Czechs bristle at Russian missile shield threat

In this Aug. 21,1968 file picture, Prague residents carrying a Czechoslovakian flag and throwing burning torches, attempt to stop a Soviet tank in downtown Prague, Czechoslovakia as the Soviet-led invasion by ...

[Howard]

Living in the Czech heritage is obvious why other nations would like to own a piece of this 'most' elaborate architectural European Gem! Thank Europe for the Czech's, they know preservation, determination and above all, resilience, even today they build to preserve, to last, and shine. the only things not to shine here are X-Soviet block buildings, thankfully nothing remains of any beauty, admiration or intrigue.

[pesky]

those concrete blocks were designed by czech architects, then why call them soviet ?
hope they build those shields well, to last, as written above !

[Howard]

I think if I was to agree, I would argue, because no one could strive in Education, to become an architect, only to design within square, un-artistic intention is right to blame this, along with the no-education rights of the people, rightly Soviet!

[pesky]

if i was to argue, then i´d say it fits the category of an architect of that time in czechia !

[Famulus01]

Howard wrote:

Living in the Czech heritage is obvious why other nations would like to own a piece of this 'most' elaborate architectural European Gem! Thank Europe for the Czech's, they know preservation, determination and above all, resilience, even today they build to preserve, to last, and shine. the only things not to shine here are X-Soviet block buildings, thankfully nothing remains of any beauty, admiration or intrigue.

Of course, you should also give rightful credit to German contributions to this wonderful blend of the Bohemian cultural landscape.

[pesky the real deal]

well said 01,
most of those Czechs were German trained those days or under German guidance !
as we all know, architecture was very much the same in these regions.

[Angel Nicholson]

The "Panelakis" are the ugliest structures ever erected in your country--they are a blight on the landscape of a country steeped in history. The "occupation" by the Russians from 1948 through 1989 was a travesty and ruined a thriving economy and go-ahead country built by the Czechs after 1918. Putin and his comrades have a Napoleonic complex and must RULE--resist them with all your might. I question your ability now that the Communists have been re-elected back into a power position--they sold the Czech Republic out before and will do it again. Pesky is a traitor to them!

Howard wrote:

I think if I was to agree, I would argue, because no one could strive in Education, to become an architect, only to design within square, un-artistic intention is right to blame this, along with the no-education rights of the people, rightly Soviet!

[Famulus01]

pesky the real deal wrote:

well said 01,
most of those Czechs were German trained those days or under German guidance !
as we all know, architecture was very much the same in these regions.

Austrian Baroque is characteristic of Austria, Hungary, Bohemia and Slovakia, alike. Another reason why nationalism is such a bullshit when we have so much in common...

[Famulus01]

Angel Nicholson wrote:

The "Panelakis" are the ugliest structures ever erected in your country--they are a blight on the landscape of a country steeped in history. The "occupation" by the Russians from 1948 through 1989 was a travesty and ruined a thriving economy and go-ahead country built by the Czechs after 1918. Putin and his comrades have a Napoleonic complex and must RULE--resist them with all your might. I question your ability now that the Communists have been re-elected back into a power position--they sold the Czech Republic out before and will do it again. Pesky is a traitor to them!
<quoted text>

You should not forget the economic progress of the era before 1918, either. The single economic zone of the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy (as sort of a precursor to the EU) created unprecedented economic prosperity in the whole East Central European area.

[Jazz singer]

Famulus01 wrote:

<quoted text> The single economic zone of the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy (as sort of a precursor to the EU) created unprecedented economic prosperity in the whole East Central European area.

So, that's what is wrong with the EU: we try to model the Austrian Empire !! I never seen it put that way!

Pardon me, but if it was a zone of unprecedented economic prosperity , why was it that so many nations wanted to leave it?

Am I right in saying that the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy had lived its natural course and was challenged in almost every corner of the Empire?

Wasn't Hungary thriving for independence?

[Famulus01]

Jazz singer wrote:

<quoted text>
So, that's what is wrong with the EU: we try to model the Austrian Empire !! I never seen it put that way!
Pardon me, but if it was a zone of unprecedented economic prosperity , why was it that so many nations wanted to leave it?
Am I right in saying that the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy had lived its natural course and was challenged in almost every corner of the Empire?
Wasn't Hungary thriving for independence?

The Austro-Hungarian Monarchy was essentially broken up because it was on the losing side of the war. It did of course have its nationality problems, just as every other country (including the Russian empire), which could have probably been solved by creating a federal structure. In the process, the original territory of Hungary was also carved up. As for Hungary's independence, there were many political factions, some of them wanted complete independence while others wanted a personal union with Austria. The key point is that the nationality problem did not affect the economic development of the Monarchy, which was indeed spectacular. If you are traveling around in these parts of Central Europe, you are witnessing a resurgence of nostalgia with Franz Joseph statues popping up everywhere from Karlsbad to Czernowitz.

