Posted on 06/28/2005 6:07:21 PM PDT by BringBackMyHUAC
Woolsey:
I can't think of two people whose judgment about this issue I admire more than Mr. Bukovsky and Mr. Pacepa, and I have no quarrel with their characterization of history or the current situation. For example, like Mr.Bukovsky, I am inclined at this point to believe, based on the information I've seen in David Satter's articles and books, that the Chekists were responsible for the apartment bombings that were blamed on the Chechens and provided the excuse for this most recent Chechen War.
(Excerpt) Read more at frontpagemag.com ...
"KGB-President Putin is no friend of the USA."
Wow, you learn something new everyday! BTW, did you hear John Kerry is a Vietnam war hero with 3 purple hearts?
==Wow, you learn something new everyday! BTW, did you hear John Kerry is a Vietnam war hero with 3 purple hearts?
Don't forget about the Putin-thugs on this board, they constantly wrap themselves in the uniform of the US military while bashing the USA.
bttt
His thesis is opposite yours, vis-a-vis a resurgent USSR:
"If by "re-Sovietization" we mean a restoration of some sort of the Soviet Union, then we can be sure that such an attempt is doomed to failure. Contrary to what Mr. Putin and his KGB cronies might think, there were objective reasons for the Soviet collapse, and those reasons did not disappear just because they took over."What I admire most about Bukovskiy is his take on what should have followed the fall of the Soviet Union:
"...In the aftermath of World War II, the leading Nazis were tried at Nuremberg. The trials were not beyond criticism, but their accomplishment was immense. At a time of madness and terror, they reminded a shattered world of the basic principles of our civilization, affirming the simple truth that neither the opinion of the majority, nor an order from a superior, nor even a threat to our own life releases us from personal responsibility for our conduct. Today, in direct contrast to the example set at Nuremberg, we have refused even to investigate the greatest evil of our time." (Secrets of the Central Committee)
It would almost be impossible for any one person to captivate the minds of FReepers long enough to ensure a clear understanding of Golitsyn. Golitsyn's thesis will enjoy an incredible resurgeance in the not to distant future IMO. Until then, one does what one can.
It was a short honeymoon (1993-2000), and I'm sad to see Russia turn into another France, but hopefully we'll never go back to the bad old days.
China, OTOH - now there's a snake worth keeping your eye on.
IMHO, the only good part is where Ion Pacepa recalls a conversation with his former superior who was (or was pretending to be) thinking and speaking in the categories and on the time scale of five centuries [i.e. in terms of civilizational identity: everything else is of much shorter duration]. This is an extremely valuable point, which is to be noted, studied and adopted as much as possible. The rest is just dirty foam and stinky bubbles on water - it does not endure.
Really! Wow. He should of made mention of it during the campaign.
"The rest is recent history which most would remember. Explosions of apartment blocs in Moscow and elsewhere in Russia, (blamed on Chechens but obviously caused by the FSB),"
Why obviously?
I have seen my share of putin apologists on this board.
Watch out for "MarMema".
RE: In the aftermath of World War II, the leading Nazis were tried at Nuremberg. The trials were not beyond criticism, but their accomplishment was immense. At a time of madness and terror, they reminded a shattered world of the basic principles of our civilization, affirming the simple truth that neither the opinion of the majority, nor an order from a superior, nor even a threat to our own life releases us from personal responsibility for our conduct. Today, in direct contrast to the example set at Nuremberg, we have refused even to investigate the greatest evil of our time.
A major league "everyone should have read and memorized Hannah Arendt's book on totalitarianism [The Origins of Totalitarianism]" bump!
And I'll bump that with a "we all should have read and absorbed Paul R. Johnson's excellent account of how appeasement, lack of follow through on treaty enforcement, and lack of true closure to WW1 led directly to WW2 [see "Modern Times"]" bump ....
And finally, an "even the mainstream Kagan and Kagan taught us the sheer idiocy of how the West handled the end of the Cold War in their excellent book, While America Sleeps" bump!
I was recently reading up on the psycho neo-Nazi groups in Russia - RNE/RNU/NBP/Northern Alliance/RNSP. It would be hard to imagine something worse than the Soviet Union arising phoenix-like from the ashes, but these nut jobs come close.
Or perhaps, something completely different, but very problematic could rise up. I pray not ..
Why obviously?
Good question. Is he suggesting that Chechens aren't capable of blowing up an apartment block to make a point?
I'm not really a Putin fan, but the situation in Russia doesn't strike me as being quite so simple.
I was inclined to be sympathetic to the Chechens after the fall of the Union, seeing them as another Estonia fighting for its independence. They won, too, Yeltsin was forced to abandon the war, and for a time they were effectively "free". Did they use their freedom to build a prosperous Estonia in the Caucasus?
They didn't. The territory filled up with fighters who began to launch attacks into Dagestan and Ingushetia, which was what convinced me, at least, that Russia could not allow such a situation to continue.
Chechnya has nothing of value, really, its a tiny region. Kazakhstan on the other hand, is enormous, it sits on an enormous pool of oil, and its half Russian. If Russia were going to war to rebuild the empire, that would be a good place to start, there or Azerbaijan, a place that has oil oozing out of the ground.
Why would Russia let Kazakhstan go and fight to keep Chechnya?
I'm convinced that the day Kazakhs launch terror attacks across the border, you'll see Russian troops rolling in. But until then, they go their way and strike deals with Americans.
As for Putin, he'll get the chance to show who he is pretty soon. Under the constitution, I don't think he's allowed another term. Will he re-write it? Or will he step aside and hold elections? How he handles this will speak volumes about who he is and what are his intentions.
I'm not really a Putin fan, but the situation in Russia doesn't strike me as being quite so simple.
I was inclined to be sympathetic to the Chechens after the fall of the Union, seeing them as another Estonia fighting for its independence.
Same here. The problem is the Chechen revolt has been hi-jacked by OBL and his gang of thugs.
Actually, Golitsyn doesn't strike me as being all that reliable. For example, Golitsyn said that the KGB recruited Harold Wilson to be a pawn; however, Vasily Mitrokhin pointed out that while the KGB did indeed try to recruit Wilson, they failed. Mitrokhin was a high-level KGB operative, while GOlitsyn, to the best of my knowledge was just a mid-ranker. If there was indeed a plan to stage a fake collapse of the COm Bloc, don't you think that it would be known by only the higher-ups? Also, while there might have been a plan for a staged collapse, how do you know that things didn't happen which the Soviet elite failed to anticipate, and that the Soviet Union, as it turnes out, collapsed for real?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.