Eastern European governments political leanings

Cook

Banned
My TL is ASB, but there will be reasonable concern/support for the Russian Alliance to launch an invasion. Especially considering who they'll be going up against... I just haven't worked out all the details yet.

but that's besides the point because what he wants is pretty ASB under any circumstances...

I think the correct recommendation is that this thread should be in the ASB section rather than here.
:)
 
As a matter of historic record, Bulgaria has been one of the less russophile slav countries, it started butting heards with Russia almost as soon as it was created.

People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. Thanks to the vagaries of international politics, the governments of Russia and Bulgaria have consistently ended up on opposite sides of great-power conflict, but neither has ever represented its people very much and the peoples of the two countries feel very warmly. Ever wandered why the Germans never sent a Bulgarian to the USSR, even though they sent Romanians, Hungarians, and Slovaks whos morale and motivation left much to be desired? Perhaps Bulgaria's changing sides the second Russian troops crossed over the Danube provides a clue. Today's Bulgarians tend to be more nostalgic about Warpac than any other member state.

Compare that to Poland, the Czech Republic, Croatia, and it's clear that you're yourself talking about something you don't know very much about.
 
the governments of Russia and Bulgaria have consistently ended up on opposite sides of great-power conflict, but neither has ever represented its people very much and the peoples of the two countries feel very warmly
Oh and here I thought letting a foreign army on your territory was a POLITICAL decision, not something done by referendum, my mistake... spare me the slavic love line.
Ever wandered why the Germans never sent a Bulgarian to the USSR, even though they sent Romanians, Hungarians, and Slovaks whos morale and motivation left much to be desired?
I'll have to call bullshit on this, this sounds more like your opinion on the matter than actual history.
Bulgaria's changing sides the second Russian troops crossed over the Danube provides a clue.
Yes, why would they change sides AS SOON AS the soviet army crossed the Danube, it is a mystery, while we're at this lets discuss why Romania changed sides as soon as the soviets crossed the Prut, was it because slavic love? Hmm... wait, romanians aren't slavs, oh I know, perhaps it had something to do with the fact that the SOVIET ARMY was in their country and they thought that at that moment the best thing for them would be to switch sides and hope for an easier peace.
Today's Bulgarians tend to be more nostalgic about Warpac than any other member state.
I have no idea if this is true or not, do you have actual proof of this? Or are you just talking out of your ass?
 

loughery111

Banned
Oh and here I thought letting a foreign army on your territory was a POLITICAL decision, not something done by referendum, my mistake... spare me the slavic love line.

I'll have to call bullshit on this, this sounds more like your opinion on the matter than actual history.

Yes, why would they change sides AS SOON AS the soviet army crossed the Danube, it is a mystery, while we're at this lets discuss why Romania changed sides as soon as the soviets crossed the Prut, was it because slavic love? Hmm... wait, romanians aren't slavs, oh I know, perhaps it had something to do with the fact that the SOVIET ARMY was in their country and they thought that at that moment the best thing for them would be to switch sides and hope for an easier peace.

I have no idea if this is true or not, do you have actual proof of this? Or are you just talking out of your ass?

I have to mention that you haven't produced so much as a scrap of evidence, apparently relying on the violence of your denials to cause us to question him, rather than you. What he says lines up rather nicely with a lot of what I've read about Eastern Europe in WWII and the Cold War... so present some evidence of why I should think you're right, and I'll overlook your incredible boorishness.
 
@Life in black

You have stated yourself that your timeline is ASB, so I won't discourage you from writing it. I would agree with the named contries if you need Russian allies in Europe, in such a scenario and I would strongly suggest to add Serbia!

But you should also consider those countries who would very fiercely defend themselves and maybe others against such a Russian plan: Poland, the Baltic states (though maybe not their Russian minorities), Hungary and if Serbia comes into play, Croatia and Albania as well.

