The BEST Guide to POLAND
Unanswered  |  Archives 
 
 
User: Guest

Home / History  % width posts: 209

Poles and Russians -- love-hate relationship?


Grzegorz_ 51 | 6,161
17 Mar 2007 #31
But Russian people elected Putin ?

They elected what (usually government controled) the media told them is the best. It's a matter of culture, they somehow like such master/slave relations with their rulers.
Maxxx Payne 1 | 196
17 Mar 2007 #32
Or maybe they wanted stability after that drunken Jeltisin.
Matyjasz 2 | 1,544
19 Mar 2007 #33
I would say both of you are right.
ArturSzastak 3 | 593
2 Apr 2007 #34
But Russian people elected Putin ?

Yes, they did, but he has "Old Russian" ambitions. Essentially he'd like another Soviet Union (geographically and economically) so Russia can be greatest country in Europe again. He's too "Stalin like" of you will :)

Thats the only reason Poles don't like him, and he's criticized us a few times. :(
josecitomadera
2 Apr 2007 #35
However on the government/state level Russia is the biggest threat for Poland.

Interesting, how is this so?

batter

I feel the sudden urge for pancakes, I wonder why?:(
ArturSzastak 3 | 593
2 Apr 2007 #36
Interesting, how is this so?

Their government (not all of it) believes that much, if not all, of Poland belongs to them. Many of their officials believe they should just kill us off because we will never stop fighting for freedom

"Introducing communism to Poland is like trying to saddle a cow"
-Stalin

Even he knew we wouldn't quit :)

(Yes, I know Russia is no longer communist)
josecitomadera
2 Apr 2007 #37
Their government (not all of it) believes that much, if not all, of Poland belongs to them. Many of their officials believe they should just kill us off because we will never stop fighting for freedom

Is this still a current belief?
ArturSzastak 3 | 593
2 Apr 2007 #38
Well honestly, i wouldn't know too much about it. All I know is that Russians and Poles, as a people are like long lost cousins who love to drink and party. But our governments can't stand each other.

I don't udnerstand how any of the Russians or anyone non-Polish can lay claims to Polish land. The first Slavic settlements were along the Vistula River, and we spread east and south from there on. In a sense, we created the Russians, and should be hugging them, not gagging each other :)
josecitomadera
2 Apr 2007 #39
The first Slavic settlements were along the Vistula River

Were you born in Poland or USA?
Crow 146 | 9,112
4 Apr 2007 #40
The first Slavic settlements were along the Vistula River

CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA

The Slavs

catholicity.com/encyclopedia/s/slavs.html

A. Slavs

Hire you would find good quotation in case with Slavic past. It is said that Catholic encyclopedia support theory that original home of the Slavs is along the Danube and on the Adriatic coast. Same position has Slavic autochtonistic school. First, famous Czech slavist- Pavel Josef Safaric supported that theory.

It was in deep past, before Germans because of Semitic penetration into Europe were exracted from Slavs, as unique ethos (Teutons). With time, they assimilated more and more Slavs- original native European population. Then, they (and many others) spraed and start to stealing Slavic history in the same time. But, they abondened our heritage and accepted newcoming Semitic ideological constructions.

That belong to untold European history.

In case with Vistula. Yes. Vistula was important but, latter in time of Sarmatia Europae. In that time Poland was core of Slavic world. In that time all Slavs used some form of Sarmatian name for their designation and Slavic name appeared in history latter.

Region between Russia and Ukraine was center of Sarmatia Asiatica. Great Moravia represented last attempt of Slavs to consolidate their lost power and to cut slave trade and humiliation/destruction of Slavs but, attacks from Romans and latter Teutons and Huns destroyed last united Slavic state and separated Slavs on Western, Eastern and Southern branches.

Slavs originates from Balkan (from Danube and from Adriatic) as even genetic findings confirmed.

