Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Lyss

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 11
16
The Russian Revolution / Re: No Stalin, no Hitler?
« on: November 13, 2007, 07:42:42 AM »
a very interesting article in the economist.
As for the rehabilitation of Stalin, can it be compared to the one of Mao? In China some belive Mao to be a semi god, is this also the case in Russia perhaps?

17
Tatiana Nicholaievna / Re: Tatiana in "Nicholas and Alexandra"
« on: November 10, 2007, 05:30:48 AM »
it takes long to load, that's true, but it's worth the waiting

18
Having Fun! / Re: drawings
« on: November 10, 2007, 04:32:56 AM »
It realy gives me a pleasure to see that people like my drawings.
I looked for another thread to post them, but didn't find one. Thank you for the link you gave me NAOTMAA fan.
Gradduchess_42 is right, Forum Admin, if you're reading this, do you know how to switch the information to the other, already existing thread?

19
Having Fun! / Re: drawings
« on: November 08, 2007, 09:15:46 AM »
Yiha, the first one worked. Thank you very much for your explanation about using thumbnails (in the "posting phoyographs" topic), Laura Mabee.
Here are two more:

Irina and her brothers (not yet finished, missing the faces):



Alexey, aged 9


20
Having Fun! / drawings
« on: November 08, 2007, 09:07:22 AM »
Hi,

I've made a couple of drawings of the Romanovs. Not knowing were to post them, I hope this is the place. This is the first time I'm using photobucket, so I'm not sure if everything will go ok.



This one is of Nicholas as a baby.

21
Romanov and Imperial Russia Links / Re: My first Romanov site
« on: November 07, 2007, 08:59:06 AM »
Looks great
I can't wait untill you finish it!

ps: you made a little mistake with Maria's sisters: two of her sisters weren't both named Olga ;)

22
For all of you who can receive France 2 and speak french, the channel is showing the film War and Peace in 4 parts, every tuesday at 20h50. Yesterday, while being bored and zapping, I accidentaly stumbelled on it. It seems pretty good. It's a french-italian-german cooperation  from 2006. The first part took place yesterday, but the other three parts are  yet to come.

http://guidetv.france2.fr/accueil.jspx#

lyss

23
The Russian Revolution / Re: No Stalin, no Hitler?
« on: November 07, 2007, 03:43:04 AM »
I've found the link to the article of The Economist about the difference in view of history, especialy WW II:
http://www.economist.com/world/europe/displaystory.cfm?story_id=9185774

an extract:
Above all, the authorised version of European history has floundered in the face of new members for whom the second world war is not the end of any debate, but a starting-point for new rows. The EU now has a fistful of ex-communist countries for whom, as one Brussels official puts it, “Strasbourg is not a symbol, and 1945 is not a magic year”. When Polish politicians mention Auschwitz, it is often to complain about it being called a “Polish death camp”, rather than the wording they feel is correct: a Nazi death camp located in Poland. ... If the EU does not learn to listen to and understand different views of the past, it may find itself stumbling when confronting future conflicts inside and outside the union. And that would be an historic mistake.

Although this isn't directly linked to "No Stalin, no Hitler?" and this forum here is not the EU, I do believe it's important, while discussing, we take in mind the different views of the past we all have. I'm not saying the are all right, but it can help us understand each other.

24
The Russian Revolution / Re: No Stalin, no Hitler?
« on: November 07, 2007, 03:23:30 AM »
Greenowl,
I don't know the names of the two seperate pease treaties with Germany, only that England signed one on the 30th of september 1938 and France on the 6th of december 1938. That's all wath my source tells me.
About the difference in view, it still exists even so many years after WW I. The Economist printed an article about it (I'll have to look it up) in regard of the EU: where the west sees 1945 as the end of WW II and thus an occation for celebration, the east sees it as a beginning of the sovjet occupation, and nothing to celebrate about.
Dmitri, you do realise that your first statement is incorrect. The treaty of Versailles was made up with the hope for a second war, albeit not as devastating as the first one. France made the Germand debtprovisions impossibly high as to assure a future attack. And why am I not allowed to critisize? As long as I base myself on facts, why is it wrong?