Some comments on your other assumptions: if you have a Russo-Chinese alliance, you need to explain it. It is like a Franco-German alliance prior to 1914; it would be simply wonderful and make perfect sense but needs a lot of explaining how it came into existence.

If your POD is a graver economic crisis than at present with such consequences I deeply encourage you to drop not only the EU, but also UK and US into a depression which is worse than 1929/33. That would make it more plausible. The scenario you give seems to suggest that the US cannot afford its superpower-status any more AT ALL.

If you have a situation with NATO and EU destroyed, I suggest you have something like a core-Europe as a result in the end, that is the Franco-German alliance under France's nuclear umbrella. Add Benelux and Austria to that at least. It would give Germany (e.a.) a piece of security and France a lot of hegemony in most of Europe.

I would also encourage you to make the supply of raw-materials play a major role in this scenario. Research on that! It is the core of Russia's present and future strength. If you have a deep decline of Mid-Eastern oil production and a scenario where Russia can still give more than it needs....then Moscow won't need to fight much. The desire to have fuel for industry, cars, heating will deliver more allies to them - if they play smart, maybe the whole of Europe after a short while if their offers are generous enough.
 
Thank you.I will be posting in ASB but, I am still just trying to make a few things work and finalize details. And one can't have a Russian invasion of Europe without knowing who its allies are.
 
I have to mention that you haven't produced so much as a scrap of evidence, apparently relying on the violence of your denials to cause us to question him, rather than you. What he says lines up rather nicely with a lot of what I've read about Eastern Europe in WWII and the Cold War... so present some evidence of why I should think you're right, and I'll overlook your incredible boorishness.

Which part of what I said do you not agree with exactly because you're not making any sense. Evidence for what do you need, because I haven't made any claims which aren't historically based, even I Blame Communism admits that the Bulgarian political forces were regularly at odds with Russia, despite the fact that he's acting like an apologist about it and claims that that was just the governments and that the real bulgarian people love Russia.

Eastern Europe pre WWII even before it fell to nazi influence was controlled by center right political forces which saw Russia as the greatest threat, Poland even as Germany was preparing to invade saw Russia as a greater threat than Germany for gods sake.

EDIT: Oh and by the way, I was debating replying to you and I decided to overlook your arrogance in thinking I care about what you think of me, you weren't even in the conversation. See... I can be generous too, don't act like in posting a reply you're doing me a favour.
 

loughery111

Banned
Which part of what I said do you not agree with exactly because you're not making any sense. Evidence for what do you need, because I haven't made any claims which aren't historically based, even I Blame Communism admits that the Bulgarian political forces were regularly at odds with Russia, despite the fact that he's acting like an apologist about it and claims that that was just the governments and that the real bulgarian people love Russia.

Eastern Europe pre WWII even before it fell to nazi influence was controlled by center right political forces which saw Russia as the greatest threat, Poland even as Germany was preparing to invade saw Russia as a greater threat than Germany for gods sake.

EDIT: Oh and by the way, I was debating replying to you and I decided to overlook your arrogance in thinking I care about what you think of me, you weren't even in the conversation. See... I can be generous too, don't act like in posting a reply you're doing me a favour.

The point of what I said was that you were calling out someone else on not presenting any evidence to support their view of history when not only had you not formerly presented any of your own, but additionally did not provide anything debunking their interpretation.

That said, I lack the knowledge to get involved in the debate, and freely admit it. I will say that what he said seems to align more closely with much of what I have read in the past, but I couldn't remember specifics. I never said I was doing you a favor, but I'd suggest that you don't criticize others for something you're doing as well. You saying that what you've said is "historically based" does not actually make this true.

Finally, I don't need to be intimately involved in a discussion to feel that you are in the wrong on some point and say so. As I said above, I lack the knowledge to tell you two anything you don't already know or can't already figure out, as pertains to Eastern European history. I can, however, ask you to present your own evidence if you have it.
 
The point of what I said was that you were calling out someone else on not presenting any evidence to support their view of history when not only had you not formerly presented any of your own, but additionally did not provide anything debunking their interpretation.