[Famulus01]

Jazz singer wrote:

<quoted text>
So, that's what is wrong with the EU: we try to model the Austrian Empire !! I never seen it put that way!
Pardon me, but if it was a zone of unprecedented economic prosperity , why was it that so many nations wanted to leave it?
Am I right in saying that the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy had lived its natural course and was challenged in almost every corner of the Empire?
Wasn't Hungary thriving for independence?

Another point is that without a single, unifying structure, the small bickering states of the region easily fell pray to Nazism and Stalinism.

[Jazz singer]

Famulus01 wrote:

<quoted text>The Austro-Hungarian Monarchy was essentially broken up because it was on the losing side of the war. It did of course have its nationality problems, just as every other country (including the Russian empire), which could have probably been solved by creating a federal structure. In the process, the original territory of Hungary was also carved up. As for Hungary's independence, there were many political factions, some of them wanted complete independence while others wanted a personal union with Austria. The key point is that the nationality problem did not affect the economic development of the Monarchy, which was indeed spectacular. If you are traveling around in these parts of Central Europe, you are witnessing a resurgence of nostalgia with Franz Joseph statues popping up everywhere from Karlsbad to Czernowitz.

Hummm, interesting.

You seem to dismiss completely what I have read about Austria-Hungary before WWI. I read that since mid-19th century, there were independentist movements in all parts of the Empire. Hungary had (so I read) quite a strong nationalist movement that wanted to break away from Vienna, and even the Crown Prince (the one who committed 'suicide' at Mayerlink) was in favour of an independent kingdom. Also (and again, I repeat what I read), Croatia, Slovenia and other parts became growing independent movements after 1930/48.
Like Imperial Russia, the old Austrian Empire was becoming too rigid and not following the liberal trend. For example, the new German Empire was far more liberal and attractive. Here again, that's what I have read.

[Jazz singer]

Famulus01 wrote:

<quoted text>Another point is that without a single, unifying structure, the small bickering states of the region easily fell pray to Nazism and Stalinism.

Hummm

Nazism didn't come to power in Germany before 1933.

I agree that communists were active in Europe right at the end of WW1 (failure of Rosa Luxemburg in Germany, and Bela Kun in Hungary), but Stalinism as such didn't exist until the mid-30s.

[thebabbster]

Back to the matter at hand: the Russians think that just asking for a defense missle shield is a provocation for war!

[Famulus01]

Jazz singer wrote:

<quoted text>
Hummm
Nazism didn't come to power in Germany before 1933.
I agree that communists were active in Europe right at the end of WW1 (failure of Rosa Luxemburg in Germany, and Bela Kun in Hungary), but Stalinism as such didn't exist until the mid-30s.

Of course not, but I am speaking of Hitlerism and Stalinism influencing the region consecutively. Both Hitler and Stalin could make use of the ethnic hatred in the region and play out these nations against one another...

[Jazz singer]

thebabbster wrote:

Back to the matter at hand: the Russians think that just asking for a defense missle shield is a provocation for war!

Have they actually said that in those terms?

[Famulus01]

Jazz singer wrote:

<quoted text>
Hummm, interesting.
You seem to dismiss completely what I have read about Austria-Hungary before WWI. I read that since mid-19th century, there were independentist movements in all parts of the Empire. Hungary had (so I read) quite a strong nationalist movement that wanted to break away from Vienna, and even the Crown Prince (the one who committed 'suicide' at Mayerlink) was in favour of an independent kingdom. Also (and again, I repeat what I read), Croatia, Slovenia and other parts became growing independent movements after 1930/48.
Like Imperial Russia, the old Austrian Empire was becoming too rigid and not following the liberal trend. For example, the new German Empire was far more liberal and attractive. Here again, that's what I have read.

We are discussing different eras: after the so-called Compromise of 1867, the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy developed into a liberal, prosperous state (you are referring to events that had occurred before, in the so-called absolutist era), the only problem of course was that it failed to give equal rights to nationalities (even though, it was much more tolerant than for example France to the Bretons and Russia from where many Jewish refugees settled in the Monarchy). All in all, in the second part of the 19th century, most nationalities wanted emancipation and federalization of the Monarchy, the preference for breaking it up came only at the end of WWI, when the Entente powers (especially, France) wanted to build a power base in Central Europe by dismantling a formidable rival.

[Jazz singer]

Famulus01 wrote:

<quoted text>Of course not, but I am speaking of Hitlerism and Stalinism influencing the region consecutively. Both Hitler and Stalin could make use of the ethnic hatred in the region and play out these nations against one another...

And now, they are supposed to forget all that and get on like long lost friends inside the big EU family, right?

Allow me to be sceptical about it ...

[Live Free or Die]

thebabbster wrote:

Back to the matter at hand: the Russians think that just asking for a defense missle shield is a provocation for war!

I don't think so. I think they object to a radar facility that could give anyone an edge in a first strike scenario and upset the MAD balance. You know, after reading the NPAC manifesto and watching the US push for Georgian NATO entry (pretty unstable country to be in NATO, eh), I'd have my doubts too. You never know, better safe than sorry.(See, it works like this - that argument works from either direction).