Warsaw Pact?

**Sean Osborne** · June 7th, 2007, 23:44

Forum for discussion of the "former" Warsaw Pact nations (excluding those who are now NATO members) and their relation to the Trans-Asian Axis.

Okaaaay, that means that this is going to be a very quiet forum. So, I might as well be loud with my post to it.

You see... ALL of the former nations of the Warsaw Pact (East Germany, Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Romania and Bulgaria) are now members of NATO.

East Germany ist kaput, and now part of the Federal Republic of Germany and a member of NATO

The other former-Warsaw Pact who are now members of NATO are... (north to south)

Republic of Poland

Czech Republic

Slovak Republic

Republic of Hungary

Romania

Republic of Bulgaria.

That's ALL of them.

So who are we gonna talk about here???

**Brian Baldwin** · June 8th, 2007, 00:33

I think a huge part of the Russian Chess game with the U.S. will be played out within these former U.S.S.R. states.

**Sean Osborne** · June 8th, 2007, 01:18

Brian,

None of the former-Warsaw Pact nations were ever Soviet Socialist Republics, as in the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.

Only those nations which existed within the boundaries of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics had the S S R designation.

East Germany was the German Democratic Gepublic or GDR

Poland was the People's Republic of Poland (PRP)

Czechoslovakia was the Czechoslovak Socialist Republic (CSR)

Hungary was the People's Republic of Hungary (PRH)

Romania was the Socialist Republic of Romania (SRR)

Bulgaria was the People's Republic of Bulgaria (PRB)

None of them were organized around lower to upper level soviet-style heirarchies, they were each manifestations of the communist party of each region within each individual state.

This could turn into a thread for the accurate review of history regarding the nations of Eastern Europe in the post-World War Two and Cold War era (1945 - 1989).

**Ryan Ruck** · June 8th, 2007, 05:53

Sean,
Perhaps there could be a better name for the forum. The goal was to create a forum that would be for discussion of Russia trying to reassert itself in its former territories and nearby areas of influence.

Places such as the several "-stan" nations that fell under the umbrella of the Soviet Union as well as Belarus and the former Yugoslavia.

So, perhaps the title of the forum could be changed to something more appropriate and inclusive. Do you have any suggestions for a new name, or perhaps other improvements such as including those new NATO members here instead? Maybe a name like "Eastern Europe" or something else that would accomplish the above stated goal? As you know we are always trying to make TAA better by taking member suggestions into account!

**Sean Osborne** · June 9th, 2007, 19:36

Originally Posted by Ryan Ruck

Sean,
Perhaps there could be a better name for the forum. The goal was to create a forum that would be for discussion of Russia trying to reassert itself in its former territories and nearby areas of influence.

Ryan,

If the forum descriptor which I quoted above had stated this to begin with - then that would have been spot on and a necessary topic of discussion. As a Cold Warrior who does not accept the disinformation that the Cold War was "cold' or that it ever ended I noticed the error regarding the Warsaw Pact nations. My first post was intended as a humorous response to that error.

Places such as the several "-stan" nations that fell under the umbrella of the Soviet Union as well as Belarus and the former Yugoslavia.

Belarus, (except for the omission of the vowel "ye") is the corrected version of the anglicized word Byelorussia (Byela = white. Russia = Russia. White Russia). It has been a part of the Russian empire since annexation by Empress Catherine II (Catherine the Great) in 1795 as a part of the third Partition of Poland. Map: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:R...Rozbiory_3.png

Maybe a name like "Eastern Europe" or something else that would accomplish the above stated goal? As you know we are always trying to make TAA better by taking member suggestions into account!

I vote for "Eastern Europe".

**samizdat** · June 10th, 2007, 02:44

Instead of slavic slave states- that sounds a bit cruel- how about the soviet slave states- including Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia and all the -stans- nah- soviet means united.

"Socialist"- that's it. Socialist servant slaves- sounds great- all these happy folk for so many years workin hard to please one another in harmony. ...nah that's a lie.

Soviet slave states with sheep. ... and no pastor.

**Sean Osborne** · June 10th, 2007, 12:12

Originally Posted by samizdat

Instead of slavic slave states- that sounds a bit cruel-

Who said anything about "slavic slave states"?

Ethic slav's have enslaved and conquered each other just as other non-slavic states have done throughout history.

Communist Russia came along and enslaved them all - an equal opportunity totalitarian enslaver.

Nothing cruel about that as it happens to be a historical fact.

**Ryan Ruck** · June 11th, 2007, 02:39

Okay... Since just "Eastern Europe" would omit the "-stan"s given their geographic location, how about "Eastern Europe/FSU Nations"? And, we'll go ahead and shift discussion about the new NATO members here.

**Sean Osborne** · June 13th, 2007, 10:21

Originally Posted by Ryan Ruck

Okay... Since just "Eastern Europe" would omit the "-stan"s given their geographic location, how about "Eastern Europe/FSU Nations"? And, we'll go ahead and shift discussion about the new NATO members here.

Ryan,

The distinction I would like to see made is that Eastern European nations are in Eastern Europe, and the "-stans" are Central Asian nations - two different continents separated by about 2,000 miles.

**Ryan Ruck** · June 13th, 2007, 14:54

Originally Posted by Sean Osborne

Ryan,

The distinction I would like to see made is that Eastern European nations are in Eastern Europe, and the "-stans" are Central Asian nations - two different continents separated by about 2,000 miles.

And that is the problem. So, unless the forum is named something like "Eastern Europe/FSU" which would include both EE and Central Asia, we'd end up needing two forums which separately would have less traffic than both combined into one. This forum should be a sort of catch-all for, as I mentioned, discussion of TAA activity in areas of former Soviet states and satellites. So, I'll go ahead and rename this forum and we can try the new name on for size.

**Brian Baldwin** · June 13th, 2007, 19:31

Soviet Republics are the correct term for the Central Asian "stans". Within the U.S.S.R. they were also refered to as Union Republics. One could call the whole thing Soviet Fringe... Or Soviet Bloc/Republics.