That said, I lack the knowledge to get involved in the debate, and freely admit it. I will say that what he said seems to align more closely with much of what I have read in the past, but I couldn't remember specifics. I never said I was doing you a favor, but I'd suggest that you don't criticize others for something you're doing as well. You saying that what you've said is "historically based" does not actually make this true.

Finally, I don't need to be intimately involved in a discussion to feel that you are in the wrong on some point and say so. As I said above, I lack the knowledge to tell you two anything you don't already know or can't already figure out, as pertains to Eastern European history. I can, however, ask you to present your own evidence if you have it.

So... while you admit you have limited knowledge about the topic at hand, you feel I am wrong on some point, yet you're not actually able to say which point that is since you don't know anything. As amusing as that and this thread have been, it clearly needs to be in the ASB forum, so I'm done here.
 

loughery111

Banned
So... while you admit you have limited knowledge about the topic at hand, you feel I am wrong on some point, yet you're not actually able to say which point that is since you don't know anything. As amusing as that and this thread have been, it clearly needs to be in the ASB forum, so I'm done here.

Now. Let's try this again. I admit to ignorance of the topic at hand. I am, however, familiar with evasion. You still haven't addressed my core point: that you're complaining about someone else not using sources when you have none yourself.

I don't know which one of you is right, though I happen to think it isn't you... but I want to know, and am therefore asking you to give me some evidence one way or another. If you want to run off because you're unable to give such evidence, fine. If you have evidence for what you're saying, however, why won't you just provide it?

I'm saying that I think I've read things disagreeing with you in the past. I'm not saying you're certainly wrong, because I DON'T KNOW. I want to know. Therefore I want to see your evidence. This is not that complicated a concept, but I suspect you have NO evidence, because you've been consistently trying to portray this as some assault on your honor, rather than giving me the damned evidence you claim to have.
 
Now. Let's try this again. I admit to ignorance of the topic at hand. I am, however, familiar with evasion. You still haven't addressed my core point: that you're complaining about someone else not using sources when you have none yourself.

I don't know which one of you is right, though I happen to think it isn't you... but I want to know, and am therefore asking you to give me some evidence one way or another. If you want to run off because you're unable to give such evidence, fine. If you have evidence for what you're saying, however, why won't you just provide it?

I'm saying that I think I've read things disagreeing with you in the past. I'm not saying you're certainly wrong, because I DON'T KNOW. I want to know. Therefore I want to see your evidence. This is not that complicated a concept, but I suspect you have NO evidence, because you've been consistently trying to portray this as some assault on your honor, rather than giving me the damned evidence you claim to have.

Evidence about WHAT? For the love of God, evidence of what? The fact that Bulgaria and Russia have been at odd more often than not? How about the fact that they were on different sides in WW1 and for most of WW2, evidence that Romania changed sides in WW2 AFTER the soviet army was IN Romania? I have no idea how far your ignorance extends, nor am I willing to educate you on trivial matters that you can learn from Wikipedia.

When I have asked for proof it was for a dubios claim like:
Today's Bulgarians tend to be more nostalgic about Warpac than any other member state

Is that true? I don't know, it might be or it might not, he seems very sure of himself in making such a bold statement, as such I asked for some proof. This thread is starting to annoy me.
 
Oh and here I thought letting a foreign army on your territory was a POLITICAL decision, not something done by referendum, my mistake... spare me the slavic love line.

What are you actually trying to say? Where did anybody mention armies?

And I really don't know where this "Slavic love" business comes from, since I said that the Czech Republic, Poland, and Croatia, you know, don't like Russia very muc.

I'll have to call bullshit on this, this sounds more like your opinion on the matter than actual history.

That no Bulgarian division set foot in the USSR is historical fact, unless you want to unveil some hitherto-unsees source proving otherwise.