Once, today`s Serbian lands (and Bulgaria, Dalmatia, North Italy) were core of Slavdom and that`s why form of Sarmatian (Serbs) name live even today among Balkan, Molise and Lusatian Serbs. Among Czechs name was preserved as Celtic (Proto Slavs) Boii tribe. In Poland and Czeska, Serbian name is well known, in Hungary is connected with word SAMORODNI. In Ukraine and Russia was preserved as Serboi, Sibiria. Croat name went thru Greak and Latin transcription and in fact represent remain of Sarmatian name.

That`s why we Serbs- last berers of Sarmatian name, dream only about Slavia.

Balkan was first and original core of Slavdom and with that- spring of White Garden.
Bratwurst Boy 9 | 10,426
4 Apr 2007 #41
"It was in deep past, before Germans because of Semitic penetration into Europe were exracted from Slavs, as unique ethos (Teutons). With time, they assimilated more and more Slavs- original native European population. Then, they (and many others) spraed and start to stealing Slavic history in the same time. But, they abondened our heritage and accepted newcoming Semitic ideological constructions."

:)

Quote:

"The Germans, and other people who lived in what is now Germany and Eastern Europe, were Indo-Europeans, originally from the area between the Black Sea and the Caspian Sea. Sometime between 3000 BC and 2000 BC, they had migrated gradually, in many different waves, out of that area and all across Europe.

Some ended up north of Europe, in Scandinavia (modern Norway, Sweden and Denmark). These are the ancestors of modern Swedes, Norwegians, and Danes. Some went to Poland, where they developed into the Visigoths and the Ostrogoths.

Some ended up in Germany, where they are the ancestors of the modern Germans, but also of the Franks, Vandals, and Sueves.

After the fall of the Roman Empire, the Visigoths moved into Spain, and the Ostrogoths moved into Italy. The Franks moved into France, but soon conquered Germany as well, so that by 800 AD Charlemagne was able to establish a German Holy Roman Empire that extended over France, Germany, and much of central Italy. After Charlemagne died, his sons split his empire into three parts so they could each have some, but it was the branch of the family who got Germany who continued to call themselves the Holy Roman Emperors. "

....and so on!

PS: The natives of Europe were the Celts who got conquered and ejected by the germanic tribes, NOT the slaves!

:)
Grzegorz_ 51 | 6,161
4 Apr 2007 #42
NOT the slaves!

Creature...
North Pole
4 Apr 2007 #43
And yes that is a polish forum but when your history is so wrong someone HAS to tell you right!

I have post it for both of you. There is nothig worse like bunch of foreigners fighting over history, especialy on polish forum. You make fools of yourself.
ArturSzastak 3 | 593
4 Apr 2007 #44
Hire you would find good quotation in case with Slavic past. It is said that Catholic encyclopedia support theory that original home of the Slavs is along the Danube and on the Adriatic coast. Same position has Slavic autochtonistic school. First, famous Czech slavist- Pavel Josef Safaric supported that theory.

I meant modern slavs. Some say the very first ancestors of Slavs were the Sarmatians, and people have other theories. But the one I've seen most was that the first slavic settlements to pop up were near the Vistula :)

Were you born in Poland or USA?

USA while my mother was on vacation :)

NOT the slaves!

Nobody said Slavs were the fist europeans.......where'd you get that idea???

Your version of history is untold with good reason Crow...

History is written by the victors. Even Churchill said :"History will be kind to me, for I intend to right it"

I'm not trying to argue with anyone here. I've just stated facts that I've read much more than once, sometimes hundreds of times. Each country has its own version of history. Thats why I've taken multiple sources like Polish history books, English, American, French, Italian, German, The Bible, hell even the Khuran (spelling?) and I've made up my mind about certain things. You can't just always believe what you're taught, find things out yourself sometimes :)

Just merely stating facts accepted by historians is all, I didn't think it'd spark such arguements :)
witek 1 | 587
4 Apr 2007 #45
The things I like most about Russia are:

1. girls
2. vodka
3. did i mention russian girls yet? :)
Grzegorz_ 51 | 6,161
4 Apr 2007 #46

Source: The Slavs - History for Kids!

