Re: The History of Latvia

The Black Monk wrote:
> On May 6, 4:07 am, "J. Anderson" <anderso...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> The Black Monk wrote:
>>> The five people didn't take over the US, they took over a plane with
>>> 92 people.  They established total control over it and did what they
>>> wanted with it, just as the small band of Bolsheviks established total
>>> control over Russia.  
>> This is one of the weirdest analogies 'your side' has ever presented in
>> this forum (and that's saying a lot).
> 
> What do you mean, "my side."

The four or five posters who spend their days in SCB mainly trying to 
defame the Balts and defend the Russians.

>> Here's what you are comparing:
>>
>> 1) A few armed men hijack an aircraft with less than a hundred unarmed
>> passengers and crew.
> 
> Already you've screwed up, sorry.  "Armed" with  boxcutters.  How do
> you know none of the other 87 pocketknives, sharp scissors, or other
> "weapons" comparable to those of the hijackers?

A boxcutter is an excellent instrument for slashing throats. You only 
need to slit one throat to establish total control of all the others.

>> The whole thing takes place in a confined space at
>> an altitude of several kilometres. The purpose is to use the aircraft
as
>> a suicide bomb. The existence of crew and passengers is irrelevant.
> 
> Only for your convenience.

They were meant to die, whereas in Russia the population would have 
another role -- that of upholding the new regime.

>>  And it's all over in a matter of minutes.
> 
> That's all the time that was necessary.

Yes, and how does that support your analogy?

>> 2) A few thousand insurgents
> 
> Actually a few tens of thousands.

OK, let's say 50,000. The 9/11 hijackers were 5% against 95% in the 
aircraft. The Bolshies were 50,000 against 170,000,000 in Russia. That's 
0.03% against 99.97%.

>> usurp power in the largest country on
>> earth, a country with 170 million inhabitants. Having done this they
>> don't blow themselves up with the rest of the place but manage to stay
>> in charge for the next 74 years.
> 
> Yes.  Do you have a problem with the above?

I'm having a problem with your comprehension. Any sensible person would 
realize that the existence of the totalitarian Soviet state required 
continuing support and acceptance from the Russian people. You are 
trying to explain away this simple fact by again and again bringing up 
the riflemen.

>> In the first case the outcome was certain from the very beginning:
>> whatever crew and passengers might undertake, they (and the hijackers)
>> would peril.
> 
> Why?

Because as soon as the aircraft was hijacked and in the hands of these 
suicidal maniacs, there was little to be done. Any attempt to overpower 
the hijackers would only lead to an immediate crashing of the plane. 
Remember that contrary to a 'normal' hijacking, in this case the 
hijackers were flying the aircraft.

>> In the second case the leader (Lenin) and his helpers (the riflemen)
>> were gone by 1924, but the whole thing rolled on and on with due
>> assistance from the hijacked.
> 
> Bolsheviks ruled through terror at least through the 1940's.  You
> didn't know that?  Ever hear of the gulags, the millions dead, etc.?
> You ought to visit your local library.
> 
> BM