Yes, why would they change sides AS SOON AS the soviet army crossed the Danube, it is a mystery, while we're at this lets discuss why Romania changed sides as soon as the soviets crossed the Prut, was it because slavic love? Hmm... wait, romanians aren't slavs, oh I know, perhaps it had something to do with the fact that the SOVIET ARMY was in their country and they thought that at that moment the best thing for them would be to switch sides and hope for an easier peace.

And Hungary? The third's the spoiler. Romania had its own domestic reasons to switch sides.

The Romanian and Bulgarian situations aren't really comparable in any case. The Romanians fought almost from day one, and switched sides after several armies had been swallowed whole. The Bulgarians fought for exactly three days, start to finish.

I have no idea if this is true or not, do you have actual proof of this? Or are you just talking out of your ass?

In fairness to you, my source are several personal testimonies on the back of a well-reputed newspaper (the Economist) and not cited historical works.

But then, if you have any sources, I don't see them. All I see is abrasiveness, obscenity, and "calling bullshit" on matters of recorded fact.

Which part of what I said do you not agree with exactly because you're not making any sense. Evidence for what do you need, because I haven't made any claims which aren't historically based, even I Blame Communism admits that the Bulgarian political forces were regularly at odds with Russia, despite the fact that he's acting like an apologist about it and claims that that was just the governments and that the real bulgarian people love Russia.

What am I apologising for? If I thought all the Slavs loved Holy Russia, why would I be naming those Slavic countries that didn't? As for your claim, it was in fact that Bulgaria was one of the less pro-Russian Slavic countries. Even if Bulgarians were completely ambivalent about Russia, that would still put it well behind Poland, Croatia, or western Ukraine, so your claim is still kind of not true.

Eastern Europe pre WWII even before it fell to nazi influence was controlled by center right political forces which saw Russia as the greatest threat, Poland even as Germany was preparing to invade saw Russia as a greater threat than Germany for gods sake.

That says a lot about Poland and, ah, nothing of substance about Bulgaria. It says exactly as much about Bulgaria as the fact that Czechoslovakia had an alliance with the USSR, in fact, which calls in to question whether "eastern Europe" in fact means "the bits of eastern Europe" which serve to illustrate my barely-coherent argument that, because of Polish government policy, the Bulgarian people don't like Russia.

Were I being abrasive and rude, I might "call bullshit" on that assertion about Poland, but instead I'm going to ask for a source.

EDIT: Oh and by the way, I was debating replying to you and I decided to overlook your arrogance in thinking I care about what you think of me, you weren't even in the conversation. See... I can be generous too, don't act like in posting a reply you're doing me a favour.

Good heavens, this kind of thing is just ridiculous. Mate, it's a message board. Everybody is "in the conversation". Reported.

Thanks, Loughery, for being so very polite and level-headed.
 
Last edited:
What are you actually trying to say? Where did anybody mention armies?

I'm pretty sure that's what OP is about.

That no Bulgarian division set foot in the USSR is historical fact, unless you want to unveil some hitherto-unsees source proving otherwise.

I didn't say that Bulgarian divisions invaded the USSR, I said that the reason for why they didn't which you said sounds like bullshit.

And Hungary? The third's the spoiler. Romania had its own domestic reasons to switch sides.

Oh I know! It might have something to do with the fact that Skorzeny kidnapped Horthy's son and forced him to resign when Hitler found out that he was negociating with with the Soviets. The guy they put in Horthy's place was a fanatic, so no, it wasn't a spoiler, it's just that the germans moved faster than in Romania. The coup in Romania was organized enough and fast enough that he nazis couldn't stop it.

Did you really not know this?

The Romanian and Bulgarian situations aren't really comparable in any case. The Romanians fought almost from day one, and switched sides after several armies had been swallowed whole. The Bulgarians fought for exactly three days, start to finish.


Yeah, that's why Romania switched sides, the losses they suffered, it had nothing to do with the fact that the Red Army crossed into Romania, I'm sure they would have switched sides even if the front in the east was beyond the Dnister.