Creature, come back when you begin reading something for adults :)
witek 1 | 587
4 Apr 2007 #47
crow, kak o si kurac :)

you wrote " Slavs originate from Balkan (from Danube and from Adriatic) as even genetic findings confirmed."

please Serbian friend don't spread garbage hypothesis.

The origin of Slavs is most likely from the border region between Poland and Ukraine.

This is why we have Sorbs (ancestors of Serbs) living next to Poles and Krakow area used to be home to White Croats.

The location of the speakers of pre-Proto-Slavic and Proto-Slavic is subject to considerable debate. Serious candidates are cultures on the territories of modern Belarus, Poland and Ukraine. The proposed frameworks are:

Lusatian culture hypothesis: The pre-Proto-Slavs were present in north-eastern Central Europe since at least the late 2nd millennium BC, and were the bearers of the Lusatian culture and later the Przeworsk culture (part of the Chernyakhov culture).

Milograd culture hypothesis: The pre-Proto-Slavs (or Balto-Slavs) were the bearers of the Milograd culture
Chernoles culture hypothesis: The pre-Proto-Slavs were the bearers of the Chernoles culture of northern Ukraine
From the 19th century onwards, the debate became politically charged, particularly in connection with the history of the Partitions of Poland, and German imperialism known as Drang nach Osten. Generally, both German and Slavic want to be 'autochthonic' on land at river Vistula.

Autochthonic theory (the Proto-Slavs are native to the area of modern Poland), before 5th century.

Allochthonic theory (the Slavs immigrated to the area of modern Poland) after 5th century.

The debate has been used as a tool of political propaganda and is often emotionally charged and interspersed with pseudoarchaeology and national mysticism.

Contemporary scholarship in general has moved away from the idea of monolithic nations and the Urheimat debates of the 19th and early 20th centuries, and its focus of interest is that of a process of ethnogenesis, regarding competing Urheimat scenarios as false dichotomies.
Grzegorz_ 51 | 6,161
5 Apr 2007 #48
you wrote " Slavs originate from Balkan (from Danube and from Adriatic) as even genetic findings confirmed."

please Serbian friend don't spread garbage hypothesis.

The origin of Slavs is most likely from the border region between Poland and Ukraine.

**************

You can't be sure, these are just some of many versions.
Crow 146 | 9,112
6 Apr 2007 #49
crow, kak o si kurac

Brate Witek zasto pominjes `kurac`(if that word mean same on Polish/Serbian)?

You must be aware that there are ladies on this forum, too. :)

So, please.

:)

Witek, Witek...

please Serbian friend don't spread garbage hypothesis.

Witek,

You think that I belong to people who believe in theory of so called `Great migration` and that on the base of that theory I claim that Vistula wasn`t populated by Slavs (perticulary Poles) in time BC? Same theory stand on position that Balkan was populated by Slavs at arround 6 AD.

Well, that is German theory and was created by German schoolars to support expansionistic intentions of German elite. In short- to support reasons for `Drang nach Osten.`

Modern science (on the base of old data and new foundings) and authors (of Slavic and non-Slavic origin) abondened that theory already. And, not because we Slavs want different history but becuse of sake of scientific truth.

Science can`t eveolve and progress if based on false data/history. We must operate with true facts if we want to understand social (and other) mechanismm of human development.

So, I will tell you Witek- Yes, Vistula was populated with Slavs/Poles very, very early (in that time all Slavs used some form of Sarmatian name for their designation). In fact, our ancestors were practicly first humans who populated that area (and many other areas) after Ice Age has been finished.

But, Witek- think (later I would present you many valuble sources but, for now just use logic), how those Slavs on Vistula come in Vistula region?

By river of course > In old days people strongly dependent on water from rivers and they could spread on distant places only if fallow great rivers.

