Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: RusIvan
So Bolshevicks gave them Russia’ territory in 1918 but in 1939 decided to take some back.

Was it the Bolsheviks' land to give? How did they take it back if it was never theirs in the first place? Don't you mean to say Russia took its land back? Or was it the Bolsheviks? You say the two are different things, but then you seem to confuse them, when it comes to defending Stalinist aggression against non-Russians. You need to get your story straight. Do you support what the Bolsheviks did or not? It seems that the answer is that you support what they did, as long as they did it to non-Russians.

44 posted on 07/26/2007 4:44:12 PM PDT by Tailgunner Joe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies ]


To: Tailgunner Joe

Don’t you mean to say Russia took its land back? Or was it the Bolsheviks?==

Bolshevicks took it back.

Do you support what the Bolsheviks did or not?==

No I’m not. Because Bolshevicks did many territorial changes. The most of them are against the best interests of Russia. So if we reject today ALL I emphasize ALL Bolshevick territorial changes then Russia will benefit of it. Russia will get the russian territories which Bolshevicks gave Ukraine and Kazakhstan. I’m totally agree to exchange them for that smal patch of land taken form Finland in 1939. But only as the exchange I emphasize.


49 posted on 07/27/2007 1:25:02 AM PDT by RusIvan (Western MSM zombies the western publics.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson