What should Poland do with the problem of Belarus?

After 2 weeks it is still valid.

You recommending they start violently demonstrating?

They won`t abolish Lukashenka with peaceful demos.

But, they may very well abolish themselves with violent demos. Regime change can come through peaceful demos--just look at your country. Who would've thought Poland would be free in 1980?

I'd also think Poland would not want 2 hot civil wars going at its border.

Not so fast. Poland wasn`t free in 1980 - it happened in 1990s, really. And throughout 1980s, streets in Polish cities looked like this on important anniversaries:

• 
  z8807891QStanwojen.jpg
  
• 
  4ee1feaf99c20_p.jpg
  
• 
  unnamed.jpg
  

Eh, choice was easy back then. We ALL knew where is freedom. Today? Can you guaranty Belorussians they won`t finish importing contingents of Arabs within the EU? Or, can you guaranty to Belorussians how is EU democratic, Slavic loving creation and how NATO isn`t terrorist organization? Can you guaranty them that Pope loves Belorussians more then he love Germans?

Etc. Can you give those guaranties?

@ Pawian

Let me clarify: back in 1980, who would've dreamed Poland would be free by 1989? Not too many.

Those pictures of violence in the street in Poland, was the violence perpetuated by the demonstrators or the police?

Most importantly, the communist regime in Poland did not fall because of violent protests, but through more peaceful means (strikes, economic pressures, and political pressures from the multiplying voices of Polish citizens demanding change). Belarus may finally be gathering the multitude of voices to apply the political pressure it needs to get rid of it tyrant--but, it ain't gonna be easy, and I doubt it'll be successful if it becomes violent.

The mainstream 30 years back was IMHO (at least in the West) also a lot more conservative/rightist.

Or let us put it this way. Is Poland free today? No, it isn`t. If Poland is free to choose, citizens, politicians and intelectual elite, Poland would force Visegrad and Central European Union. After all, Duda spoke of Intermarium before first time elected? Do he speak of Intermarium now? No, Poland isn`t free. For so many reasons more that is more then clear.

*nods

The West was more confident in its heritage, institutions, and values back then, but there were some signs of erosion.


How do you define free? Seems like you define free as something that must fit into your personal beliefs...seems kind of tyrannical.

One of definitions could be to do what you desire, need and want, something what you feel to be right for you. Ask majority of Poles where they want to invest their energy, in the EU or rather in Visegrad with tendency to create Central European Union. If you could ask them they would tell its not the EU but the other. Then, reality would kick in and most of Poles would satisfy themselves with EU, no matter all sh** within EU and more sh** to come. Why is that so? Bluntly speaking its because of fear. Poles fear of consequences of what would happen if they do what they want. See? Poles aren`t free. They care what would Germany do, what would Vatican says, what would western Europe do, what would USA say, what about NATO, etc. So, Poland`s politics force agenda that don`t serve to that what Poland want. Now, some may say such a politics may be reasonable. But, I see it rather as a negative choice, a servitude, wasting a time.

The Kremlin spokeswoman accused Poland of meddling into Belarus` affairs, mainly by sponsoring the opposition and broadcasting independent programmes.

@ Crow

Poland, freely choose to enter the EU, did it not?


Wasn't there a recent Pew survey that showed something like 75% of Poles had a favorable opinion of the EU? I don't know whether that's accurate or not, but I'm willing to bet neither do you. I strongly dislike supranational government constructs and all that, but Poland wasn't bribed or put under any type of duress to enter the EU. It did it under its own free volition.

Besides, what would a Visegrad union give Poland that would match or be better than what the EU gives it? I mean, other than a slavic boner.


Hahahaha!!!! Isn't that rich?! Maybe the Kremlin has been following PF and has seen your call to a violent uprising.

I would tell it yes, practically yesterday. But today I know more. I mean, I don`t know. What information we all have? Had? 30 years ago I very much liked EU. Today I am terrified of idea of having anything with it.


Supranational constructs are also Christian Churches. Islam also function that way. Global things, you know. People want to rule and control and when one refuse, they kill one and all that. So, let us speak openly. We don`t need all those constructs in shadows fighting for ``us``. Why no global government? I mean, whats the difference.

I think you're on to something. :)


No, they are not. Churches are not concerned with controlling governments, but primarily with spreading the Gospel. Churches do want to inform governments of the dignity of the human person and morality, but its by proposition--not legal mandates. Churches, in general, are part of local cultures--they respect and add to the development of local cultures--they don't promote a global unitarian politic, but a universal truth that informs local cultures. They are constructs where the natural world weaves into the supernatural.

Churches are trade guilds. But truly spirited people could be find there and anywhere. Among locals that arent informed, too. So, why upset locals with universal truth?