Now, little from climatology. Balkan was first region in Europe free from ice after glacial period (Ice Age). Genetic science (Human Genome Project), using old data about Balkan population and latest archeological foundings started to investigte genetics of Balkans. You know what they found (we speak about international project, don`t forget)?

They found (you`ll get links) that modern Slavs of Balkan represent direct descendents of old/antic Balkan popultion and, they even confirmed that genetic markers suggest that Balkan Slavic population inhabite Balkan at least 25.000 years. Archeology already know that old Balkan cultures dates from paleolithic and neolit (we speak about even 50.000 years BC).

Secund region free from ice (and important for all Slavs) was somwhere in the border region between Ukraine and Russia.

Genetics confirmed that these two populations were in contact, let`s say `from the beggining of time`. Those populations were in contact even before they settled on Balkan/in Russia/Ukraine, in time before they moved into Europe following changings in climete. Their start location was somwhere on the Near East to the region- in past known as Persia (modern day Iran).

And so, after arrival in Europe, following coast of Black See those two populations continue to cooperate, inter-mix and Slavic (Proto Slavic) genetic stock was extracted (maybe even existed before Proto Slavs came to Europe- that we can`t be sure).

Now. Key European River is Danube and smaller rivers which gravitates to Danube, represent good connection between Danube and Adriatic coast (remember comment from Catholic Enciclopedya), then we have good connection between Danube and Central Europe, Danube and Eastern Europe, Danube and Southern Europe, Black See, Northern Europe- Baltik, etc, etc.

There is no debt. Danube was/is key Slavic river. Thanks to fact that we were first on Danube and that our ancestors developed agriclture- we spread on such wide geograpical territory.

So, you see Witek. Vistula was populated with Slavs/Poles in time much, much before BC and much before Germans even exist (as I said they appeard on historic scene after penetration of Semitics into Europe).

But, European chapter of Slavic history started from Balkan after Ice Age. People can`t fly as birds and before Vistula they needed to follow Danube- our old Ister (old name of Danube- also Slavic word).
Janko
10 Apr 2007 #50
I think that it is reasonable for the polish government to distrust the russian government because as history shows that they along with the germans, tried to erase poland from existence.
Crow 146 | 9,112
11 Apr 2007 #51
It is interesting question- What is resonable for Polish governmant?

I can understand historic resons that Poles are `a little` suspicious on Russians but, on the other side, Poles has even more then enough reasons to be suspicious on Germans (for example). As, I know from history, Polish territories were cut on the first place from the Western side under pressure of cruel Germanization. Under different historic circumstances, old Slavic Pomerans, Kashubs, both Lusatias, even Prusia (etc, etc) would be essential part of Poland today.

Same way how part of Russian elite made mistake and colababorated with Germans, Polish elite made mistake when decided to confront Russians on Baltic (Letonia, Estonia, Litvania- in that time Slavic territories). Polish elite needed to made deal with Russian elite and alloved acess to Baltic to Russia (thay neede that) and in the same time Poland should concentrate on her Western borders which were under pressure of non-Slavs.

Practicly, German nation and state exist only because of tragic mistake of Polish elite and Polish people paid that greatly (same as whole Slavic world).

So, if analize history we can come to interesting conclusions.

It is fact that Slavs if united hold enormous resources more then enough to secure existance, continuity and prosperity of Slavic civilization.

Western Europe is more advanced (for now)- it is fact but, if you analize reasons for that you will come to conclusion that THEY did everything what was possible to prevent that Slavs prosper, that Slavic countries stay rural part of Europe.

Take in conideration that Slavs were often on the first line when non-Europeans atacked Europe and that in return `Western` Europe didn`t support us but THEY colaborted with invaders and profit from Slavic disaster.

Then, take in consideration that old Slavic states were destroyed by Semitic Romans (later Teutons, too) and Greaks. Slavs were object of slavery all over `Western` Europe, on Near East, in Anatolia, in Africa (slave trade).

Slavs would be resonable if they united in great Slavic Unity- SLAVIA and prosper. All other are dangerous experiments.

