Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : A CENTURY OF LIONS/THE 20TH CENTURY TOP 100 -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Neocon who wrote (1021)	10/30/1999 1:10:00 PM
From: jbe	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 3246

Are you seriously saying, Neo, that if it were not for Yeltsin, "there would have been civil war...perhaps from St. Petersburg to Vladivostok..."? What reason do you have to think so, Neo? In the first place, if it were not for Yeltsin, the Soviet Union would not have dissolved quite as abruptly as it did. I would agree that it was a good thing that Yeltsin, at the time, did not take a Russian nationalist position, or else there might have been armed conflict (over territorial claims)between Russia and Ukraine, Russia and Kazakhstan, etc. But, on the other hand, he would not have signed the Belovezhsky documents to begin with if he had taken such a position. But civil war within Russia? Are you thinking of the Parliament-President shoot-out in 1993? If it had not been for Yeltsin's confrontational temperament, things would never have reached the point of a shoot-out at all. Americans tended to swallow the Yeltsin line that he was the only guarantee against "Communist revanche." But it was a line. Joan