Hahahaha...maybe where you live; which I imagine is a place of colorful adventure--mostly psychedelic. :)


Because it's truth and universal, it's for all of us, even the locals.

I sense its worldwide.


Crusaders had same arguments but it was all about money. Sure, some believed and they were used. Later came ustashe. Monsters used by bigger monsters.

Tell me, you think that EU seek to offer higher truth to Belarus? Man, Lukashenko is a little child for EU`s democrats.

EU is not the Church, it pretty much acknowledged it doesn't care to officially recognize its Christian heritage. It's a thoroughgoing secular construct. So, it can't offer a higher truth, only things like policies, laws, and enforcement.

There were both strikes and protests. Show me a source which claims that only strikes contributed to the fall of communism. hahaha

See a scene depicting a violent protest during a strike:

• 
  AR312089904.jpg
  

Poland must save Belarus from the evil of EU. I don't know, how. Do something for God's sake. Organize protests against EU in Warsaw for example. Fu*k the EU anyhow.

I never said it was the only thing that contributed to the fall of communism; I also never said there were never violent confrontations--only that it was the violent confrontations that drove the communists to the negotiating table. Again, was the violence perpetuated by the protesters or the police?

When angry protesters threw stones which injured the riot police and set fire to their vehicles, was it violent or not?


But you said this: the communist regime in Poland did not fall because of violent protests, but through more peaceful means (strikes,

I quoted it in my previous post but it got deleted somehow, I don`t know why.

How about such a compromise: both violent protests and peaceful ones like strikes contributed to the fall of communism. ?? hahaha

Please, calm down. Keep it civil like a cultural person.

Besides, Belarussians aren`t stupid and can see how quickly Poland has been developing in the EU and how their own country has been staggering and hopelessly coping with increasing economic crisis.

Do you know financial figures for Belarus and Poland?

But of course. Thanks for reprimandation. I apologize. Emotions prevailed for the moment. I am fine now.


Sure. Because Poles aren't stupid. They are wise to milk the cow and refuse many residual ugly things the cow offering in abundance.

Yes, it is. But, again, it's not what brought the regime to the negotiation table. If there is evidence that the communist regime wanted to make some concessions with Solidarity because of the violent protests, I'm unaware of it and would be happy to see it.


economic pressures, and political pressures from the multiplying voices of Polish citizens demanding change). You left the remainder of sentence out.

I appreciate and respect the civil suggestion of an compromise, but it wouldn't be accurate. :)

I want Central European Union from Baltic to Balkan`s Adriatic, if possible all the way to the Black Sea. EU is obstacle same as AH and Turks. In the meanwhile let us minimize our casualties and that include to be careful with Belarus.

The way it happened in Poland I think that the cost was too high. It would be better to have a war with soviet establishment in Poland provided that Polish side would have been victorious.

IF Solidarity would have had happened in 1989 rather than in 1980 and IF they wouldn't be so damn peaceful and timid then it be much better situation.

hahaha So you reject a compromise??? Very well, I will have to be tough with you now.

You said directly that violent protests didn`t contribute at all:: the communist regime in Poland did not fall because of violent protests, but through more peaceful means (strikes, economic pressures, and political pressures.

Of course it isn`t true.


You are unaware coz you aren`t Polish, didn`t live in Poland at the time and didn`t read enough books about it later on. So, your ignorance is natural, sort of.

Explanation: In late 1980s, workers and other groups started getting rebellious again. Communists knew that after peaceful strikes the next step would be violent protests which had already occured in 1981-84 and caused a lot of trouble to the regime. To avoid such protests which might end up with burning party buildings and executions of communists in streets, they agreed to talk with the opposition in 1988. I read a book by Jerzy Urban, infamous spokesman for the regime, who directly admits communists feared being lynched by angry mob if protests got out of control. A popular rhymed saying at the time: Communists will hang on trees instead of leaves.

Isn`t it logical? .


That`s what the Polish elites at the time - both communists and opposition, wanted to avoid at any cost. The civil war is a disaster in any country. Wishing it to happen is criminal thinking of a rabid fascist nationalist.

Now define who are soviets in Poland.

Then, define what is Polish side. Poles? Kashubi? Lemki? Lusatians? Etc? I ask because Polish ethnicity isn`t monolitic. Its like Yugoslavian ethnicity. Yugoslavia was kind of South Slavic unity basically created by Serbs and around Serbs, but where live those Slavs who aren`t Serbs. Poland is named after Polani but, its wider story. At the same time, `soviet` is essentially ideological term.

So, define what are Polish and what are soviet sides within Poland before you dream of conflict in Poland or in Belarus or anywhere.