Can you imagine that Russia stop to exist and that territors of Russia are split between USA, China and Germany? Would you like to see that?

I think that all Slavic people would suffer because of that and Slavs would be asmilated faster without Russia, or without Poland. Without Poland Slavic West would simply collapse. That is destine of Slavic South without Serbia.

On the other side, we don`t neede some selfih Russian Empire. What Russians and all Slavs need is democratic and economicaly strong Russia with good standard of living.

If Russians show that they aren`t capable to evolve in positive dirrection then never mind but, before we give up from them we should wait and give them some time, even help them, not support non-Slavs to encircle and isolate Russia.

Poles, be aware that Russian role on Balkan was positive, different then Russian role in central Europe (with Poland). Without Russian support nor Orthodox, nor Catholic, nor Protestant Slavs in South Eastern Europe (Balkan) wouldn`t exis today. All of us will be assimilated and transformed into Germans or Turks.

In his time great Polish King Jan Sobeski also supported Balkan Slavs and we Serbs won`t forget that. Part of our being will always live to repay that debt to children of Poland.

Poles, what would I tell you. Go, be independent, live, you deserve best but I would only call you not to destroy bridges behind you. That, so that you can reatret among your brothers one day when all masks fall down and when beast show her true intentions.

We will be ready to repay our debt. Nobady would humiliate Poland enymore, especialy not brotherly Russia. Too long Serbia was apsend from inter-Slavic relations because of Ottoman occupation and communism and, balance among Slavs was destroyed. We will change some things now.

Long live Poland! Glory to Slavdom!
vom
11 Apr 2007 #52
Well, Putin did a hellova job busting and scaring the hell of the sick zionists that robbed both poland and russia figuratively and literally. So my attitude towards Russia are very good.

It's very easy to see if a president is a zionist-puppet or a real one, if the big(zionist controlled) media like cnn,bbc,reuters criticize a country for "lack of democracy" it means that country have a real president, if they support a country it means it's a zionist controlled deathcamp.
history4u
17 Apr 2007 #53
There is nothig worse like bunch of foreigners fighting over history, especialy on polish forum. You make fools of yourself.

Knowing history from Polish books is like not knowing it at all, LMAO......
Dzhaklin 3 | 166
5 Dec 2007 #54
It's proven that genetically Russians have smaller skulls much like asians
witek 1 | 587
5 Dec 2007 #55
can you provide some proof to back up your statement?



Dzhaklin 3 | 166
5 Dec 2007 #56
can you provide some proof to back up your statement?

putin.jpg

Putin is just a figment of the worlds imagination?
Shawn_H
5 Dec 2007 #57
Putin got a make over.



Crow 146 | 9,112
5 Dec 2007 #58
Poles hate Russians

There are things that aren`t OK in Polish-Russian relations but, I can`t say that ordinary Poles and ordinary Russians hate each others.

Anyway, let`s say that there is hate. Why would we say that- somebody would ask? Look,... what would Polish and Russian foes without that hate. It`s THEIR only hope. And, so hate exist to satisfy needs of those who think that Slavs hold too much resources and that Slavs are still too numerous. Hate also serve well to corrupt politicians on all sides.
Dzhaklin 3 | 166
6 Dec 2007 #59
Dzhaklin

PM Profile
Posts: 11
Joined: Dec 3, 07
Female
Quote Yesterday, 00:14 ¦ My threads #62

It's proven that genetically Russians have smaller skulls much like asians

Sorry somehow this posted in the wrong thread... In the other thread we we're debating if you could really tell different slavs apart. I must have had two windows opened! I bet i looked like a spaz putting a comment like that randomly hah
gill0055 - | 3
9 Dec 2007 #60
yeah, the relationships btw poles and russians are not easy to say the least


Home / History / Poles and Russians -- love-hate relationship?
BoldItalic [quote]
 
To post as Guest, enter a temporary username or login and post as a member.