Posted: Sun Dec 18, 2011 3:25 am
Thanks for clearing that up. I thought that was how it worked, but Neeek phrased it in a way that scared the intestinal slush out of me.
Welcome to the Gaming Den.
http://www.tgdmb.com/phpBB3/
Zinegata wrote:Part of the treaty is both sides recognizing the new border between Poland and the Soviet Union, and the Soviet Union therefore surrendered its claim to the territory past the Curzon line
So really, even the Soviet government of 1939 disagrees with Frank.Soviet diplomacy claimed that they were "protecting the Ukrainian and Belarusian minorities of eastern Poland since the Polish government had abandoned the country and the Polish state ceased to exist"
You do if you don't have the military capacity to fight back. Stop being a fucking idiot.Zinegata wrote:You do not sign a Peace Treaty and then a Non-Aggression Pact with a country you're supposedly sore with.
Are you not familiar with the concept of suing for peace, Zinegata?Zinegata wrote:The Peace of Riga was not signed "under duress". The Soviet Union never even protested the terms, unlike the Germans at Versailles. Moreover, again - if the Soviet Union hated the treaty so much, then why did they ALSO sign a non-aggression pact with the Poles a few years later?
I'm not sure it necessarily even applies to mass murder, honestly. Piracy, genocide, human trafficking, and certain war crimes are the entire list, I believe. Possibly terrorism, I'd have to check on that.Datawolf wrote: Am I simply reading this wrong? Or does this apply only to particularly nasty large scale crimes like mass murder, genocide, human trafficking and the like?
This is what's called making yet another 98% vs 99% distinction.A Man In Black wrote:Are you not familiar with the concept of suing for peace, Zinegata?Zinegata wrote:The Peace of Riga was not signed "under duress". The Soviet Union never even protested the terms, unlike the Germans at Versailles. Moreover, again - if the Soviet Union hated the treaty so much, then why did they ALSO sign a non-aggression pact with the Poles a few years later?
The Soviet invasion of Afghanistan was particularly preposterous in its casus belli: They claimed that the president of Afghanistan had "invited" Soviet forces to enter the country, on the same day the Spetznatz assassinated him.Gx1080 wrote:For example, the Franco-Vietnamese war or the Russian invasion of Afghanistan. Those examples were clear as the day, were completely ignored and, well, the rest is history. Recent history.
You haven't made any sufficient argument to refute mine -- the only thing you might have made a case for would be that it isn't relevant.Zinegata wrote:So really, who shall we believe? Man in Black, Frank Trollman, and Radiant Phoenix? Or shall we believe a Masters in International Relations, and the stated words of the Soviet Union itself?
Okay, let me put is more simply then.RadiantPhoenix wrote: You haven't made any sufficient argument to refute mine -- the only thing you might have made a case for would be that it isn't relevant.
Oh, I see. You're actually that fucking retarded. So you are saying that it's okay for nations to "play nice" but secretly plot to destroy another country.If one does not have the capacity to fight back (which may or may not have been true in 1932 -- I suspect that others will be able to furnish arguments either way on this far more effectively than myself), then yes, you totally fucking do play nice until you can rectify the situation, because if you don't, the other guy will probably even further remove your capacity to fight back. The only reason you wouldn't would be if they were still beating you up even though you were trying to play nice.
And I was. Not sure why you're lumping me in with everyone else, since I wasn't making any further arguments. Feel free to carry on yelling at people who are actually arguing with you about the main points.Zinegata wrote:Sure, you can argue that the Peace of Riga was the Soviets suing for peace.
If your intent was just to make a point of order, then lumping withdrawn.A Man In Black wrote:And I was. Not sure why you're lumping me in with everyone else, since I wasn't making any further arguments. Feel free to carry on yelling at people who are actually arguing with you about the main points.Zinegata wrote:Sure, you can argue that the Peace of Riga was the Soviets suing for peace.
You really shouldn't quote Zinegata, there is enough spam from his multi post style that it messes up the thread through my ignore ALREADY.RadiantPhoenix wrote:Zinegata wrote:So really, who shall we believe? Man in Black, Frank Trollman, and Radiant Phoenix? Or shall we believe a Masters in International Relations, and the stated words of the Soviet Union itself?
With absolutely no rewording the entire post ALSO applies to his imaginary dad who has a Masters in totally beating up all our dads.Koumei wrote:I assumed, reading that quote, that Zine isn't talking about himself
"We are protecting our minorities because the Polish government can't anymore" is not the same as "We are taking back the land which was rightfully ours!".Soviet diplomacy claimed that they were "protecting the Ukrainian and Belarusian minorities of eastern Poland since the Polish government had abandoned the country and the Polish state ceased to exist"
PL has you on ignore because you're kind of an annoying blowhard, so he only sees what people quote. I'm not entirely sure why, you're about par for the course in MPSIMS as far as I can tell.Zinegata wrote:I find it very funny that PL is so retarded that he thinks I claimed that I had a Master's Degree in International Relations.
Read again. I had a conversation with a friend who has a Master's Degree in International Relations, and who has worked six years in the US Department of Defense as an analyst. And who is so knowledgeable about stuff
A Man In Black wrote:PL has you on ignore because you're kind of an annoying blowhard, so he only sees what people quote. I'm not entirely sure why, you're about par for the course in MPSIMS as far as I can tell.
Yes, blowhard. Look at how awesome the credentials of the people you know are, etc. A mild and specific insult. Are we really nitpicking insults now?Zinegata wrote:
Sure, I'm not doing anything right now, so let's proceed with nitpicking insults pointlessly!A Man In Black wrote:Yes, blowhard. Look at how awesome the credentials of the people you know are, etc. A mild and specific insult. Are we really nitpicking insults now?Zinegata wrote:
Zinegata wrote:Last edited by Zinegata on Tue Dec 20, 2011 7:58 am; edited 3 times in total