Conference, the US did not let it happen. The world had already endured 7 hard fought years to end the Third Reich rein. Stalin did not obey the precepts of the Yalta Conference which asked for free elections. The worker's parties in Eastern Europe basically shanghaied the elections and the rest was history. We could not go to war with the Soviets on this technical matter. And besides, it could have been worse if Stalin sided with Adolf in 1941.

ad 1. No, I am willing to do and I honestly tried. But you probably misunderstood what Sysiphos work means.
Ad 2. NO, you are wrong, sorry. Totally. I do not know which countries you include in Eastern Europe – for sure you cannot include Poland or Czech Republic in those because they are in Central Europe (Prague in basically in the exact geographical center of Europe). However as for a secret deal in Yalta - on Churchill’s request (but Roosevelt was present) Poland and Czech Republic were to be in “Russian sphere of influence” instead of Greece and Turkey. So if we already were under Russian influence, you cannot talk about free elections at all; they were manipulated.
P.S. please, what 7 years? Yalta was in 1943 so the war lasted some 3,5 years (just reminder; it started 1.9.1939 when Germany invaded Poland).
Oh, try to put your feet in these moccasins: how would you feel if you were an ally with a country and fighting for the cause of that country and all of the sudden you got given to the Bolsheviks? What kind of fairness is that?

quote:

Originally posted by Hudson:
No country needs consent of other countries to do what is in the best interest of that nation, including military action. That is not what the UN or any other international organization is defined. .

OK, if you think so … but then this country must be ready for all the consequences following which may include reprocess in military action. In my book this is not the way how to solve problems though.

quote:

Originally posted by Hudson:
The Yugoslav wars have been going on since 1991. The US got involved in 1995 under the umbrella of the UN. The US did broker a peace treaty in 1994. And the main force under the NATO is US forces, particularly with Kosovo in 1999. .

Yes, I know what you are saying and you are right - but you still cannot say it was ONLY the US in NATO forces.

quote:

Originally posted by Hudson:
The US may listen to those opinion, but they are no where binding. We may reject the opinion, we may accept the opinion, we may not act on the opinion, etc. However, the US will still seek to protect its vital economic and strategic interests. That would mean we will have to step on a few toes and ignore others, like every nation does. So, why the double standard? .

I agree with your statement provided this ‘protection of vital economics and strategic interest' does not destroy other nations.

quote:

Originally posted by Hudson:
The US was basically isolationist prior to WWII. FDR did all he could, including violating the Neutrality Act, to help prepare the US for eventual war. It was not until the Pearl Harbor attack that got the US into war and that was on the premise to help Europe first even though Germany never attacked the US. But there is really no big difference between WWII and now. The challengers have changed names, but the same politics still remain the same. But this time, the US is constantly used as a guinea pig for others and is criticized no matter what we do.

Come on; I did not criticize US and I never will (maybe others do, but …). All what I am saying is meant honestly and I am trying to explain why people from countries like mine now are reacting defensively on some US statements. You should understand that we were told what to do by Russia before and now we feel like we are told what to do by somebody else; this is why there is some resentment among the people from my country.
And sorry, again I disagree with you there is no difference between W.W.II. and Iraq. Can you, please, prove me I am wrong … I am also trying to put myself in your shoes, see.

quote:

Originally posted by Hudson:
Oh really, which region do you specialize? Which products?

What kind of question is that? MA is a graduate degree and you are supposed to master the diplomatic history starting with the history of the USA, knowing kings of Indo-China within few last centuries and a current status of Burkina Faso. I hope you were just kidding here.

Again, Hudson, I know you are an educated guy. Sometimes I can make mistakes and the only reason why I put this down is that I thing somebody might think about it for a while. I love America very much, honestly – but because I have my ‘foreign’ eyes I can see some things from a different perspective. This perspective is not ment to be destructive or criticizing; I know I cannot change the history. But I know the more people over here realize these small remarks I give you and take them into consideration the better and more glorious the USA will be. I would love to see this happen.
I will never do anything what might hurt the USA; actually I am defending it against very sharp remarks I am getting from the people from my country. Just by the way.

Honey,
there's no arguing with a person like Hudson because he thinks he and the US of A, are always right and he's got his blinders on. Not willing to really understand the reality, the real history, just what is written in what he reads.

WE KNOW THE REAL HISTORY HUDSON - YOU DON'T.

There were no free elections in Poland.
Hundreds of thousands people stayed out of Poland when the war was ended because for us the war NEVER ended until 1989.

You know NOTHING Hudson.

quote:

Originally posted by iperson:
Honey,
there's no arguing with a person like Hudson because he thinks he and the US of A, are always right and he's got his blinders on. Not willing to really understand the reality, the real history, just what is written in what he reads.

