Before I'll forget, I need to comment on a couple of things here, that are important for future references...
Quote:
Originally Posted by rebel12
Spare me the stories about ancient Russians and show me Russian democratic traditions in the past 500 years.
|
You've read the material diagonally, apparently...
The traditions of "mir" continued in Russia up until the revolution of the 1917 ( i.e. for the last 500 years including,) which makes Russians original communists.
Quote:
|
Those evil Americans, they even created the might of Chinese economy to the enjoyment of the Chinese themlseves. LOL. Chinese economy is not controlled from Washinhton or New York although many would like it this way.
|
These two economies are directly interdependent, since one created the other.
What part of it you do not understand?
Quote:
Yes, it parted way and while Europe had Magna Carta and French Revolution you had nothing of that.
At the beginning of the first war none of the monarchies involved were as absolutist as Russian one. Russia has always based its politics on the Bisantine tradition or "samodherzhavie" while Europe has much diferent traditions.
|
The reason why Russia became absolutist monarchy didn't have much to do with Bysantine tradition initially. In fact when Russia received her autocephalous church from Byzantium, back in those days she was very much divided into principalities, governed by different princes, not unlike Germany. However this separation ( and constant quarreling between Russian princes) made the country an easy prey for Tatar-Mongols, when Russian princes couldn't unite their resistance.
The only way Russians could finally remove the Tatar's yoke, was when prince of Moscow concentrated all power in his hands. That's what ultimately strengthened the nation, and laid the ground for absolutism. Before the Tatar invasion Russian democratic traditions were actually more advanced for those times comparably to Western Europe. ( Read about Russian "Veche" - you'll get the idea.)
Tatar-Mongol invasion is yet another reminder that Russia never had it easy comparably with the rest of Europe, and as someone mentioned here - "to be Russian is to be tough."
Quote:
|
There is nothing logical about your conclusions, you are simply repeating the same old Soviet propganda stories. Very quick: Russians simply stole nuclear technology from the US.
|
Right. They've probably stolen the space programs too...
Konstantin Tsiolkovsky - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
You are obviously way too quick with your right-wing propaganda cliches ( I've already mentioned that earlier,) so here is something to consider while talking about that "stolen nuclear technology."
First of all the US was not the original "creator" of nuclear technology; Europeans were, the US as usual purchased everything and everyone.
As for Russians - don't forget that they were doing their research alone, in the midst of the devastating war, and although they were spying indeed, this is the synopsis of what exactly took place and how essential/non-essential the espionage was;
"In 1945, the Soviet intelligence obtained rough "blueprints" of the first U.S. atomic device, which may have contributed to the Soviet bomb project. Scholar Alexei Kojevnikov has estimated, based on newly released Soviet documents, that the primary way in which the espionage may have sped up the Soviet project was that it allowed Khariton to avoid dangerous tests to determine the size of the critical mass: "tickling the dragon's tail", as it was called in the U.S., consumed a good deal of time and claimed at least two lives; see Harry K. Daghlian, Jr. and Louis Slotin.
One of the key pieces of information, which Soviet intelligence obtained from Fuchs, was a cross-section for D-T fusion. This data was available to top Soviet officials roughly three years before it was openly published in the Physical Review in 1949. However, this data was not forwarded to Vitaly Ginzburg or Andrei Sakharov until very late, practically months before publication. Initially both Ginzburg and Sakharov, while working on the Sloika design, estimated such a cross-section to be similar to the D-D reaction. Once the actual cross-section become known to Ginzburg and Sakharov, the Sloika design become a priority, which resulted in successful test in 1953.
In the 1990s, with the declassification of Soviet intelligence materials, which showed the extent and the type of the information obtained by the Soviets from US sources, a heated debate ensued in Russia and abroad as to the relative importance of espionage, as opposed to the Soviet scientists' own efforts, in the making of the Soviet bomb. The vast majority of scholars agree that whereas the Soviet atomic project was first and foremost a product of local expertise and scientific talent, it is clear that espionage efforts contributed to the project in various ways and most certainly shortened the time needed to develop the atomic bomb.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_...e_Soviet_Union
This is minding you was taking place when no "great science and technology" of China or Korea was in sight, but Russians were doing their own thing independently/ in parallel with the West.
If you still have your doubts about that - have a look how far back Russian scientific research goes - back to the establishment of the Russian Academy of science, (since the times of Peter the Great.)
"In early 1930s, the Soviets were the instrumental contributors made to the advancement of nuclear physics and its related sciences, such as nuclear chemistry. The initial Soviet interest in nuclear physics had begun in the early 1930s through the Soviet Academy of Sciences, an era in which a variety of important nuclear discoveries and achievements were made (the identification of the neutron and proton as fundamental particles, the operation of the first cyclotron to energies of over 1 MeV, and the first "splitting" of the atomic nucleus by John Cockcroft and Ernest Walton).
Even before the Russian revolution and the followed by the February Revolution, the mineralogist Vladimir Vernadsky had made a number of public calls for a survey of Soviet Union's uranium deposits. The main motivation for nuclear research at the time was radium, which had scientific as well as medical uses, and could be retrieved from borehole water from the Ukhta oilfields.
After the discovery of nuclear fission in the late 1930s, scientists in the Soviet Union, like scientists all over the world, realized that nuclear reactions could, in theory, be used to release large amounts of binding energy from the atomic nucleus of uranium. As in the West, the news of fission created great excitement amongst Soviet scientists and many physicists switched their lines of research to those involving nuclear physics in particular, as it was considered a promising field of research. Few scientists thought it would be possible to harness the power of nuclear energy for human purposes within the span of many decades. Soviet nuclear research was not far behind Western scientists: Yakov Frenkel did the first theoretical work on fission in the Soviet Union in 1940, and Georgii Flerov and Lev Rusinov concluded that 3±1 neutrons were emitted per fission only days after similar conclusions had been reached by the team of Frédéric Joliot-Curie."
Therefore this (along with other things that I've mentioned earlier) make your next statement profoundly false;
"
Russians are not a part of European family."
They are part of European family indeed, that follows its own path and doesn't let the "other part" of European family to go uncontrolled in the world, which indeed is/was a problem for the US interests in particular. They've had enough of those pesky Russians, and when they saw their chance in the 90ies, the US gov. acted up on it.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