In fairness to you, my source are several personal testimonies on the back of a well-reputed newspaper (the Economist) and not cited historical works.

Oh you have personal testimonies, well clearly those are reliable sources, unlike those completely biased polls or opinion surveys. So just to be clear, when you made that statement about Bulgaria and bulgarians you didn't have any statistical basis. Good to know.
 
I'm pretty sure that's what OP is about.

My post, however, was about whether or not Bulgaria was one of the "more anti-Russian" Slavic nations. You still haven't addressed the existence of all those other Slavic nations, by the way.

I didn't say that Bulgarian divisions invaded the USSR, I said that the reason for why they didn't which you said sounds like bullshit.

So what's your proposed reason?

Oh I know! It might have something to do with the fact that Skorzeny kidnapped Horthy's son and forced him to resign when Hitler found out that he was negociating with with the Soviets. The guy they put in Horthy's place was a fanatic, so no, it wasn't a spoiler, it's just that the germans moved faster than in Romania. The coup in Romania was organized enough and fast enough that he nazis couldn't stop it.

Did you really not know this?

Did you not know that the Bulgarians had their own, pro-Soviet coup, where other eastern European countries did not? The point is that each country needs to be considered in particular and you can't apply such sweeping generalisations to diverse situations.

Yeah, that's why Romania switched sides, the losses they suffered, it had nothing to do with the fact that the Red Army crossed into Romania, I'm sure they would have switched sides even if the front in the east was beyond the Dnister.

The point, once again, is that whereas Romania fought for several years, Bulgaria fought for three days. This is some sort of a difference.

Oh you have personal testimonies, well clearly those are reliable sources, unlike those completely biased polls or opinion surveys. So just to be clear, when you made that statement about Bulgaria and bulgarians you didn't have any statistical basis. Good to know.

Good to know that you ignore that part of my reference (a reputable newspaper) which doesn't fit in with your sarcastic and unhelpful tirades.

I suggest you calm down, take a breath, and remember that we are in fact discussing history on an internet forum. Nobody has insulted anybody, none of it matters very much, and we're all going to enjoy it more and learn more from it if we keep our cool and be polite.
 
My post, however, was about whether or not Bulgaria was one of the "more anti-Russian" Slavic nations. You still haven't addressed the existence of all those other Slavic nations, by the way.

Perhaps you should reread my original post, I didn't say anti-Russian, I said less russophile. And yes, I fully admit there are other slavic nations that don't like Russia, what about it?

So what's your proposed reason?

I didn't propose one, since unlike you, I don't make statements without about something I don't know, but just because I don't know doesn't mean that whatever you say is true.

Did you not know that the Bulgarians had their own, pro-Soviet coup, where other eastern European countries did not? The point is that each country needs to be considered in particular and you can't apply such sweeping generalisations to diverse situations.

You mean the coup that took place AFTER the soviets invaded? Yeah that was quite the coincidence, the communists are invading and then we get a new government filled with communists. I'm sure that one time it was the will of the people, not the fact that the soviet army was marching on Sofia.

I noticed that you didn't say anything about Hungary, what happened? Did you really not know about Skorzeny and Horthy?

The point, once again, is that whereas Romania fought for several years, Bulgaria fought for three days. This is some sort of a difference.

Oh good at least we agree on something, several years are different from three days.

Good to know that you ignore that part of my reference (a reputable newspaper) which doesn't fit in with your sarcastic and unhelpful tirades.

If you actually posted a link to the supposed article in The Economist I would have read it, but since you didn't all I have is your word.
 

Ian the Admin

Administrator
Donor
So... while you admit you have limited knowledge about the topic at hand, you feel I am wrong on some point, yet you're not actually able to say which point that is since you don't know anything. As amusing as that and this thread have been, it clearly needs to be in the ASB forum, so I'm done here.

Or apparently you weren't done posting here.

Stop acting like an abrasive ass. This is at least a halfway civilized forum and everyone should behave accordingly.
 
Top