25
The Russian Revolution / Re: No Stalin, no Hitler?
« on: November 06, 2007, 04:14:04 PM »
After the anexation of Austria,  during the conference in Muchen on 28the of september 1939 Hitler, Mussolini, Chamberlain and Daladier came together and corresponded that Germany could anex Sudentenland. On the 31 of March 1939 France and Great Britain garanteed the Polish independance. If Poland would be attacked, both countries had to declare war on the agressor. They declared war, but they didn't engage themselves in it. The funny fact is, that in 1938 both France as well as England signed a non-aggression treaty with Germany.
In the crisisperiod of august 1939 both Daladier and Chamberlain send their negotiators on a boat to Moscow. There, the sovjets found out that both F&E would not fullfill their military obligations when needed; England did not have an army on land and France thought the distance too great.
So on the 1th of september 1939 the Germans invaded Poland, on the 3th of september war was declared towards Germany by E & F, but nothing happened. On the 17th of september Stalin's troops invaded Poland.
These are just some brief facts, I'm not going to put the entire course of WW II, because 1)that's way too lon, 2) you can look it up your self.
It's just that Dimitri, I don't understand your answer. You tend to think nazi Germany had to be stopped, but England didn't think that way untill Churchill came along (Churchill's interview on the BBC on the 22th of june 1941: "We are determined to destroy Hitler and every trace of the nazi regime...")
I also don't see how the curant Polish migration has anything to do with the actions of E&F during WW II?

ps: all my information comes from the first chapter of Prof. Y. Vanden Berghe "De Koude Oorlog", a Dutch book on the cold war.

26
The Russian Revolution / Re: No Stalin, no Hitler?
« on: November 06, 2007, 08:12:43 AM »
France and England declared themselves responsable for Poland, even before the war. But They betraded Poland when Hitler invaded the country. The did declare war on Hitler, but only on paper. They didn't send any troops to help the Poles. Hitler and Stalin invaded the country from two sides (as was planned). Poland didn't stand a chance. Being a Polish emigre (I was 6 when we emigrated to Belgium) I see the Poles still blame France and England for their actions, as well at the beginning as at the end (the conference at Livadia)

Lyss

27
Tsarevich Alexei Nicholaievich / Re: Remains of Heir may have been found.
« on: November 05, 2007, 08:00:29 AM »
13 and 14 year old boys can have such a growth in a year th you can be surprised. I remember once visiting a friends parents and meeting his 12-year old brother, who was a little smaller than me. A year later I had to look up, to meet his eyes. I believe he grew more than 10 cm!

28
The Russian Revolution / Re: No Stalin, no Hitler?
« on: November 05, 2007, 07:56:00 AM »
I find Hitler very difficult to understand, was he so blinded that he thought the rest of the world would permit him to invade every country? I must say, the west permitted a lot, even after he invaded Poland, England and France didn't do anything. It's weird, but in some point I believe to understand Stalin better that Hitler; Stalin needed fear and slaves to build his nation. Stalin knew he could keep on going without being disturbed, but Hitler must have known he couldn't keep invaded whole of Europe.
As for the most completely insane dictator, I vote for Pol Pot. Murdering 1/3 of your nation can realy be a proof of complete insanity.

29
Olga Nicholaievna / Re: Olga & Bi polar
« on: November 05, 2007, 07:48:42 AM »
according to wikipedia:

Also called bipolar affective disorder until recently, the current name is of fairly recent origin and refers to the cycling between high and low episodes; it has replaced the older term manic-depressive illness coined by Emil Kraepelin (1856-1926) in the late nineteenth century.[3] The new term is designed to be neutral, to avoid the stigma in the non-mental health community that comes from conflating "manic" and "depression."

And another source: ( http://www.caregiver.com/channels/bipolar/articles/brief_history.htm)

In 1913, Emil Krapelin established the term manic-depressive...In 1980, the term bipolar disorder (1980) replaced manic-depressive disorder as a diagnostic term...

So Olga could not have been diagnosed as bipolar, because the term bipolar did not exist back then. I hope this is a good answer for your question Schvibzik.
kind regards

Lyss

30
The Russian Revolution / Re: No Stalin, no Hitler?
« on: November 04, 2007, 08:46:08 AM »
Maybe the question should be asked in a different way; What if there was no Hitler, would eastern europe never become communist? Because if there never would be a war, the would be no excuse for Stalin to enter those countries, to "save" them from the occupation. Or would it happen anyway? Without Hitler, would it be Stalin to invade eastern europe?

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 11