WE KNOW THE REAL HISTORY HUDSON - YOU DON'T.

There were no free elections in Poland.
Hundreds of thousands people stayed out of Poland when the war was ended because for us the war NEVER ended until 1989.

You know NOTHING Hudson.

Well, I hate to say it (I originally thought he was a very smart guy ) … Should we include him in our fan-club to join guys like Somebody12 and SunDevilUSA than ?

I think so Honey. I mean to not know what happened and what our nations went through? Come on!
At least they must have heard about the Iron Curtain and the Berlin Wall?? Ya'd think...

quote:

Originally posted by Honey:
OK, if you think so … and what is going to be next? Absolutism?

Why does someone always responds "absolutism" when one believes there should be no UN or other international organization of that magnitude. Personally, I believe there should be no international political organization like the UN or the League of Nations. I do believe in economic agreements or military alliances, but call me old school.

NOTE: Have you any studied the failings of the UN and the League of Nations as to not how to form an international political organization?

quote:

ad 1. No, I am willing to do and I honestly tried. But you probably misunderstood what Sysiphos work means.
Ad 2. NO, you are wrong, sorry. Totally. I do not know which countries you include in Eastern Europe – for sure you cannot include Poland or Czech Republic in those because they are in Central Europe (Prague in basically in the exact geographical center of Europe). However as for a secret deal in Yalta - on Churchill’s request (but Roosevelt was present) Poland and Czech Republic were to be in “Russian sphere of influence” instead of Greece and Turkey. So if we already were under Russian influence, you cannot talk about free elections at all; they were manipulated.
P.S. please, what 7 years? Yalta was in 1943 so the war lasted some 3,5 years (just reminder; it started 1.9.1939 when Germany invaded Poland).
Oh, try to put your feet in these moccasins: how would you feel if you were an ally with a country and fighting for the cause of that country and all of the sudden you got given to the Bolsheviks? What kind of fairness is that?

1. Do you mean "Sysiphos" or "Sisyphus" in the Greek mythology? I have read some works of Cicero, Sun Tzu, Von Clauesewitz, and a few others.
2. Have you studied the Yalta or the Potsdam papers? What you are suggesting is totally beyond what was said and recorded in those two agreements, footnotes and analysis. I have read some from Yale and a few other places. And it seems you are referring to a paper written in 99.
3. Apparently, you forgot about Asia, didn't you. Although the signatory signing ending WWII in the Pacific theater was on Sept 2nd, 1945, some of the Japanese forces did not surrender until 1946. This was due to the remoteness on the French-Indochina Peninsula, the Philippines, and parts of China. The Chinese regard WWWII from 1933 through 1945. So, it depends on your point of view doesn't it. Or your history is the real history and all others are just irrelevant?
4. I still refer Europe only in Western or Eastern because I still strongly believe the Cold War has not gone away. It was not meant purposely as a geographical reference, but political.

quote:

OK, if you think so … but then this country must be ready for all the consequences following which may include reprocess in military action. In my book this is not the way how to solve problems though.

And that is the $64 trillion dollar question? This is not to say that this country loves to fight, but this country has gotten lax on instant gratification. It it can occur only on CNN, or last a day or two, most people will be happy with it. But if it lasts longer than one anticipates, even with any noble cause, then they will fall like flies in support. However, I think this question is relevant to any nation except for a few.

quote:

Yes, I know what you are saying and you are right - but you still cannot say it was ONLY the US in NATO forces.

Technically you are right about NATO being more than the US. However, when one views NATO, do you think that person sees all who contribute, or just the US when NATO fights? If you answer the latter, this is what most people concur and formulate and this is where I am coming from.

quote:

I agree with your statement provided this ‘protection of vital economics and strategic interest' does not destroy other nations.

Impossible not to step on a few toes when waging war, economically or politically.

quote:

Come on; I did not criticize US and I never will (maybe others do, but …). All what I am saying is meant honestly and I am trying to explain why people from countries like mine now are reacting defensively on some US statements. You should understand that we were told what to do by Russia before and now we feel like we are told what to do by somebody else; this is why there is some resentment among the people from my country.
And sorry, again I disagree with you there is no difference between W.W.II. and Iraq. Can you, please, prove me I am wrong … I am also trying to put myself in your shoes, see.

Where in my statement did I state that you specifically criticized the US exclusively? As for the similarities, this will give a brief explanation.

quote:

What kind of question is that? MA is a graduate degree and you are supposed to master the diplomatic history starting with the history of the USA, knowing kings of Indo-China within few last centuries and a current status of Burkina Faso. I hope you were just kidding here.

The question was asked because I believed you have graduated and obtained a job using that degree. Perhaps I was wrong, perhaps not.

quote:

Again, Hudson, I know you are an educated guy. Sometimes I can make mistakes and the only reason why I put this down is that I thing somebody might think about it for a while. I love America very much, honestly – but because I have my ‘foreign’ eyes I can see some things from a different perspective. This perspective is not ment to be destructive or criticizing; I know I cannot change the history. But I know the more people over here realize these small remarks I give you and take them into consideration the better and more glorious the USA will be. I would love to see this happen.
I will never do anything what might hurt the USA; actually I am defending it against very sharp remarks I am getting from the people from my country. Just by the way.

To me, this debate is simply an exercise of the mind, and nothing more. And when I debate, I intend to win, hopefully without emotion.

quote:

Originally posted by iperson:
WE KNOW THE REAL HISTORY HUDSON - YOU DON'T.

There were no free elections in Poland.
Hundreds of thousands people stayed out of Poland when the war was ended because for us the war NEVER ended until 1989.

You know NOTHING Hudson.

For every time I had a ****hing, I would be a millionaire. So, what is the "real history" or is it your his story, IP? So, is history

"History is an account, mostly false, of events, mostly unimportant, which are brought about by rulers, mostly knaves, and soldiers, mostly fools."--Ambrose Bierce
"History is the version of past events that people have decided to agree upon." Napoleon Bonaparte
"History is more or less bunk." --Henry Ford

quote:

For every time I had a ****hing, I would be a millionaire. So, what is the "real history" or is it your his story, IP? So, is history

No, it is not only MY history, it is the history and herstory of my nation, battered through centuries with partiations, wars and attrocities, that finally ended in 1989 and sealed with EU membership in 2004.

I have been following this very closely just want to add something... since Poland joined the EU, companies have been closing their factories and causing mass unemployment in the rest of Europe, eg, Germany, England, benelux lands and re-settling in Poland where they are getting massive amounts of financial aid in grants from Belgium, so that they can make their profits excessive, using polish people for cheap labour... paying them more than they are used to but cheaper than thier european conterparts....so have the attrocious things really stopped... probably not.... just another day in paradise.... just now its economical... not physical... history is what were living today....for the historians of tomorrow.... and are we making a better job of it than our predecessors..... it is what it is...

I rather think that was the trend before Poland and other former Warsaw Pact Members were included into the EU - logic would tell you to include them into the EU to level things economically.

Well ntfd3, I have not heard about what you said, but even if that's the case, it is not because of Poland but the simple laws of demand and supply.

What else are American companies doing? Outsourcing to Asia.

I really despise this kind of attitude towards Poland from people on this board. It's either Poland stole Silesia from Germany and now stealing jobs. It's as if Germany is the better nation and surely Silesia had to be German. How could it ever be Polish since Poland really is a small country and nothing good comes out of there, right?

For your information Silesia always was Polish from the very beginning. It is German expansionist agenda that caused so many wars between the two countries.
How come we never had one war with Chechs?
We are a peaceful nation unlike Germany or Russia.

So now we're stealing German jobs? What about the Chinese, the Indian, the Thailand cheap labor?
It's called global economy.

Such posts as yours really annoy me because your attitude is arrogant and ignorant (lack of knowledge of history). Basically you are saying that the Western countries, GB, Germany, and US are so much better and other countries are poor, and have no set of values. They are theifs and criminals right?

Don't deny it, in not so many words you've expressed your arrogance.

to ntfd3 and Kollerkrot: But Poland and Czech Republic are members of EU since 1.May 2004. On the other hands they still face some restrictions; we still do not have Euro as money and we cannot work in the majority of the Union states freely as equals.

So take this from another point of view: it was Germany and such who was too afraid that its people would loose jobs because of our countries (too many Polish and Czech workers in Germany). But ironically investments go to our countries and as a result companies make more because they save bunch money on wages and they buy property much cheaper.

If we would be able to work freely within the whole EU, we would be entitled to an adequate wage common in each country by law (and we would be equally protected as other ‘old’ EU members … but not many people would emigrate because expenses on moving (the case may be different for seasonal jobs etc.) exceed the short term benefit (let's say 5 years).

For instance do you think that somebody who is 40, having family and 3 kids would just wrap it up all, sell a family house and with this little money (property is still much less expensive in Central Europe too) start over somewhere in the motel room in the suburbs of Frankfurt?

If there was a free movement of workforce, wages would equal much faster too so soon too.

Honey,
A lot of Polish people moved (in hundreds of thousands I think), esp to London but also to France and Germany.
A lot of successful people mostly because the uneducated unskilled labor doesn't know English well or at all, and many end up coming back.
But many business people start businesses or work for English businesses and they are doing great there.

And there is nothing wrong with it. EU has been created to eventually abolish national and economic inequalities and create one big nation called Europe, in the fashion of United States.

If you're against free workforce movement across Europe, I suggest to do the same in the US.
No moving from state to state ntfd3.